CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 83Human-Automation Interaction and SafetySocial Robot Interaction and HRIVehicle Noise and Vibration Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Auditory interfaces in automated driving: an international survey

Open access
Bazilinskyy, Pavlo, de Winter, Joost·2015·PeerJ Computer Science
DOI 10.7717/peerj-cs.13

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study investigated peoples’ opinion on auditory interfaces in contemporary cars and their willingness to be exposed to auditory feedback in automated driving. We used an Internet-based survey to collect 1,205 responses from 91 countries. The respondents stated their attitudes towards two existing auditory driver assistance systems, a parking assistant (PA) and a forward collision warning system (FCWS), as well as towards a futuristic augmented sound system (FS) proposed for fully automated driving. The respondents were positive towards the PA and FCWS, and rated the willingness to have automated versions of these systems as 3.87 and 3.77, respectively (on a scale from 1 = disagree strongly to 5 = agree strongly). The respondents tolerated the FS (the mean willingness to use it was 3.00 on the same scale). The results showed that among the available response options, the female voice was the most preferred feedback type for takeover requests in highly automated driving, regardless of whether the respondents’ country was English speaking or not. The present results could be useful for designers of automated vehicles and other stakeholders.

Overview

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 · 10.7717/peerj-cs.13

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • In the vehicle domain, automatic speech recognition has additional challenges including low performance caused by uncontrollable cabin conditions such as wind and road noise.

    “However, in vehicle domain there are additional challenges; low performance caused by uncontrollable cabin conditions such as wind and road noise [272].”

    From A Survey of Autonomous Driving: Common Practices and Emerging Technologies (2020) · cites this paper as [272]

    The section on an augmented/spatial sound system discusses filtering unwanted vehicle sounds, but does not address automatic speech recognition or its performance. Searches for automatic speech recognition and wind or road noise found no passage linking cabin conditions to poor recognition performance; the only recognition-related hit was a title in the References. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Adell, 2008, Test of HMI alternatives for driver support to keep safe speed and safe distance—a simulator study, The Open Transportation Journal, 2, 53, 10.2174/1874447800802010053 · DOI
  2. Alicandri, 1992, Human factors and the automated highway system, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 36, 1064, 10.1518/107118192786749793 · DOI
  3. Arrabito, 2009, Effects of talker sex and voice style of verbal cockpit warnings on performance, Human Factors, 51, 3, 10.1177/0018720808333411 · DOI
  4. Bainbridge, 1983, Ironies of automation, Automatica, 19, 775, 10.1016/0005-1098(83)90046-8 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Banks, 2014, Sub-systems on the road to vehicle automation: Hands and feet free but not ‘mind’ free driving, Safety Science, 62, 505, 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.10.014 · DOI
  6. Barón, 2006, Safety and usability of speech interfaces for in-vehicle tasks while driving: a brief literature review, Technical Report No. UMTRI-2006-5
  7. Begault, 1993, Head-up auditory displays for traffic collision avoidance system advisories: a preliminary investigation, Human Factors, 35, 707, 10.1177/001872089303500409 · DOI
  8. Beiker, 2012, Legal aspects of autonomous driving: the need for a legal infrastructure that permits autonomous driving in public to maximize safety and consumer benefit, Santa Clara Law Review, 52, 1145
  9. Belz, 1999, A new class of auditory warning signals for complex systems: auditory icons, Human Factors, 41, 608, 10.1518/001872099779656734 · DOI
  10. Braitman, 2010, Volvo and Infiniti drivers’ experiences with select crash avoidance technologies, Traffic Injury Prevention, 11, 270, 10.1080/15389581003735600 · DOI
  11. Bregman, 1990, Auditory scene analysis: the perceptual organization of sound, 10.7551/mitpress/1486.001.0001 · DOI
  12. Bronkhorst, 1996, Application of a three-dimensional auditory display in a flight task, Human Factors, 38, 23, 10.1518/001872096778940859 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Clarke, 2005, Voluntary risk taking and skill deficits in young driver accidents in the UK, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37, 523, 10.1016/j.aap.2005.01.007 · DOI
  14. Cooke, 2001, The auditory organization of speech and other sources in listeners and computational models, Speech Communication, 35, 141, 10.1016/S0167-6393(00)00078-9 · DOI
  15. De Winter, 2013, Predicting self-reported violations among novice license drivers using pre-license simulator measures, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 52, 71, 10.1016/j.aap.2012.12.018 · DOI
  16. De Winter, 2014, Effects of adaptive cruise control and highly automated driving on workload and situation awareness: a review of the empirical evidence, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 196, 10.1016/j.trf.2014.06.016 · DOI
  17. De Winter, 2015, Using CrowdFlower to study the relationship between self-reported violations and traffic accidents, 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.514 · DOI
  18. Desmond, 1998, Fatigue and automation-induced impairments in simulated driving performance, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1628, 8, 10.3141/1628-02 · DOI
  19. Dingus, 1998, Human–system interface issues in the design and use of advanced traveler information systems, 359
  20. Ebbatson, 2009, The loss of manual flying skills in pilots of highly automated airliners, PhD Thesis
  21. Edworthy, 2003, The use of male or female voices in warnings systems: a question of acoustics, Noise & Health, 6, 39
  22. Garas, 2000, Adaptive 3D sound systems, 10.1007/978-1-4419-8776-1 · DOI
  23. Godinho, 2001, 3D sound scattering by rigid barriers in the vicinity of tall buildings, Applied Acoustics, 62, 1229, 10.1016/S0003-682X(01)00004-4 · DOI
  24. Goodall, 2014, Machine ethics and automated vehicles, 93, 10.1007/978-3-319-05990-7 · DOI
  25. Gururaj, 2008, Road traffic deaths, injuries and disabilities in India: current scenario, National Medical Journal of India, 21, 14
  26. Hermann, 2011, The sonification handbook
  27. Ho, 2007, Multisensory in-car warning signals for collision avoidance, Human Factors, 49, 1107, 10.1518/001872007X249965 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Holland, 2002, AudioGPS: spatial audio navigation with a minimal attention interface, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 6, 253, 10.1007/s007790200025 · DOI
  29. Howe, 2006, The rise of crowdsourcing, Wired Magazine, 14, 1
  30. Jamson, 2008, Potential benefits of an adaptive forward collision warning system, Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 16, 471, 10.1016/j.trc.2007.09.003 · DOI
  31. Jonsson, 2011, I can’t hear you? drivers interacting with male or female voices in native or non-native language, 298, 10.1007/978-3-642-21666-4_33 · DOI
  32. Kulas, 2009, Middle category endorsement in odd-numbered Likert response scales: associated item characteristics, cognitive demands, and preferred meanings, Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 489, 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.005 · DOI
  33. Kulas, 2008, Middle response functioning in Likert-responses to personality items, Journal of Business and Psychology, 22, 251, 10.1007/s10869-008-9064-2 · DOI
  34. Kyriakidis, 2015, Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 32, 127, 10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Large, 2013, Drivers’ preferences and emotional responses to satellite navigation voices, International Journal of Vehicle Noise and Vibration, 9, 28, 10.1504/IJVNV.2013.053815 · DOI
  36. Larsson, 2014, Learning from experience: familiarity with ACC and responding to a cut-in situation in automated driving, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 229, 10.1016/j.trf.2014.05.008 · DOI
  37. Lee, 2002, Modeling young driver motor vehicle crashes: data with extra zeros, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 34, 515, 10.1016/S0001-4575(01)00049-5 · DOI
  38. Lee, 2007, Technology and teen drivers, Journal of Safety Research, 38, 203, 10.1016/j.jsr.2007.02.008 · DOI
  39. Levitan, 1998, Human factors issues for automated highway systems, ITS Journal, 4, 21, 10.1080/10248079808903735 · DOI
  40. Markoff, 2010, Google cars drive themselves, in traffic, The New York Times
  41. Matthews, 1986, Age differences in male drivers’ perception of accident risk: the role of perceived driving ability, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 18, 299, 10.1016/0001-4575(86)90044-8 · DOI
  42. Merat, 2012, Highly automated driving, secondary task performance, and driver state, Human Factors, 54, 762, 10.1177/0018720812442087 · DOI
  43. Nixon, 1998, Female voice communications in high levels of aircraft cockpit noises—part I: spectra, levels, and microphones, Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 69, 675
  44. Nixon, 1998, Female voice communications in high level aircraft cockpit noises—part II: vocoder and automatic speech recognition systems, Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 69, 1087
  45. Noyes, 2006, Speech warnings: a review, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 7, 551, 10.1080/14639220600731123 · DOI
  46. Norman, 1990, The ‘problem’ with automation: inappropriate feedback and interaction, not ‘over-automation’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences, 327, 585, 10.1098/rstb.1990.0101 · DOI
  47. Payre, 2014, Intention to use a fully automated car: attitudes and a priori acceptability, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 252, 10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.009 · DOI
  48. Rozier, 2000, Hear & There: an augmented reality system of linked audio, MSc Thesis
  49. Rudin-Brown, 2004, Behavioural adaptation to adaptive cruise control (ACC): implications for preventive strategies, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 7, 59, 10.1016/j.trf.2004.02.001 · DOI
  50. Scallen, 1995, Pilot performance and preference for short cycles of automation in adaptive function allocation, Applied Ergonomics, 26, 397, 10.1016/0003-6870(95)00054-2 · DOI
  51. Stanton, 2001, Automating the driver’s control tasks, International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 5, 221, 10.1207/S15327566IJCE0503_5 · DOI
  52. Stanton, 1999, Human factors in auditory warnings
  53. Stanton, 1997, Drive-by-wire: the case of driver workload and reclaiming control with adaptive cruise control, Safety Science, 27, 149, 10.1016/S0925-7535(97)00054-4 · DOI
  54. Strand, 2014, Semi-automated versus highly automated driving in critical situations caused by automation failures, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 218, 10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.005 · DOI
  55. Sturgis, 2012, Middle alternatives revisited: How the neither/nor response acts as a way of saying I Don’t Know?, Sociological Methods & Research, 43, 15, 10.1177/0049124112452527 · DOI
  56. Tacken, 2005, Use and acceptance of new technology by older people. Findings of the international MOBILATE survey: ‘Enhancing mobility in later life’, Gerontechnology, 3, 126, 10.4017/gt.2005.03.03.002.00 · DOI
  57. Takayama, 2008, Driver safety and information from afar: an experimental driving simulator study of wireless vs. in-car information services, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 66, 173, 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.06.005 · DOI
  58. Underwood, 2014, Automated vehicles forecast: vehicle symposium opinion survey
  59. Varaiya, 1993, Smart cars on smart roads. Problems of control, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 38, 195, 10.1109/9.250509 · DOI
  60. Wetmore, 2003, Driving the dream. The history and motivations behind 60 years of automated highway systems in America, Automotive History Review, 7, 4
  61. Wickens, 2013, Engineering psychology and human performance
  62. World Health Organization, 2013, Global status report on road safety 2013

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bazilinskyy, P., & de Winter, J.
Affiliations
Delft University of Technology (NL)
ORCID
Venue
PeerJ Computer Science
Publisher
PeerJ
Published
2015-08-19
Volume
1
Pages
e13
ISSN
2376-5992 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.7717/peerj-cs.13
OpenAlex
W1198252587
Cited by
83
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3
FWCI
11.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • PeerJ Computer Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Vehicle Noise and Vibration Control
Keywords
auditory interfaces, autonomous driving, driver assistance systems, auditory feedback, forward collision warning, fully automated vehicles, takeover requests, intercultural attitudes, human-machine interaction

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