What determines drivers’ speed?

A replication of three behavioural adaptation experiments in a single driving simulator study

Journal Article (2018)
Author(s)

Timo Melman (TU Delft - Human-Robot Interaction)

DA Abbink (TU Delft - Human-Robot Interaction)

M. M.(René) van Paassen (TU Delft - Control & Simulation)

E.R. Boer (TU Delft - Human-Robot Interaction)

J.C.F. Winter (TU Delft - Biomechatronics & Human-Machine Control)

Research Group
Human-Robot Interaction
Copyright
© 2018 T. Melman, D.A. Abbink, M.M. van Paassen, E.R. Boer, J.C.F. de Winter
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1426790
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2018
Language
English
Copyright
© 2018 T. Melman, D.A. Abbink, M.M. van Paassen, E.R. Boer, J.C.F. de Winter
Related content
Research Group
Human-Robot Interaction
Issue number
7
Volume number
61
Pages (from-to)
966-987
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

We conceptually replicated three highly cited experiments on speed adaptation, by measuring drivers’ experienced risk (galvanic skin response; GSR), experienced task difficulty (self-reported task effort; SRTE), and safety margins (time-to-line-crossing; TLC) in a single experiment. The three measures were compared using a nonparametric index that captures the criteria of constancy during self-paced driving and sensitivity during forced-paced driving. In a driving simulator, 24 participants completed two forced-paced and one self-paced run. Each run held four different lane width conditions. Results showed that participants drove faster on wider lanes, thus confirming the expected speed adaptation. None of the three measures offered persuasive evidence for speed adaptation because they failed either the sensitivity criterion (GSR) or the constancy criterion (TLC, SRTE). An additional measure, steering reversal rate, outperformed the other three measures regarding sensitivity and constancy, prompting a further evaluation of the role of control activity in speed adaptation.