The driving style of an automated vehicle (AV) needs to be comfortable to encourage the broad acceptance and use of this newly emerging transport mode. However, current research provides limited knowledge about what influences comfort, how this concept is described, and how it is measured. This knowledge is especially lacking when comfort is linked to the AV's driving styles. This paper presents results from an online workshop with nine experts, all with hands-on experience of AVs and a long track record of research in this context. Using online tools, experts were invited to introduce concepts they considered relevant to comfort/discomfort in currently available modes of transport which offer a ride (taxi/bus/train) to users and compare these to the concepts used to define comfort and discomfort in AVs. Results showed that a wide range of terms were used to describe user comfort and discomfort for both modes. Although all terms used for existing vehicles were found to apply to AVs, additional terms were proposed for determining comfort/discomfort of AVs. For example, to enhance comfort in AVs, designers should consider good communication channels, as well as ensuring that the AV's capabilities match users’ expectations. Results also revealed that more terms were used, overall, to define discomfort, and that a comfortable ride in AVs is not just about mitigating discomfort. New concepts specific to AVs were also revealed when considering what increases their discomfort, such as whether riders’ safety and privacy are affected, or if they feel in control. Experts’ input from the workshop was used to enhance and expand a simple conceptual framework, explaining how AV driving styles, as well as other, non-driving-related factors, affect user comfort. It is hoped that this framework provides a more comprehensive list of the concepts affecting user comfort, also allowing more accurate measurement of the concept. As well as allowing for a more accurate comparison between empirical studies measuring comfort in AVs, this study will facilitate the design of more comfortable and acceptable automated driving for future vehicles.

User comfort in higher-level Automated Vehicles (AVs, SAE Level 4+) is crucial for public acceptance. AV driving styles, characterised by vehicle kinematic and proxemic factors, affect user comfort, with “human-like” driving styles expected to provide natural feelings. We investigated a) how the kinematic and proxemic factors of an AV's driving style affect users' evaluation of comfort and naturalness, and b) how the similarities between automated and users' manual driving styles affect user evaluation. Using a motion-based driving simulator, participants experienced three Level 4 automated driving styles: two human-like (defensive, aggressive) and one machine-like. They also manually drove the same route. Participants rated their comfort and naturalness of each automated controller, across twenty-four varied UK road sections. We calculated maximum absolute values of the kinematic and proxemic factors affecting the AV's driving styles in longitudinal, lateral, and vertical directions, for each road section, to characterise the automated driving styles. The Euclidean distance between AV and manual driving styles, in terms of kinematic and proxemic factors, was calculated to characterise the human-like driving style of the AV. We used mixed-effects models to examine a) the effect of AV's kinematic and proxemic factors on the evaluation of comfort and naturalness, and b) how similarities between manual and automated driving styles affected the evaluation. Results showed significant effects of lateral and rotational kinematic factors on comfort and naturalness, with longitudinal kinematic factors having a less prominent effect. Similarities in vehicle metrics, such as speed, longitudinal jerk, lateral offset, and yaw, between manual and automated driving styles, enhanced user comfort and naturalness. This research facilitates an understanding of how control features of AVs affect user experience, contributing to the design of user-centred controllers and better acceptance of higher-level AVs.