CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 13Tactile and Sensory InteractionsAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Hey, What's Going On?: Conveying Traffic Information to People with Visual Impairments in Highly Automated Vehicles: Introducing OnBoard

Open access
Meinhardt, Luca-Maxim, Rück, Maximilian, Zähnle, Julian, Elhaidary, Maryam, Colley, Mark, Rietzler, Michael, Rukzio, Enrico·2024·Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
DOI 10.1145/3659618
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Highly Automated Vehicles offer a new level of independence to people who are blind or visually impaired. However, due to their limited vision, gaining knowledge of the surrounding traffic can be challenging. To address this issue, we conducted an interactive, participatory workshop (N=4) to develop an auditory interface and OnBoard- a tactile interface with expandable elements - to convey traffic information to visually impaired people. In a user study with N=14 participants, we explored usability, situation awareness, predictability, and engagement with OnBoard and the auditory interface. Our qualitative and quantitative results show that tactile cues, similar to auditory cues, are able to convey traffic information to users. In particular, there is a trend that participants with reduced visual acuity showed increased engagement with both interfaces. However, the diversity of visual impairments and individual information needs underscores the importance of a highly tailored multimodal approach as the ideal solution.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3659618

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 65

  1. [2][2] Shruti Amre and Ye Sun. 2021. Effects of Non-driving Task Related Workload and Situational Awareness in Semi-autonomous Vehicles. In Advances in Simulation and Digital Human Modeling, Julia L. Wright, Daniel Barber, Sofia Scataglini, and Sudhakar L. Rajulu (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 264. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 247--254. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79763-8_30 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  2. [3][3] Aries Arditi and YingLi Tian. 2013. User interface preferences in the design of a camera-based navigation and wayfinding aid. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 107, 2 (2013), 118--129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1310700205 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  3. [5][5] Roger Bennett, Rohini Vijaygopal, and Rita Kottasz. 2020. Willingness of people who are blind to accept autonomous vehicles: An empirical investigation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 69 (2020), 13--27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.12.012 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  4. [6][6] Shadan Sadeghian Borojeni, Torben Wallbaum, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2017. Comparing Shape-Changing and Vibro-Tactile Steering Wheels for Take-Over Requests in Highly Automated Driving. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, Susanne Boll, Bastian Pfleging, Birsen Donmez, Ioannis Politis, and David Large (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 221--225. https://doi.org/10.1145/3122986.3123003 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  5. [7][7] Rupert R. A. Bourne, Jaimie Adelson, Seth Flaxman, Paul Briant, Michele Bottone, Theo Vos, Kovin Naidoo, Tasanee Braithwaite, Maria Cicinelli, Jost Jonas, Hans Limburg, Serge Resnikoff, Alex Silvester, Vinay Nangia, and Hugh R. Taylor. 2020. Global Prevalence of Blindness and Distance and Near Vision Impairment in 2020: progress towards the Vision 2020 targets and what the future holds. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 61, 7 (2020), 2317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30425-3 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  6. [9][9] Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology 18, 3 (2021), 328--352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  7. [11][11] Robin N. Brewer and Vaishnav Kameswaran. 2018. Understanding the Power of Control in Autonomous Vehicles for People with Vision Impairment. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Faustina Hwang, Joanna McGrenere, and David Flatla (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 185--197. https://doi.org/10.1145/3234695.3236347 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  8. [12][12] Julian Brinkley, Earl W. Huff, Briana Posadas, Julia Woodward, Shaundra B. Daily, and Juan E. Gilbert. 2020. Exploring the Needs, Preferences, and Concerns of Persons with Visual Impairments Regarding Autonomous Vehicles. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 13, 1 (2020), 1--34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372280 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  9. [13][13] Julian Brinkley, Brianna Posadas, Imani Sherman, Shaundra B. Daily, and Juan E. Gilbert. 2019. An Open Road Evaluation of a Self-Driving Vehicle Human-Machine Interface Designed for Visually Impaired Users. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 35, 11 (2019), 1018--1032. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1561787 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  10. [14][14] Julian Brinkley, Brianna Posadas, Julia Woodward, and Juan E. Gilbert. 2017. Opinions and Preferences of Blind and Low Vision Consumers Regarding Self-Driving Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Amy Hurst, Leah Findlater, and Meredith Ringel Morris (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 290--299. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132525.3132532 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  11. [15][15] Piyush Chanana, Rohan Paul, M. Balakrishnan, and Pvm Rao. 2017. Assistive technology solutions for aiding travel of pedestrians with visual impairment. Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineering 4 (2017), 2055668317725993. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055668317725993 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  12. [16][16] Francesco Chiossi, Steeven Villa, Melanie Hauser, Robin Welsch, and Lewis Chuang. 2022. Design of On-body Tactile Displays to Enhance Situation Awareness in Automated Vehicles. In 2022 IEEE 9th International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Virtual Environments for Measurement Systems and Applications (CIVEMSA). IEEE, New York, NY, USA, 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIVEMSA53371.2022.9853690 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  13. [17][17] Mark Colley, Christian Bräuner, Mirjam Lanzer, Marcel Walch, Martin Baumann, and Enrico Rukzio. 2020. Effect of Visualization of Pedestrian Intention Recognition on Trust and Cognitive Load. In 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (Virtual Event, DC, USA) (AutomotiveUI '20). ACM, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 181--191. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410648 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  14. [18][18] Mark Colley, Benjamin Eder, Jan Ole Rixen, and Enrico Rukzio. 2021. Effects of Semantic Segmentation Visualization on Trust, Situation Awareness, and Cognitive Load in Highly Automated Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yoshifumi Kitamura, Aaron Quigley, Katherine Isbister, Takeo Igarashi, Pernille Bjørn, and Steven Drucker (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445351 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  15. [19][19] Mark Colley, Cristina Evangelista, Tito Daza Rubiano, and Enrico Rukzio. 2023. Effects of Urgency and Cognitive Load on Interaction in Highly Automated Vehicles. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7, MHCI (2023), Article 207 (September 2023), 20 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3604254 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  16. [20][20] Mark Colley, Max Rädler, Jonas Glimmann, and Enrico Rukzio. 2022. Effects of Scene Detection, Scene Prediction, and Maneuver Planning Visualizations on Trust, Situation Awareness, and Cognitive Load in Highly Automated Vehicles. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 6, 2, Article 49 (jul 2022), 21 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3534609 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  17. [21][21] Mark Colley, Oliver Speidel, Jan Strohbeck, Jan Ole Rixen, Jan Henry Belz, and Enrico Rukzio. 2024. Effects of Uncertain Trajectory Prediction Visualization in Highly Automated Vehicles on Trust, Situation Awareness, and Cognitive Load. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 7, 4, Article 153 (jan 2024), 23 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3631408 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  18. [22][22] Mark Colley, Marcel Walch, Jan Gugenheimer, Ali Askari, and Enrico Rukzio. 2020. Towards Inclusive External Communication of Autonomous Vehicles for Pedestrians with Vision Impairments. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Regina Bernhaupt, Florian 'Floyd' Mueller, David Verweij, Josh Andres, Joanna McGrenere, Andy Cockburn, Ignacio Avellino, Alix Goguey, Pernille Bjørn, Shengdong Zhao, Briane Paul Samson, and Rafal Kocielnik (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376472 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  19. [25][25] Henrik Detjen, Bastian Pfleging, and Stefan Schneegass. 2020. A Wizard of Oz Field Study to Understand Non-Driving-Related Activities, Trust, and Acceptance of Automated Vehicles. In 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (Virtual Event, DC, USA) (AutomotiveUI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 19--29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409120.3410662 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  20. [26][26] Henrik Detjen, Maurizio Salini, Jan Kronenberger, Stefan Geisler, and Stefan Schneegass. 2021. Towards Transparent Behavior of Automated Vehicles: Design and Evaluation of HUD Concepts to Support System Predictability Through Motion Intent Communication. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Mobile Human-Computer Interaction (Toulouse & Virtual, France) (MobileHCI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 19, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447526.3472041 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  21. [27][27] Patrizia Di Campli San Vito, Gözel Shakeri, Stephen Brewster, Frank Pollick, Edward Brown, Lee Skrypchuk, and Alexandros Mouzakitis. 2019. Haptic Navigation Cues on the Steering Wheel. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Stephen Brewster, Geraldine Fitzpatrick, Anna Cox, and Vassilis Kostakos (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300440 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  22. [28][28] Julie Ducasse, Anke M. Brock, and Christophe Jouffrais. 2018. Accessible Interactive Maps for Visually Impaired Users. In Mobility of Visually Impaired People, Edwige Pissaloux and Ramiro Velazquez (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 537--584. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54446-5{_}17 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  23. [29][29] Mica R Endsley, Stephen J Selcon, Thomas D Hardiman, and Darryl G Croft. 1998. A comparative analysis of SAGAT and SART for evaluations of situation awareness. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, Vol. 42. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 82--86. Crossref Google Scholar
  24. [30][30] Mica R. Endsley, Stephen J. Selcon, Thomas D. Hardiman, and Darryl G. Croft. 1998. A Comparative Analysis of Sagat and Sart for Evaluations of Situation Awareness. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 42, 1 (1998), 82--86. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129804200119 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  25. [31][31] Stefanie M. Faas, Andrea C. Kao, and Martin Baumann. 2020. A Longitudinal Video Study on Communicating Status and Intent for Self-Driving Vehicle - Pedestrian Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376484 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  26. [32][32] Paul D. S. Fink, Anas Abou Allaban, Omoruyi E. Atekha, Raymond J. Perry, Emily S. Sumner, Richard R. Corey, Velin Dimitrov, and Nicholas A. Giudice. 2023. Expanded Situational Awareness Without Vision. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Ginevra Castellano, Laurel Riek, Maya Cakmak, and Iolanda Leite (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 54--62. https://doi.org/10.1145/3568162.3576975 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  27. [33][33] Paul D. S. Fink, Velin Dimitrov, Hiroshi Yasuda, Tiffany L. Chen, Richard R. Corey, Nicholas A. Giudice, and Emily S. Sumner. 2023. Autonomous is Not Enough: Designing Multisensory Mid-Air Gestures for Vehicle Interactions Among People with Visual Impairments. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI '23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 74, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580762 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  28. [34][34] Paul D. S. Fink, Jessica A. Holz, and Nicholas A. Giudice. 2021. Fully Autonomous Vehicles for People with Visual Impairment: Policy, Accessibility, and Future Directions. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 14, 3 (2021), 1--17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3471934 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  29. [36][36] Nick Gang, Srinath Sibi, Romain Michon, Brian Mok, Chris Chafe, and Wendy Ju. 2018. Don't Be Alarmed: Sonifying Autonomous Vehicle Perception to Increase Situation Awareness. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (Toronto, ON, Canada) (AutomotiveUI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 237--246. https://doi.org/10.1145/3239060.3265636 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  30. [38][38] Nicholas A Giudice and Gordon E Legge. 2008. Blind navigation and the role of technology. The engineering handbook of smart technology for aging, disability, and independence (2008), 479--500. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470379424.ch25 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  31. [39][39] Christiane Glatz, Stas S. Krupenia, Heinrich H. Bülthoff, and Lewis L. Chuang. 2018. Use the Right Sound for the Right Job: Verbal Commands and Auditory Icons for a Task-Management System Favor Different Information Processes in the Brain. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174046 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  32. [42][42] Kevin Anthony Hoff and Masooda Bashir. 2015. Trust in automation: integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human factors 57, 3 (2015), 407--434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  33. [43][43] Leona Holloway, Matthew Butler, and Kim Marriott. 2022. 3D Printed Street Crossings: Supporting Orientation and Mobility Training with People who are Blind or have Low Vision. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Simone Barbosa, Cliff Lampe, Caroline Appert, David A. Shamma, Steven Drucker, Julie Williamson, and Koji Yatani (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502072 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  34. [44][44] Leona Holloway, Kim Marriott, Matthew Butler, and Samuel Reinders. 2019. 3D Printed Maps and Icons for Inclusion. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Shiri Azenkot, and Shaun K. Kane (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 183--195. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353790 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  35. [46][46] Patrick W. Jordan, Ian Lyall McClelland, B. Thomas, and Bernard A. Weerdmeester (Eds.). 1996. Usability evaluation in industry (first edition ed.). CRC Press, an imprint of Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL. https://permalink.obvsg.at/ Google Scholar
  36. [47][47] Juffrizal Karjanto, Nidzamuddin Md. Yusof, Chao Wang, Jacques Terken, Frank Delbressine, and Matthias Rauterberg. 2018. The effect of peripheral visual feedforward system in enhancing situation awareness and mitigating motion sickness in fully automated driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 58 (2018), 678--692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.06.046 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  37. [48][48] Moritz Körber. 2019. Theoretical Considerations and Development of a Questionnaire to Measure Trust in Automation. In Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018), Sebastiano Bagnara, Riccardo Tartaglia, Sara Albolino, Thomas Alexander, and Yushi Fujita (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 13--30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96074-6_2 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  38. [49][49] Oswald Kothgassner, A Felnhofer, N Hauk, E Kastenhofer, J Gomm, and I Krysprin-Exner. 2013. Technology Usage Inventory. https://www.ffg.at/sites/default/files/allgemeine_downloads/thematische%20programme/programmdokumente/tui_manual.pdf. Manual. Wien: ICARUS 17, 04 (2013), 90. [Online; accessed: 05-JULY-2020]. Google Scholar
  39. [50][50] Andreas Löcken, Anna-Katharina Frison, Vanessa Fahn, Dominik Kreppold, Maximilian Götz, and Andreas Riener. 2020. Increasing User Experience and Trust in Automated Vehicles via an Ambient Light Display. In 22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3379503.3403567 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  40. [51][51] Andreas Löcken, Fei Yan, Wilko Heuten, and Susanne Boll. 2019. Investigating driver gaze behavior during lane changes using two visual cues: ambient light and focal icons. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 13, 2 (2019), 119--136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12193-019-00299-7 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  41. [52][52] Tyron Louw, Ruth Madigan, Yee Mun Lee, Cinzia de Marco, Jorge Lorente Mallada, and Natasha Merat. 2021. Don't Worry, I'm in Control! Is Users' Trust in Automated Driving Different When Using a Continuous Ambient Light HMI Compared to an Auditory HMI?. In 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 220--222. https://doi.org/10.1145/3473682.3481875 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  42. [53][53] Karthik Mahadevan, Sowmya Somanath, and Ehud Sharlin. 2018. Communicating Awareness and Intent in Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174003 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  43. [55][55] Nidzamuddin Md. Yusof, J. Karjanto, J. M. B. Terken, F. L. M. Delbressine, and G. W. M. Rauterberg. 2020. Gaining Situation Awareness through a Vibrotactile Display to Mitigate Motion Sickness in Fully-Automated Driving Cars. International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering 17, 1 (2020), 7771--7783. https://doi.org/10.15282/ijame.17.1.2020.23.0578 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  44. [56][56] Valerie Mendoza and David G. Novick. 2005. Usability over time. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Conference on Design of Communication: Documenting & Designing for Pervasive Information (Coventry, United Kingdom) (SIGDOC '05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 151--158. https://doi.org/10.1145/1085313.1085348 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  45. [57][57] Saad Minhas, Aura Hernández-Sabaté, Shoaib Ehsan, and Klaus D. McDonald-Maier. 2022. Effects of Non-Driving Related Tasks During Self-Driving Mode. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 23, 2 (2022), 1391--1399. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2020.3025542 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  46. [58][58] Michael J. Muller and Sarah Kuhn. 1993. Participatory Design. Commun. ACM 36, 6 (jun 1993), 24--28. https://doi.org/10.1145/153571.255960 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  47. [59][59] Tobias Müller, Mark Colley, Gülsemin Dogru, and Enrico Rukzio. 2022. AR4CAD: Creation and Exploration of a Taxonomy of Augmented Reality Visualization for Connected Automated Driving. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6, MHCI, Article 177 (sep 2022), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3546712 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  48. [60][60] Chihab Nadri, Sangjin Ko, Colin Diggs, Michael Winters, V. K. Sreehari, and Myounghoon Jeon. 2021. Novel Auditory Displays in Highly Automated Vehicles: Sonification Improves Driver Situation Awareness, Perceived Workload, and Overall Experience. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 65, 1 (2021), 586--590. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181321651071 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  49. [62][62] Bastian Pfleging, Maurice Rang, and Nora Broy. 2016. Investigating user needs for non-driving-related activities during automated driving. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (Rovaniemi, Finland) (MUM '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 91--99. https://doi.org/10.1145/3012709.3012735 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  50. [63][63] Bastian Pfleging, Shadan Sadeghian, and Debargha Dey. 2021. User interfaces for automated vehicles. it - Information Technology 63, 2 (2021), 73--75. https://doi.org/10.1515/itit-2021-0020 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  51. [64][64] André Rodrigues, Hugo Nicolau, Kyle Montague, João Guerreiro, and Tiago Guerreiro. 2020. Open Challenges of Blind People Using Smartphones. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 36, 17 (2020), 1605--1622. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020. 1768672 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1768672 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI · Paper page
  52. [66][66] Tobias Schneider, Joana Hois, Alischa Rosenstein, Sabiha Ghellal, Dimitra Theofanou-Fülbier, and Ansgar R.S. Gerlicher. 2021. ExplAIn Yourself! Transparency for Positive UX in Autonomous Driving. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Yoshifumi Kitamura, Aaron Quigley, Katherine Isbister, Takeo Igarashi, Pernille Bjørn, and Steven Drucker (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3446647 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  53. [67][67] Eldon Schoop, James Smith, and Bjoern Hartmann. 2018. HindSight: Enhancing Spatial Awareness by Sonifying Detected Objects in Real-Time 360-Degree Video. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173717 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  54. [68][68] Rebecca M. Sheffield, Frances M. D'Andrea, Valerie Morash, and Sarah Chatfield. 2022. How Many Braille Readers? Policy, Politics, and Perception. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 116, 1 (2022), 14--25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X211071125 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  55. [70][70] Kohei Sonoda and Takahiro Wada. 2017. Displaying System Situation Awareness Increases Driver Trust in Automated Driving. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles 2, 3 (2017), 185--193. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2017.2749178 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  56. [71][71] Richard M Taylor. 2017. Situational awareness rating technique (SART): The development of a tool for aircrew systems design. In Situational awareness. Routledge, Abingdon, UK, 111--128. Crossref Google Scholar
  57. [73][73] Jean Toner. 2009. Small is not too small: Reflections concerning the validity of very small focus groups (VSFGs). Qualitative Social Work 8, 2 (2009), 179--192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325009103374 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  58. [74][74] Endel Tulving and Neal Kroll. 1995. Novelty assessment in the brain and long-term memory encoding. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2, 3 (1995), 387--390. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210977 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  59. [76][76] Tamara von Sawitzky, Philipp Wintersberger, Andreas Riener, and Joseph L. Gabbard. 2019. Increasing trust in fully automated driving. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays, Mohamed Khamis, Salvatore Sorce, Jessica R. Cauchard, and Vito Gentile (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3321335.3324947 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  60. [77][77] Marcel Woide, Mark Colley, Nicole Damm, and Martin Baumann. 2022. Effect of System Capability Verification on Conflict, Trust, and Behavior in Automated Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, Yong Gu Ji and Myounghoon Jeon (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 119--130. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543174.3545253 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  61. [78][78] Jiawei Yang, Xinyue Yu, Mengge Wang, Zhenhao Chen, and Hao Tan. 2022. Novel Tactile Feedback Research for Situation Awareness in Autonomous Vehicles. In With Design: Reinventing Design Modes, Gerhard Bruyns and Huaxin Wei (Eds.). Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore, 2874--2887. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4472-7{_}186 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  62. [79][79] Koji Yatani, Nikola Banovic, and Khai Truong. 2012. SpaceSense: Representing Geographical Information to Visually Impaired People Using Spatial Tactile Feedback. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Joseph A. Konstan, Ed H. Chi, and Kristina Höök (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 415--424. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2207734 Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  63. [80][80] Fang You, Xu Yan, Jun Zhang, and Wei Cui. 2022. Design Factors of Shared Situation Awareness Interface in Human-Machine Co-Driving. Information 13, 9 (2022), 437. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13090437 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  64. [81][81] Limin Zeng, Mei Miao, and Gerhard Weber. 2015. Interactive Audio-haptic Map Explorer on a Tactile Display. Interacting with Computers 27, 4 (2015), 413--429. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu006 Crossref Google Scholar · DOI
  65. [82][82] Zoox. 2023. Built for riders, not drivers. https://zoox.com/vehicle/ Google Scholar Cited By View all Gu YDeng BWang YYu SMao MLin ZYao YHaghighat MChen LWang YQi Z(2026)UniC: A Unified Automotive Cockpit Domain Management System for Enhanced In-vehicle InfotainmentACM Transactions on Architecture and Code Optimization10.1145/384561823:4(1-22)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2026 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3845618 Colley MAescht TRajabi ORädler MJansen PRukzio E(2026)Effects of Auditory Information for People With Visual Impairments in Highly Automated VehiclesProceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3828157.3828774(106-117)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2026 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3828157.3828774 Arabian AMosaferchi SMortezapour AColley MNavarro JGoodridge COviedo-Trespalacios OVitiello GNaddeo A(2026)How does the anthropomorphism of automated vehicles shape human trust? A systematic review and meta-analysisTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour10.1016/j.trf.2026.103720121(103720)Online publication date: Jul-2026 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2026.103720 Show More Cited By Index Terms Index Terms (Premium feature) Hey, What's Going On?: Conveying Traffic Information to People with Visual Impairments in Highly Automated Vehicles: Introducing OnBoard Hardware Communication hardware, interfaces and storage Sensors and actuators Human-centered computing Accessibility Accessibility design and evaluation methods Accessibility systems and tools Accessibility technologies Empirical studies in accessibility Human computer interaction (HCI) HCI design and evaluation methods Laboratory experiments User studies Interaction devices Haptic devices Sound-based input / output Recommendations Recommendations (Premium feature) Light My Way: Developing and Exploring a Multimodal Interface to Assist People With Visual Impairments to Exit Highly Automated Vehicles CHI '25: Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems The introduction of Highly Automated Vehicles (HAVs) has the potential to increase the independence of blind and visually impaired people (BVIPs). However, ensuring safety and situation awareness when exiting these vehicles in unfamiliar environments ... Read More AccessComics2: Understanding the User Experience of an Accessible Comic Book Reader for Blind People with Textual Sound Effects For people with visual impairments, many studies have been conducted to improve the accessibility of various types of images on the web. However, the majority of the work focused on photos or graphs. In this study, we propose AccessComics, an accessible ... Read More SonicVista: Towards Creating Awareness of Distant Scenes through Sonification Spatial awareness, particularly awareness of distant environmental scenes known as vista-space, is crucial and contributes to the cognitive and aesthetic needs of People with Visual Impairments (PVI). In this work, through a formative study with PVIs, we ... Read More Comments Comments (Premium feature) Information & Contributors Information Published In cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies Volume 8, Issue 2 June 2024 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meinhardt, L.-M., Rück, M., Zähnle, J., Elhaidary, M., Colley, M., Rietzler, M., & Rukzio, E.
Affiliations
Universität Ulm (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2024-05-13
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
1-24
ISSN
2474-9567 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1145/3659618
OpenAlex
W4396919403
Cited by
13
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1
FWCI
3.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (536409562)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
highly automated vehicles, auditory interfaces, touch interfaces, traffic information, situational awareness, predictability, user engagement, multimodal interfaces, assistive technology, participatory design, visual acuity loss

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review