Novices' physiological reactions, acceptance, and assessment of the controllability of a level 2 system in real traffic

<jats:p>Driver assistance systems are becoming more prevalent in the market. SAE Level 2 systems are now available in affordable price segments and in used vehicles. Nonetheless, very little is known about how people without any experience with driver assistance systems perceive and accept such systems, which take over longitudinal and lateral control of the vehicle, or what physiological consequences an experienced system failure (drop, crash) can have for the respective driver. To answer these questions, a real-life driving study was conducted. Nineteen people (9 female and 10 male; M = 36,7; SD = 9,9) with no experience with Level 1 or 2 systems were recruited for the study. After an introduction and explanation of the Level 2 system, the test subjects were asked to complete a 50-minute drive in the vehicle. The route was selected to ensure activation of the installed Level 2 function in the test vehicle (BMW 5 Series). The route consisted of three sections: an urban road, a two-lane rural road, and a highway. The system was activated when the following conditions were met: a vehicle was present in front, the vehicle was driving on a highway, there were visible lane markings, and the speed was below 60 km/h. The participants were instructed to follow a moving truck on the highway for as long as possible. The results show a significant decrease in the acceptance of the system as well as in the confidence in the Level 2 system as the number of system drops increases. However, the subjective perception of the increase in comfort provided by the system shows that, despite the frequent drops, the ride was perceived overall as comfortable. Additionally, most participants felt that the system drops were justified. Furthermore, the ride was experienced as very safe and controllable. Electrodermal activity (EDA) was measured using a two-electrode recording system. This method quantifies changes in skin conductance between two surface electrodes and serves as an indirect measure of autonomic nervous system activity and physiological arousal. An analysis of the EDA responses during the 10-second intervals before and after a system failure revealed no statistically significant differences. These results suggest that the first system failure does not cause a measurable change in electrodermal activity and therefore does not lead to a significant physiological response.</jats:p>