This work provides an in-depth-view of driver motivational aspects when driver assistance Systems (DAS) are considered. Thereby, the role of driver actual experience with DAS use was also identified and highlighted. A central outcome of this thesis is the STADIUM model describing the interplay of motivational factors that determine the engagement in secondary activities while taking actual DAS use experience into account. The role of motives in showing attentive behaviour depending on DAS (the navigation system) could also be underlined. The relevance, enrichment and need of combining qualitative and quantitative approaches when the effects of safety countermeasures on driver behaviour are investigated could also be shown.
The results are discussed in terms of hierarchical driver behaviour models, the theory of planned behaviour and its extended versions and the strengths of the introduced studies and limitations. Implications for traffic safety are provided and future research issues are recommended.:Table of Content
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS III
LIST OF INCLUDED PUBLICATIONS III
SUMMARY VII
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG XIII
TABLE OF CONTENT XXI
LIST OF FIGURES XXVII
LIST OF TABLES XXXI
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Outline 2
1.2. Theoretical Background 3
1.2.1. Understanding driver behaviour: models and approaches that aim at describing driver behaviour. 3
1.2.2. Motivation and driving. 13
1.2.3. The role of motivation in behavioural adaptation due to driver assistance system use. 15
1.2.3.1. Driver assistance systems 15
1.2.3.2. Actual DAS use experience 24
1.2.4. Relevant motivational influence factors based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour. 25
1.2.4.1. Perceived risk 29
1.2.4.2. Perceived behavioural control 30
1.2.4.3. Norms 32
1.2.4.4. Attitudes towards reckless driving 33
1.2.4.5. Attitudes towards DAS 34
1.2.4.6. The intention to carry out concurrent activities to the driving tasks 35
1.2.5. Applying qualitative or quantitative methods when effects of DAS use on driver behaviour are investigated? 37
1.3. Objectives 41
2. STUDY I - ON THE INTERPLAY OF ACTUAL DAS USE EXPERIENCE AND MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS DETERMINING DRIVERS’ ENGAGEMENT IN SECONDARY ACTIVITIES – A THEORETICAL MODEL 45
2.1. Introduction 46
2.2. Methods 49
2.2.1. Focus group discussions. 49
2.2.2. Participants. 49
2.2.3. Procedure. 51
2.2.4. Data analysis. 54
2.3. Findings and Model Development 55
2.3.1. Perceived risk while driving. 55
2.3.2. Perceived behavioural control. 57
2.3.3. Safety-related beliefs concerning DAS: attitudes towards-, and norms concerning-, DAS. 59
2.4. Discussion 65
2.4.1. The STADIUM model. 65
2.4.2. Strengths and limitations. 66
3. STUDY IIA – THE STADIUM MODEL: SECONDARY ACTIVITY ENGAGEMENT DEPENDING ON THE INFLUENCE OF DAS USE EXPERIENCE ON MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS 69
3.1. Introduction 70
3.2. Methods 72
3.2.1. Participants. 72
3.2.2. Questionnaire. 73
3.2.2.1. DAS use experience 74
3.2.2.2. Motivational factors 75
3.2.2.3. Target behaviour: Intentions to carry out secondary activities while driving 76
3.2.3. Data analysis. 76
3.3. Results 78
3.3.1. DAS use experience: Chi-Squares and correlations. 78
3.3.2. Item analysis. 78
3.3.3. Correlations and Partial correlations. 79
3.3.4. The path analysis. 80
3.4. Discussion 82
3.4.1. Strengths and limitations. 87
4. STUDY IIB – THE ROLE OF DRIVER ASSISTANCE EXPERIENCE, SYSTEM FUNCTIONALITY, GENDER, AGE AND SENSATION SEEKING IN ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE SAFETY OF DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS 91
4.1. Introduction 92
4.1.1. System functionality. 93
4.1.2. Driver characteristics. 94
4.1.2.1. Actual DAS use experience 94
4.1.2.2. Gender 96
4.1.2.3. Sensation seeking & age 97
4.1.3. Objectives & hypotheses. 98
4.2. Methods 98
4.2.1. Participants. 98
4.2.2. Questionnaire. 99
4.2.2.1. DAS use experience 99
4.2.2.2. Attitudes towards DAS 99
4.2.3. Data analysis. 100
4.3. Results 101
4.3.1. Gender differences. 106
4.3.2. Sensation seeking. 108
4.3.3. Age. 108
4.3.4. Actual DAS use experience. 110
4.4. Discussion 111
5. STUDY III – LOOK WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO! A FIELD STUDY COMPARING GLANCE BEHAVIOUR AT URBAN INTERSECTIONS USING A NAVIGATION SYSTEM OR A PRINTED ROUTE INSTRUCTION 117
5.1. Introduction 118
5.1.1. Behavioural effects of navigation system use. 119
5.1.2. Errors in visual attention allocation: The looked but failed to see phenomenon. 121
5.1.3. The navigation task and hierarchical models of driver behaviour. 122
5.1.4. Objectives. 124
5.1.5. Hypotheses. 124
5.2. Methods 126
5.2.1. Participants. 127
5.2.2. Standardised test drives. 127
5.2.3. Materials. 128
5.2.4. Data analysis procedure. 129
5.3. Results 132
5.3.1. Results from the descriptive, qualitative observation analysis. 132
5.3.2. Quantitative results. 135
5.3.2.1. Drivers’ reactions to pedestrians and/or cyclists who intend to cross 135
5.3.2.2. Driving Speed 136
5.3.2.3. Number of Glances 139
5.3.2.3.1. Areas of interest 139
5.3.2.4. Time looking to the areas of interest 142
5.3.2.4.1. Areas of interest: distribution of glances 142
5.3.2.4.2. Proportionate time looking to the areas of interest related to intersection passing duration 142
5.3.3. Summary of results from the qualitative and the quantitative analyses. 145
5.4. Conclusion 146
5.4.1. Driving speed. 147
5.4.2. Glance behaviour 147
5.4.3. Drivers’ reactions to pedestrians and cyclists. 150
5.4.4. Overall safety effect of type of route guidance 151
5.5. Discussion 152
5.5.1. Field drives: internal and external validity. 152
5.5.2. Experienced navigation system users. 154
5.5.3. Combination of qualitative and quantitative research. 154
5.5.4. Areas of interest. 156
5.5.5. Look but failed to see. 156
5.5.6. Presence of pedestrians and/ or cyclists. 157
5.5.7. Transition towards higher levels of automation. 157
6. FINAL DISCUSSION AND OVERALL CONCLUSION 161
6.1. Looking back, looking ahead 162
6.2. Hierarchical driver behaviour models: Be motivated to pay attention 163
6.3. The STADIUM model 166
6.3.1. Comparison with the Theory of Planned Behaviour. 167
6.3.2. The STADIUM model and its relevance for understanding driver behaviour. 168
6.4. Applying qualitative or quantitative methods when effects of DAS use on driver behaviour are investigated? 169
6.5. Limitations of this research 171
6.6. Implications 175
6.6.1. Individual & DAS. 175
6.6.2. Society & DAS. 177
6.7. Outline: Recommendations for future research 179
7. REFERENCES 183
8. ANNEX: OVERVIEW OF STUDIES THAT INVESTIGATED DRIVER BEHAVIOUR 209
EIDESSTATTLICHE ERKLÄRUNG 219
CURRICULUM VITAE 220
Personal Details 220
Scientific Education 221
Professional Experience in Science 222
Awards & Fellowship 223
Publications 224
Journal Paper 224
Book Chapter 225
Conferences 226 / Diese Arbeit liefert einen gründlichen Einblick, welche Rolle motivationale Aspekte spielen, wenn Fahrerassistenzsysteme (FAS) genutzt werden. Dabei wurde auch die Funktion der tatsächlichen Erfahrung mit FAS identifiziert und hervorgehoben. Ein zentrales Ergebnis dieser Arbeit ist das STADIUM Modell, welches das Zusammenspiel motivationaler Faktoren in Abhängigkeit von der tatsächlichen Erfahrung mit FAS erklärt, die wiederum bestimmen, inwieweit und ob andere Aktivitäten während des Fahrens ausgeführt werden. Außerdem konnte unterstrichen werden, welche Rolle Motive spielen, aufmerksames Verhalten in Abhängigkeit von der Nutzung von FAS (dem Navigationssystem) zu zeigen. Zusätzlich konnte dargestellt werden, wie relevant, bereichernd und nützlich es ist, qualitative und quantitative Methoden zu kombinieren, wenn die Effekte von FAS auf das FahrerInnenverhalten untersucht werden.
Die Ergebnisse werden diskutiert indem auf hierarchische Fahrerverhaltensmodelle, auf die Theorie des geplanten Verhaltens und ihre erweiterten Versionen und auf die Stärken und Schwächen der Studien Bezug genommen wird. Es werden Implikationen dargestellt und zukünftige Forschungsfragen und Problemstellungen empfohlen.:Table of Content
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS III
LIST OF INCLUDED PUBLICATIONS III
SUMMARY VII
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG XIII
TABLE OF CONTENT XXI
LIST OF FIGURES XXVII
LIST OF TABLES XXXI
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1. Outline 2
1.2. Theoretical Background 3
1.2.1. Understanding driver behaviour: models and approaches that aim at describing driver behaviour. 3
1.2.2. Motivation and driving. 13
1.2.3. The role of motivation in behavioural adaptation due to driver assistance system use. 15
1.2.3.1. Driver assistance systems 15
1.2.3.2. Actual DAS use experience 24
1.2.4. Relevant motivational influence factors based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour. 25
1.2.4.1. Perceived risk 29
1.2.4.2. Perceived behavioural control 30
1.2.4.3. Norms 32
1.2.4.4. Attitudes towards reckless driving 33
1.2.4.5. Attitudes towards DAS 34
1.2.4.6. The intention to carry out concurrent activities to the driving tasks 35
1.2.5. Applying qualitative or quantitative methods when effects of DAS use on driver behaviour are investigated? 37
1.3. Objectives 41
2. STUDY I - ON THE INTERPLAY OF ACTUAL DAS USE EXPERIENCE AND MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS DETERMINING DRIVERS’ ENGAGEMENT IN SECONDARY ACTIVITIES – A THEORETICAL MODEL 45
2.1. Introduction 46
2.2. Methods 49
2.2.1. Focus group discussions. 49
2.2.2. Participants. 49
2.2.3. Procedure. 51
2.2.4. Data analysis. 54
2.3. Findings and Model Development 55
2.3.1. Perceived risk while driving. 55
2.3.2. Perceived behavioural control. 57
2.3.3. Safety-related beliefs concerning DAS: attitudes towards-, and norms concerning-, DAS. 59
2.4. Discussion 65
2.4.1. The STADIUM model. 65
2.4.2. Strengths and limitations. 66
3. STUDY IIA – THE STADIUM MODEL: SECONDARY ACTIVITY ENGAGEMENT DEPENDING ON THE INFLUENCE OF DAS USE EXPERIENCE ON MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS 69
3.1. Introduction 70
3.2. Methods 72
3.2.1. Participants. 72
3.2.2. Questionnaire. 73
3.2.2.1. DAS use experience 74
3.2.2.2. Motivational factors 75
3.2.2.3. Target behaviour: Intentions to carry out secondary activities while driving 76
3.2.3. Data analysis. 76
3.3. Results 78
3.3.1. DAS use experience: Chi-Squares and correlations. 78
3.3.2. Item analysis. 78
3.3.3. Correlations and Partial correlations. 79
3.3.4. The path analysis. 80
3.4. Discussion 82
3.4.1. Strengths and limitations. 87
4. STUDY IIB – THE ROLE OF DRIVER ASSISTANCE EXPERIENCE, SYSTEM FUNCTIONALITY, GENDER, AGE AND SENSATION SEEKING IN ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE SAFETY OF DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS 91
4.1. Introduction 92
4.1.1. System functionality. 93
4.1.2. Driver characteristics. 94
4.1.2.1. Actual DAS use experience 94
4.1.2.2. Gender 96
4.1.2.3. Sensation seeking & age 97
4.1.3. Objectives & hypotheses. 98
4.2. Methods 98
4.2.1. Participants. 98
4.2.2. Questionnaire. 99
4.2.2.1. DAS use experience 99
4.2.2.2. Attitudes towards DAS 99
4.2.3. Data analysis. 100
4.3. Results 101
4.3.1. Gender differences. 106
4.3.2. Sensation seeking. 108
4.3.3. Age. 108
4.3.4. Actual DAS use experience. 110
4.4. Discussion 111
5. STUDY III – LOOK WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO! A FIELD STUDY COMPARING GLANCE BEHAVIOUR AT URBAN INTERSECTIONS USING A NAVIGATION SYSTEM OR A PRINTED ROUTE INSTRUCTION 117
5.1. Introduction 118
5.1.1. Behavioural effects of navigation system use. 119
5.1.2. Errors in visual attention allocation: The looked but failed to see phenomenon. 121
5.1.3. The navigation task and hierarchical models of driver behaviour. 122
5.1.4. Objectives. 124
5.1.5. Hypotheses. 124
5.2. Methods 126
5.2.1. Participants. 127
5.2.2. Standardised test drives. 127
5.2.3. Materials. 128
5.2.4. Data analysis procedure. 129
5.3. Results 132
5.3.1. Results from the descriptive, qualitative observation analysis. 132
5.3.2. Quantitative results. 135
5.3.2.1. Drivers’ reactions to pedestrians and/or cyclists who intend to cross 135
5.3.2.2. Driving Speed 136
5.3.2.3. Number of Glances 139
5.3.2.3.1. Areas of interest 139
5.3.2.4. Time looking to the areas of interest 142
5.3.2.4.1. Areas of interest: distribution of glances 142
5.3.2.4.2. Proportionate time looking to the areas of interest related to intersection passing duration 142
5.3.3. Summary of results from the qualitative and the quantitative analyses. 145
5.4. Conclusion 146
5.4.1. Driving speed. 147
5.4.2. Glance behaviour 147
5.4.3. Drivers’ reactions to pedestrians and cyclists. 150
5.4.4. Overall safety effect of type of route guidance 151
5.5. Discussion 152
5.5.1. Field drives: internal and external validity. 152
5.5.2. Experienced navigation system users. 154
5.5.3. Combination of qualitative and quantitative research. 154
5.5.4. Areas of interest. 156
5.5.5. Look but failed to see. 156
5.5.6. Presence of pedestrians and/ or cyclists. 157
5.5.7. Transition towards higher levels of automation. 157
6. FINAL DISCUSSION AND OVERALL CONCLUSION 161
6.1. Looking back, looking ahead 162
6.2. Hierarchical driver behaviour models: Be motivated to pay attention 163
6.3. The STADIUM model 166
6.3.1. Comparison with the Theory of Planned Behaviour. 167
6.3.2. The STADIUM model and its relevance for understanding driver behaviour. 168
6.4. Applying qualitative or quantitative methods when effects of DAS use on driver behaviour are investigated? 169
6.5. Limitations of this research 171
6.6. Implications 175
6.6.1. Individual & DAS. 175
6.6.2. Society & DAS. 177
6.7. Outline: Recommendations for future research 179
7. REFERENCES 183
8. ANNEX: OVERVIEW OF STUDIES THAT INVESTIGATED DRIVER BEHAVIOUR 209
EIDESSTATTLICHE ERKLÄRUNG 219
CURRICULUM VITAE 220
Personal Details 220
Scientific Education 221
Professional Experience in Science 222
Awards & Fellowship 223
Publications 224
Journal Paper 224
Book Chapter 225
Conferences 226
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:DRESDEN/oai:qucosa:de:qucosa:20483 |
| Date | 17 June 2016 |
| Creators | Haupt, Juliane |
| Contributors | Krems, Josef F., Risser, Ralf, Technische Universität Chemnitz |
| Source Sets | Hochschulschriftenserver (HSSS) der SLUB Dresden |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | doc-type:doctoralThesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis, doc-type:Text |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0036 seconds