Mode awareness is important for the safe use of automated vehicles, yet drivers' understanding of mode transitions has not been sufficiently investigated. In this study, we administered an online survey to 838 respondents to examine their understanding of control responsibilities in partial and conditional driving automation with four types of interventions (brake pedal, steering wheel, gas pedal, and take-over request). Results show that most drivers understand that they are responsible for speed and distance control after brake pedal interventions and steering control after steering wheel interventions. However, drivers have mixed responses regarding the responsibility for speed and distance control after steering wheel interventions and the responsibility for steering control after gas pedal interventions. With a higher automation level (conditional driving automation), drivers expect automation to remain responsible more often compared to a lower automation level (partial driving automation). Regarding Hands-on requirements, more than 99% of respondents answered that drivers would keep their hands on the steering wheel after all intervention types in partial automation, while 60–95% would place their hands on the wheel after various intervention types in conditional automation. A misalignment between actual logic and drivers' expectations regarding control responsibilities is observed by comparing survey responses to the mode transition logic of commercial partially automated vehicles. To resolve confusion about control responsibilities and ensure consistent expectations, we propose implementing a consistent mode design and providing enhanced information to drivers.

@en

As the adoption of automated vehicles becomes more prevalent, there is a need for systematic approaches to understanding, communicating, and analyzing the design aspects of the technology. Designing a taxonomy - a hierarchical framework that classifies and organizes design elements and features - is a critical tool in this pursuit. A well-defined taxonomy provides an effective communication tool and enables stakeholders to understand, discuss, and compare system designs. However, current taxonomies often fail to consider technological advancements and the needs of stakeholders. This gap limits the understanding of vehicle automation and hinders addressing critical aspects such as safety and social impact. This workshop aims to propose a stakeholder-centered taxonomy for automated vehicles, taking into consideration the perspectives and requirements of different stakeholder groups, such as technology professionals, policymakers, and end-users. The workshop aims to identify relevant considerations for taxonomy design that cater to different stakeholders, incorporate diverse perspectives, and highlight opportunities and challenges for effective communication and decision-making in vehicle automation. @en