%0 Journal Article
%T Human¡¯s Overtrust in and Overreliance on Advanced Driver Assistance Systems: A Theoretical Framework
%A Toshiyuki Inagaki
%A Makoto Itoh
%J International Journal of Vehicular Technology
%D 2013
%I Hindawi Publishing Corporation
%R 10.1155/2013/951762
%X This paper gives a theoretical framework to describe, analyze, and evaluate the driver¡¯s overtrust in and overreliance on ADAS. Although ¡°overtrust¡± and ¡°overreliance¡± are often used as if they are synonyms, this paper differentiates the two notions rigorously. To this end, two aspects, (1) situation diagnostic aspect and (2) action selection aspect, are introduced. The first aspect is to describe overtrust, and it has three axes: (1-1) dimension of trust, (1-2) target object, and (1-3) chances of observation. The second aspect, (2), is to describe overreliance on the ADAS, and it has other three axes: (2-1) type of action selected, (2-2) benefits expected, and (2-3) time allowance for human intervention. 1. Introduction Driving a car requires a continuous process of perception, cognition, action selection, and action implementation. Various functions are implemented in an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) to assist a human to drive a car in a dynamic environment. Such functions, sometimes arranged in a multilayered manner, include (a) perception enhancement that helps the driver to perceive the traffic environment around his/her vehicle, (b) arousing attention of the driver to encourage paying attention to potential risks around his/her vehicle, (c) setting off a warning to encourage the driver to take a specific action to avoid an incident or accident, and (d) automatic safety control that is activated when the driver takes no action even after being warned or when the driver¡¯s control action seems to be insufficient [1]. The first two functions, (a) and (b), are to help the driver to understand the situation. Understanding of the current situation determines what action needs to be done [2]. Once situation diagnostic decision is made, action selection decision is usually straightforward, as has been suggested by recognition-primed decision making research [3]. However, the driver may sometimes feel difficulty in action selection decision. Function (c) is to help the driver in such a circumstance. Note that any ADAS that uses only the three functions, (a)¨C(c), is completely compatible with the human-centered automation principle [4] in which the human is assumed to have the final authority over the automation. Suppose an ADAS contains the fourth function, (d). Then the ADAS may not always be fully compatible with the human-centered automation principle, because the system can implement an action that is not ordered by the driver explicitly. Some automatic safety control functions have been already implemented in the real world. Typical examples
%U http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijvt/2013/951762/