Should Steering Settings be Changed by the Driver or by the Vehicle Itself?

INTRODUCTION: Cars are increasingly computerized, and vehicle settings such as steering gain (SG) can now be altered during driving. However, it is unknown whether transitions in SG should be adaptable (i.e., triggered by driver input) or adaptive (i.e., triggered automatically). We examined this question for road segments expected to require different SG. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to investigate whether SG mode changes should be made by the driver or automatically. METHODS: Twenty-four participants drove under four conditions in a simulator: fixed low gain (FL), fixed high gain (FH), a machine-initiated steering system, which switched between the two SG levels at predetermined locations (MI), and a driver-initiated steering system, in which the SG level could be changed by pressing a button on the steering wheel (DI). RESULTS: Participants showed poorer lane-keeping and reported higher effort for FH compared to FL on straights, while the opposite held true on curved roads. On curved roads, the MI condition yielded better lane-keeping and lower subjective effort than the DI condition. However, a substantial portion of the drivers gave low preference rankings to the MI system. CONCLUSION: Drivers prefer and benefit from a steering system with a variable rather than fixed gain. Furthermore, although automatic SG transitions reduce effort, some drivers reject this concept. APPLICATION: As the state of technology advances, MI transitions are becoming increasingly feasible, but whether drivers would want to delegate their decision-making authority to a machine remains a moot point.

What determines drivers' speed? A replication of three behavioural adaptation experiments in a single driving simulator study.

We conceptually replicated three highly cited experiments on speed adaptation, by measuring drivers' experienced risk (galvanic skin response; GSR), experienced task difficulty (self-reported task effort; SRTE) and safety margins (time-to-line-crossing; TLC) in a single experiment. The three measures were compared using a nonparametric index that captures the criteria of constancy during self-paced driving and sensitivity during forced-paced driving. In a driving simulator, 24 participants completed two forced-paced and one self-paced run. Each run held four different lane width conditions. Results showed that participants drove faster on wider lanes, thus confirming the expected speed adaptation. None of the three measures offered persuasive evidence for speed adaptation because they failed either the sensitivity criterion (GSR) or the constancy criterion (TLC, SRTE). An additional measure, steering reversal rate, outperformed the other three measures regarding sensitivity and constancy, prompting a further evaluation of the role of control activity in speed adaptation. Practitioner Summary: Results from a driving simulator experiment suggest that it is not experienced risk, experienced effort or safety margins that govern drivers' choice of speed. Rather, our findings suggest that steering reversal rate has an explanatory role in speed adaptation.