Drivers often misjudge the capabilities of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS), compromising safety. Guided by a Context–Vehicle–Driver (C-V-D) framework drawn from 22 empirical studies, this study analyzed a secondary survey of 838 drivers to identify predictors of self-reported “ADAS unawareness” (“I don’t know if I use it”). Analysis of the representation ratio (RR) showed that drivers with a low annual driving distance (' 5000 km), lack of private car ownership, and young age (18–29 years) were consistently overrepresented among unaware users (RR ≥ 1.2), while car sharing frequency and license tenure were not. Un-awareness was highest for Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) among the three ADAS examined. These results support a hierarchical account in which contextual factors outweigh vehicle and driver-level influences. The C-V-D model yields testable hypotheses for road type, traffic density, and interface design that merit evaluation in larger-sample studies. Addressing the priority groups identified here can help designers, dealers, and educators reduce mode confusion and promote safe ADAS adoption.

Understanding how human drivers handle inter-actions with each other can aid the development of automated vehicles capable of operating in mixed traffic. Interactions between human drivers are often complex, so driver behavior models are needed to better understand them. However, existing models mostly focus on the behavior of one driver, which limits their ability to explain complex reciprocal interactions between multiple drivers. At the same time, the prior research that does focus on interactive behaviors of two or more drivers is typically limited to describing drivers' tactical decisions, limiting the understanding of how these decisions are related to operational aspects of behavior (safety margins and control inputs). In this work, we address this gap, focusing specif-ically on highway merging interactions. We build upon the Communication-Enabled Interactions (CEI) framework - a previously proposed holistic approach to interaction modeling. We develop a CEI-based model of highway merging that captures both tactical and operational aspects of the behavior of two drivers interacting in a highway merging scenario. Our model exhibits human-like behavior aligned with empirical observations of high-level decisions (i.e., who goes first?), safety margins (headways), and position and velocity profiles. Based on our model, we identify key mechanisms regarding drivers' beliefs, velocity perception, and planning, which can potentially generalize beyond highway merging to other interactive human driving behaviors. Our findings highlight the potential of the CEI framework in modeling reciprocal traffic interactions in realistic traffic scenarios, and contribute to understanding the complexities of interactions between human drivers.

Understanding human behavior in overtaking scenarios is crucial for enhancing road safety in mixed traffic with automated vehicles (AVs). Computational models of behavior play a pivotal role in advancing this understanding, as they can provide insight into human behavior generalizing beyond empirical studies. However, existing studies and models of human overtaking behavior have mostly focused on scenarios with simplistic, constant-speed dynamics of oncoming vehicles, disregarding the potential of AVs to proactively influence the decision-making process of the human drivers via implicit communication. Furthermore, despite numerous studies in other scenarios, so far it remained unknown whether overtaking decisions of human drivers are affected by whether they are interacting with an AV or a human-driven vehicle (HDV). To address these gaps, we conducted a “reverse Wizard-of-Oz” driving simulator experiment with 30 participants who repeatedly interacted with oncoming AVs and HDVs, measuring the drivers' gap acceptance decisions and response times. The oncoming vehicles featured time-varying dynamics designed to influence the overtaking decisions of the participants by briefly decelerating and then recovering to their initial speed. We found no evidence of differences in participants' overtaking behavior when interacting with oncoming AVs compared to HDVs. Furthermore, we did not find any evidence of brief decelerations of the oncoming vehicle affecting the decisions or response times of the participants. Cognitive modeling of the obtained data revealed that a generalized drift-diffusion model with dynamic drift rate and velocity-dependent decision bias best explained the gap acceptance outcomes and response times observed in the experiment. Overall, our findings highlight that cognitive models of the kind considered here can provide a generalizable description of human overtaking decisions and their timing. Such models can thus help further advance the ongoing development of safer interactions between human drivers and AVs during overtaking maneuvers.

Driving automation holds significant potential for enhancing traffic safety. However, effectively handling interactions with human drivers in mixed traffic remains a challenging task. Several models exist that attempt to capture human behavior in traffic interactions, often focusing on gap acceptance. However, it is not clear how models of an individual driver's gap acceptance can be translated to dynamic interactions between humans and automated vehicles (AVs) in the context of high-speed scenarios like overtaking. In this study, we address this issue by employing a cognitive process modeling approach. We investigate a variety of drift-diffusion models to describe the dynamic decision-making process of the driver during overtaking maneuvers. Our findings reveal that a drift-diffusion model incorporating an initial decision-making bias dependent on the initial velocity can accurately describe the qualitative patterns of overtaking gap acceptance observed previously. Our results demonstrate the potential of the cognitive process approach in modeling human overtaking behavior when the oncoming vehicle is an AV. To this end, this study contributes to the development of effective strategies for ensuring safe and efficient overtaking interactions between human drivers and AVs.