But first let me see: Comparison of light cues after a take-over request in automated driving

• Light cues can influence drivers’ gaze behavior during a two-step take-over. • The large light cue reduced user experience by occluding parts of the visual field. • With experience, drivers rated the light cues as increasingly helpful and salient. • An adapted variant of the dynamic growth variant is proposed. With conditional automated driving, drivers can engage in non-driving-related tasks, but they must remain capable of taking over control if the vehicle reaches a system boundary. For a safe take-over, the driver must have sufficient situation awareness. Previous research indicated that drivers often show dysfunctional gaze behavior, an indirect measure of situation awareness. Providing structured guidance for drivers’ gaze may mitigate dysfunctional gaze behavior. This approach could enhance perception, improve situation awareness, and increase safety. To identify the best method for guiding the gaze during a two-step take-over, we conducted a 4 x 2 within-subject experiment using a static driving simulator. We compared four light cue variants and two different sequences. The four variants of light cues were designed using attention-attracting features like size, movement, and blinking. Cues targeted the rear-view mirror, the side mirror, the road ahead, and the speedometer. We assessed gaze behavior, user experience, and driving behavior for N = 26 participants. Two variants were more effective in guiding the gaze: the variant using a big onset and the variant using growing movement. The big onset variant seems inappropriate because of the bad user experience. We propose an adapted variant that combines features of both light cue variants, which may deliver a positive user experience while remaining effective. This adapted variant will be tested in a future study. Furthermore, the light cues’ overall effectiveness regarding driving behavior, gaze behavior, and user experience should be evaluated and compared with that of other support methods.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transportation Research Part F Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
Published
2025-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2025.103346
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.44

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

But first let me see: Comparison of light cues after a take-over request in automated driving

Mark Vollrath, Vanessa Schmidt, Kerstin Kuhlmann
1 citations
Transportation Research Part F Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
2.44
article

But first let me see: Comparison of light cues after a take-over request in automated driving

Mark Vollrath, Vanessa Schmidt, Kerstin Kuhlmann
article en
1 citations

Abstract

• Light cues can influence drivers’ gaze behavior during a two-step take-over. • The large light cue reduced user experience by occluding parts of the visual field. • With experience, drivers rated the light cues as increasingly helpful and salient. • An adapted variant of the dynamic growth variant is proposed. With conditional automated driving, drivers can engage in non-driving-related tasks, but they must remain capable of taking over control if the vehicle reaches a system boundary. For a safe take-over, the driver must have sufficient situation awareness. Previous research indicated that drivers often show dysfunctional gaze behavior, an indirect measure of situation awareness. Providing structured guidance for drivers’ gaze may mitigate dysfunctional gaze behavior. This approach could enhance perception, improve situation awareness, and increase safety. To identify the best method for guiding the gaze during a two-step take-over, we conducted a 4 x 2 within-subject experiment using a static driving simulator. We compared four light cue variants and two different sequences. The four variants of light cues were designed using attention-attracting features like size, movement, and blinking. Cues targeted the rear-view mirror, the side mirror, the road ahead, and the speedometer. We assessed gaze behavior, user experience, and driving behavior for N = 26 participants. Two variants were more effective in guiding the gaze: the variant using a big onset and the variant using growing movement. The big onset variant seems inappropriate because of the bad user experience. We propose an adapted variant that combines features of both light cue variants, which may deliver a positive user experience while remaining effective. This adapted variant will be tested in a future study. Furthermore, the light cues’ overall effectiveness regarding driving behavior, gaze behavior, and user experience should be evaluated and compared with that of other support methods.

Transportation Research Part F Traffic Psychology and BehaviourVol. 115
Technische Universität Braunschweig (DE)
Technische Universität Braunschweig
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
2.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.