In-vehicle displays for driving automation: a scoping review of display design and evaluation using driver gaze measures

References

• Akash, K., Jain, N., & Misu, T. (2020). Toward adaptive trust calibration for level 2 driving automation. International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 10, 538–547. https://doi.org/10.1145/3382507.3418885
   Google Scholar
• Arksey, H., & O’malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
   Google Scholar
• Bigelow, P. (2023, June 16). Level 3 presents a complicated, “mushy middle” in automated driving. Automotive News. https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/mercedes-benz-level-3-drive-pilot-launches-amid-questions
   Google Scholar
• Chen, K.-T., & Chen, H.-Y. W. (2021). Manipulating music to communicate automation reliability in conditionally automated driving: A driving simulator study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 145, 102518.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen-Lazry, G., Borowsky, A., & Oron-Gilad, T. (2020). The impact of auditory continual feedback on take-overs in Level 3 automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 75, 145–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danner, S., Feierle, A., Manger, C., & Bengler, K. (2021). Context-adaptive availability notifications for an sae level 3 automation. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5040016
   Google Scholar
• DeGuzman, C. A., Kanaan, D., Hopkins, S. A., & Donmez, B. (2021). Takeover request (TOR) effects during different automated vehicle failures. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Winter, J., Happee, R., Martens, M. H., & Stanton, N. A. (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, 196–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.06.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebel, P., Lingenfelder, C., & Vogelsang, A. (2023). On the forces of driver distraction: Explainable predictions for the visual demand of in-vehicle touchscreen interactions. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2023.106956
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebnali, M., Fathi, R., Lamb, R., Pourfalatoun, S., & Motamedi, S. (2020). Using augmented holographic uis to communicate automation reliability in partially automated driving. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2700.
   Google Scholar
• Feierle, A., Beller, D., & Bengler, K. (2019). Head-up displays in urban partially automated driving: Effects of using augmented reality. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference, 1877–1882.
   Google Scholar
• Feierle, A., Holderied, M., & Bengler, K. (2020). Evaluation of ambient light displays for requests to intervene and minimal risk maneuvers in highly automated urban driving. IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Feng, J., Kaber, D., & Cunningham, C. (2020). Designing In-vehicle Message Delivery for Manual and Highly Automated Driving.
   Google Scholar
• Forster, Y., Naujoks, F., Neukum, A., & Huestegge, L. (2017). Driver compliance to take-over requests with different auditory outputs in conditional automation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 109, 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.09.019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fridman, L., Brown, D. E., Glazer, M., Angell, W., Dodd, S., Jenik, B., Terwilliger, J., Patsekin, A., Kindelsberger, J., Ding, L., Seaman, S., Mehler, A., Sipperley, A., Pettinato, A., Seppelt, B., Angell, L., Mehler, B., & Reimer, B. (2019). MIT Autonomous Vehicle Technology Study.
   Google Scholar
• Gaspar, J., & Carney, C. (2019). The effect of partial automation on driver attention: A naturalistic driving study. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 61(8), 1261–1276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819836310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaspar, J., Schwarz, C., Kashef, O., Schmitt, R., & Shull, E. (2018). Using driver state detection in automated vehicles. SAFER-SIM University Transportation Center.
   Google Scholar
• General Motors. (2018). 2019 Cadillac CT6 owner’s manual.
   Google Scholar
• Golson, D. (2023, September 27). We put our blind faith in Mercedes-Benz’s first-of-its-kind autonomous Drive Pilot feature. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/27/23892154/mercedes-benz-drive-pilot-autonomous-level-3-test
   Google Scholar
• Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haghzare, S., Campos, J. L., & Mihailidis, A. (2024). Classifying older drivers’ gaze behaviour during automated versus Non-automated driving: A preliminary step towards detecting mode confusion. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2112933
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins, A. J. (2023). Mercedes-Benz is the first to bring Level 3 automated driving to the US. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/27/23572942/mercedes-drive-pilot-level-3-approved-nevada
   Google Scholar
• He, D., Kanaan, D., & Donmez, B. (2021). In-vehicle displays to support driver anticipation of traffic conflicts in automated vehicles. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 149, 105842.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hecht, T., Kratzert, S., & Bengler, K. (2020). The effects of a predictive HMI and different transition frequencies on acceptance, workload, usability, and gaze behavior during urban automated driving. Information, 11(2), 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11020073
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra-Atwood, L., Prendez, D., Campbell, J. L., & Richard, C. M. (2019). Some on-road glances are more equal than others: Measuring engagement in the driving task. HFES Annual Meeting, 63(1), 1986–1990.
   Google Scholar
• Inagaki, T., & Sheridan, T. B. (2019). A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement. Cognition, Technology & Work, 21(4), 569–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0471-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin, M., Lu, G., Chen, F., & Shi, X. (2020). How driving experience affect trust in automation from level 3 automated vehicles? An experimental analysis. IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Kalb, L., Streit, L., & Bengler, K. (2018). What drivers make of directional maneuver information in a take-over scenario. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 3859–3864.
   Google Scholar
• Kanaan, D., Ayas, S., Donmez, B., Risteska, M., & Chakraborty, J. (2019). Using naturalistic vehicle-based data to predict distraction and environmental demand. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction, 11(3), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMHCI.2019070104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanaan, D., Donmez, B., Kelley-Baker, T., Popkin, S. M., Lehrer, A. M., & Fisher, D. L. (2020). Driver fitness in the resumption of control. In D. L. Fisher, W. J. Horrey, J. D. Lee, & M. A. Regan (Eds.), Handbook of human factors for automated, connected and intelligent vehicles (pp. 173–216). CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kanaan, D., Powell, M., & Donmez, B. (2021). Assessment of driving automation interfaces via visual attention measures: A literature review. HFES Annual Meeting, 1400–1404.
   Google Scholar
• Karatas, N., Yoshikawa, S., Tamura, S., Otaki, S., Funayama, R., & Okada, M. (2017). Sociable driving agents to maintain driver’s attention in autonomous driving. IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 143–149.
   Google Scholar
• Klauer, S. G., Dingus, T. A., Neale, V. L., Sudweeks, J. D., & Ramsey, D. J. (2006). The impact of driver inattention on near-crash/crash risk: An analysis using the 100-Car naturalistic driving study data (DOT HS 810 594).
   Google Scholar
• Kolodny, L. (2023, April 25). Cruise robotaxis now run all day in San Francisco, with public access after 10 pm CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/25/cruise-robotaxis-now-run-24-7-in-san-francisco-public-access-at-night.html
   Google Scholar
• Kraft, A. K., Maag, C., & Baumann, M. (2020). Comparing dynamic and static illustration of an HMI for cooperative driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105682
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraft, A. K., Maag, C., Cruz, M. I., Baumann, M., & Neukum, A. (2020). Effects of explaining system failures during maneuver coordination while driving manual or automated. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105839
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraft, A. K., Naujoks, F., Wörle, J., & Neukum, A. (2018). The impact of an in-vehicle display on glance distribution in partially automated driving in an on-road experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.11.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunze, A., Summerskill, S. J., Marshall, R., & Filtness, A. J. (2019). Automation transparency: Implications of uncertainty communication for human-automation interaction and interfaces. Ergonomics, 62(3), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1547842
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurpiers, C., Lechner, D., Raisch, F., & Administration, N. H. T. S. (2019). The influence of a gaze direction based attention request to maintain mode awareness. International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, 10–13.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Q., Hou, L., Wang, Z., Wang, W., Zeng, C., Yuan, Q., … Cheng, B. (2021). Drivers’ visual-distracted take-over performance model and its application on adaptive adjustment of time budget. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 154, 106099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Q., Wang, Z., Wang, W., Zeng, C., Li, G., Yuan, Q., & Cheng, B. (2022). An adaptive time budget adjustment strategy based on a take-over performance model for passive fatigue. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 52(5), 1025–1035. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2021.3121665
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Q., Wang, Z., Wang, W., Zeng, C., Wu, C., Li, G., Heh, J.-S., & Cheng, B. (2023). Table of contents. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(4), C1–C4. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2023.3256154
   Google Scholar
• Lin, D. (2023, August 19). 2 robotaxi crashes in San Francisco put focus on autonomous vehicle safety—CBS San Francisco. https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/robotaxi-crashes-san-francisco-focus-autonomous-vehicle-safety/
   Google Scholar
• Liu, W., Li, Q., Wang, Z., Wang, W., Zeng, C., & Cheng, B. (2023). A literature review on additional semantic information conveyed from driving automation systems to drivers through advanced In-vehicle HMI just before, during, and right after takeover request. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(10), 1995–2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2074669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, Z., Zhang, B., Feldhütter, A., Happee, R., Martens, M., & De Winter, J. C. F. (2019). Beyond mere take-over requests: The effects of monitoring requests on driver attention, take-over performance, and acceptance. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 63, 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.03.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahajan, K., Large, D. R., Burnett, G., & Velaga, N. R. (2021a). Exploring the benefits of conversing with a digital voice assistant during automated driving: A parametric duration model of takeover time. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 80, 104–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2021.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahajan, K., Large, D. R., Burnett, G., & Velaga, N. R. (2021b). Exploring the effectiveness of a digital voice assistant to maintain driver alertness in partially automated vehicles. Traffic Injury Prevention, 22(5), 378–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2021.1904138
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, A. D., Alambeigi, H., Engström, J., Markkula, G., Vogelpohl, T., Dunne, J., & Yuma, N. (2019). Toward computational simulations of behavior during automated driving takeovers: A review of the empirical and modeling literatures. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 61(4), 642–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819829572
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehrotra, S., Wang, M., Wong, N., Parker, J., Roberts, S. C., Kim, W., Romo, A., & Horrey, W. J. (2022). Human-machine interfaces and vehicle automation: A review of the literature and recommendations for system design, feedback, and alerts.
   Google Scholar
• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013). Vehicle safety research note: Distraction detection algorithm evaluation.
   Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board. (2020). Collision between a sport utility vehicle operating with partial driving automation and a crash attenuator, HWY18FH011, Mountain View, California.
   Google Scholar
• Naujoks, F., Purucker, C., Wiedemann, K., Neukum, A., Wolter, S., & Steiger, R. (2017). Driving performance at lateral system limits during partially automated driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 108, 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.08.027
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naujoks, F., Wiedemann, K., Schömig, N., Hergeth, S., & Keinath, A. (2019). Towards guidelines and verification methods for automated vehicle HMIs. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 60, 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.10.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordhoff, S., Lee, J. D., Calvert, S. C., Berge, S., Hagenzieker, M., & Happee, R. (2023). (Mis-)use of standard autopilot and full self-driving (FSD) beta: Results from interviews with users of tesla’s FSD beta. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1101520.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pampel, S. M., Large, D. R., Burnett, G., Matthias, R., Thompson, S., & Skrypchuk, L. (2019). Getting the driver back into the loop: the quality of manual vehicle control following long and short non-critical transfer-of-control requests: TI:NS. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 20(3), 265–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2018.1463412
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul, K. (2023, August 14). Robotaxi breakdowns cause mayhem in San Francisco days after expansion vote. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/14/san-francisco-robotaxi-waymo-cruise-breakdown
   Google Scholar
• Petersen, L., Robert, L., Yang, X. J., & Tilbury, D. M. (2019). Situational awareness, driver’s trust in automated driving systems and secondary task performance. In SAE International Journal of Connected and Autonomous Vehicles.
   Google Scholar
• Piechulla, W., Mayser, C., Gehrke, H., & König, W. (2003). Reducing drivers’ mental workload by means of an adaptive man–machine interface. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 6(4), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2003.08.001
   Google Scholar
• Pipkorn, L., Dozza, M., & Tivesten, E. (2024). Driver visual attention before and after take-over requests during automated driving on public roads. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 66(2), 336–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208221093863
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pipkorn, L., Tivesten, E., Flannagan, C., & Dozza, M. (2023). Driver response to take-over requests in real traffic. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 53(5), 823–833. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2023.3304003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pluemer, A. (2022). The state of driver monitoring systems (DMS) today. Embedded. https://www.embedded.com/the-state-of-driver-monitoring-systems-dms-today/
   Google Scholar
• Purucker, C., Naujoks, F., Prill, A., & Neukum, A. (2017). Evaluating distraction of in-vehicle information systems while driving by predicting total eyes-off-road times with keystroke level modeling. Applied Ergonomics, 58, 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.04.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauffet, P., Botzer, A., Chauvin, C., Saïd, F., & Tordet, C. (2020). The relationship between level of engagement in a non-driving task and driver response time when taking control of an automated vehicle. Cognition, Technology & Work, 22(4), 721–731. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00611-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roche, F., Somieski, A., & Brandenburg, S. (2019). Behavioral changes to repeated takeovers in highly automated driving: Effects of the takeover-request design and the nondriving-related task modality. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 61(5), 839–849. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720818814963
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SAE International. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for On-road motor vehicles.
   Google Scholar
• Schömig, N., Wiedemann, K., Naujoks, F., Neukum, A., Leuchtenberg, B., & Vöhringer-Kuhnt, T. (2018). An augmented reality display for conditionally automated driving. Adjunct Proceedings – AutomotiveUI, 2018, 137–141.
   Google Scholar
• Stephenson, A., Eimontaite, I., Caleb-Solly, P., & Alford, C. (2020). The impact of a biological driver state monitoring system on visual attention during partially automated driving. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Advances in human aspects of transportation: Vol. 1212 AISC (pp. 193–200). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Szymkowski, S. (2020). Audi hangs up hopes for Level 3 partial automation system. CNET. https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/audi-a8-level-3-automation-traffic-jam-pilot-system/
   Google Scholar
• Telpaz, A., Rhindress, B., Zelman, I., & Tsimhoni, O. (2017). Using a vibrotactile seat for facilitating the handover of control during automated driving. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction, 9(3), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijmhci.2017070102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tesla. (2019). Model X owner’s manual.
   Google Scholar
• Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulahannan, A., Jennings, P., Oliveira, L., & Birrell, S. (2020). Designing an adaptive interface: Using eye tracking to classify how information usage changes over time in partially automated vehicles. IEEE Access, 8, 16865–16875. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2966928
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulahannan, A., Thompson, S., Jennings, P., & Birrell, S. (2021). Using glance behaviour to inform the design of adaptive HMI for partially automated vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Victor, T. W., Harbluk, J. L., Engström, J. A., & Engströ, J. A. (2005). Sensitivity of eye-movement measures to in-vehicle task difficulty. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 8(2), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2005.04.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Victor, T. W., Tivesten, E., Gustavsson, P., Johansson, J., Sangberg, F., & Ljung Aust, M. (2018). Automation expectation mismatch: Incorrect prediction despite eyes on threat and hands on wheel. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 60(8), 1095–1116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720818788164
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlakveld, W., van Nes, N., de Bruin, J., Vissers, L., & van der Kroft, M. (2018). Situation awareness increases when drivers have more time to take over the wheel in a Level 3 automated car: A simulator study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 917–929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.07.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelpohl, T., Gehlmann, F., & Vollrath, M. (2020). Task interruption and control recovery strategies after take-over requests emphasize need for measures of situation awareness. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 62(7), 1190–1211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819866976
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelpohl, T., Kühn, M., Hummel, T., Gehlert, T., & Vollrath, M. (2018). Transitioning to manual driving requires additional time after automation deactivation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 55, 464–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.03.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walch, M., Lehr, D., Colley, M., & Weber, M. (2019). Don't you see them? Towards gaze-based interaction adaptation for driver-vehicle cooperation. In Proceedings of the 11th international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications: Adjunct proceedings (pp. 232–237). Utrecht, Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Weidner, F., & Broll, W. (2019). Smart S3D TOR: Intelligent warnings on large stereoscopic 3D dashboards during take-overs. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM international symposium on pervasive displays (pp. 1-7).
   Google Scholar
• Weidner, F., & Broll, W. (2022). Stereoscopic 3D dashboards: An investigation of performance, workload, and gaze behavior during take-overs in semi-autonomous driving. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 26(3), 697–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-020-01438-8
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, B., Sawyer, B. D., & Rosenholtz, R. (2022). Toward a theory of visual information acquisition in driving. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 64(4), 694–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820939693
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wörle, J., Metz, B., Thiele, C., & Weller, G. (2019). Detecting sleep in drivers during highly automated driving: The potential of physiological parameters. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 13(8), 1241–1248. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2018.5529
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, T. J., Agrawal, R., Samuel, S., Wang, Y., Zilberstein, S., & Fisher, D. L. (2017). Effects of alert cue specificity on situation awareness in transfer of control in level 3 automation. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2663(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.3141/2663-04
   Google Scholar
• Wright, T. J., Agrawal, R., Samuel, S., Wang, Y., Zilberstein, S., & Fisher, D. L. (2018). Effective cues for accelerating young drivers’ time to transfer control following a period of conditional automation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 116, 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.10.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, B., Saito, T., Wang, Z., Kitazaki, S., & Nakano, K. (2023). Driver behaviors assisted by different human machine interfaces to avoid rear-end collisions during level 2 automated driving. Traffic Injury Prevention, 24(6), 475–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2023.2222326
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Y., Karakaya, B., Dominioni, G. C., Kawabe, K., & Bengler, K. (2018, November 4-7). An HMI concept to improve driver's visual behavior and situation awareness in automated vehicle. 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC) (pp. 650–655), Maui, Hawaii, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, Z., & Pan, Y. (2020, December 18-20). Evaluating safety of mechanisms that transit control from autonomous systems to human drivers. Proceedings of the 2020 4th CAA International Conference on Vehicular Control and Intelligence (CVCI) (pp. 767–770), Hangzhou, China.
   Google Scholar
• Yoshida, J. (2021). Who is responsible when a level 3 vehicle crashes? EE Times Asia. https://www.eetasia.com/who-is-responsible-when-a-level-3-vehicle-crashes/
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, B., de Winter, J., Varotto, S., Happee, R., & Martens, M. (2019). Determinants of take-over time from automated driving: A meta-analysis of 129 studies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 64, 285–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.04.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, F., & Roberts, S. C. (2023). Factors affecting drivers’ off-road glance behavior while interacting with in-vehicle voice interfaces. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 179, 106883.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Y., Wang, W., Zhou, X., Wang, Q., & Sun, X. (2023). Tactical-Level explanation is Not enough: Effect of explaining AV’s lane-changing decisions on drivers’ decision-making, trust, and emotional experience. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(7), 1438–1454. doi:10.1080/10447318.2022.2098965
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar