skip to main content
research-article

Pedestrians and Visual Signs of Intent: Towards Expressive Autonomous Passenger Shuttles

Published: 09 September 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Autonomous Passenger Shuttles (APS) are rapidly becoming an urban public transit alternative. Traversing populous commercial and residential centers, these shuttles are already operating in several cities. In the absence of a human driver and embedded means of communicating the autonomous shuttle's intent, the task of seamlessly navigating crosswalks and pedestrian-friendly zones becomes a challenging pursuit for pedestrians.
We contribute to the emerging notion of AV-Pedestrian Interaction by examining the context of autonomous passenger shuttles (APS) in real-world settings, and by comparing four different classes of visual signals -- namely instructional, symbolic, metaphorical, and anthropomorphic -- designed to communicate the shuttle's intentions. Following a participatory methodology involving local residents and public transport service provider, and working within the framework of inflexible road traffic regulations concerning the operation and testing of autonomous vehicles, we conducted a participatory design workshop, a qualitative, and a survey study. The findings revealed differences across these four classes of signals in terms of pedestrians' subjective perceptions. Anthropomorphic signals were identified as the preferred and effective modality in terms of pedestrians' interpretation of the communicated intent and their perceived sense of attention, confidence, and calmness. Additionally, pedestrians' experiences while judging the intention of transitionary vehicular states (starting/slowing) were reported as perplexing and evoked stress. These findings were translated into design and policy implications in collaboration with other stakeholders, and exemplify a viable way for assimilating human factors research in urban mobility.

Supplementary Material

verma (verma.zip)
Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, Pedestrians and Visual Signs of Intent: Towards Expressive Autonomous Passenger Shuttles

References

[1]
Hamed S. Alavi, Farzaneh Bahrami, Himanshu Verma, and Denis Lalanne. 2017. Is Driverless Car Another Weiserian Mistake?. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 249--253.
[2]
Saleema Amershi, Dan Weld, Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Adam Fourney, Besmira Nushi, Penny Collisson, Jina Suh, Shamsi Iqbal, Paul N. Bennett, Kori Inkpen, Jaime Teevan, Ruth Kikin-Gil, and Eric Horvitz. 2019. Guidelines for Human-AI Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 3, 13 pages.
[3]
James M Anderson, Kalra Nidhi, Karlyn D Stanley, Paul Sorensen, Constantine Samaras, and Oluwatobi A Oluwatola. 2014. Autonomous vehicle technology: A guide for policymakers. Rand Corporation.
[4]
F Gregory Ashby and Nancy A Perrin. 1988. Toward a unified theory of similarity and recognition. Psychological review 95, 1 (1988), 124.
[5]
Jimi Beckwith. 2018. Jaguar Land Rover gives driverless pods 'eyes' to signal road users. https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/jaguar-land-rover-gives-driverless-pods-eyes-signal-road-users. {Online; accessed 3-September-2018}.
[6]
Brett Berk. 2015. How Nissan's Using Anthropology to Make Autonomous Cars Safe. http://www.thedrive.com/tech/999/how-nissans-using-anthropology-to-make-autonomous-cars-safe. {Online; accessed 3-September-2018}.
[7]
The League of American Bicyclists Bikeleague. 2014. Autonomous and Connected Vehicles: Implications for Bicyclists and Pedestrians. https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/Bike_Ped_Connected_Vehicles.pdf. {Online; accessed 26-April-2019}.
[8]
Laurens Boer and Jared Donovan. 2012. Provotypes for participatory innovation. In Proceedings of the designing interactive systems conference. ACM, 388--397.
[9]
Patrick M Boesch, Francesco Ciari, and Kay W Axhausen. 2016. Autonomous vehicle fleet sizes required to serve different levels of demand. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2542 (2016), 111--119.
[10]
Patrick M Bösch, Felix Becker, Henrik Becker, and Kay W Axhausen. 2018. Cost-based analysis of autonomous mobility services. Transport Policy 64 (2018), 76--91.
[11]
Lawrence D Burns. 2013. Sustainable mobility: a vision of our transport future. Nature 497, 7448 (2013), 181.
[12]
Stephen M. Casner, Edwin L. Hutchins, and Don Norman. 2016. The Challenges of Partially Automated Driving. Commun. ACM 59, 5 (April 2016), 70--77.
[13]
Chia-Ming Chang, Koki Toda, Daisuke Sakamoto, and Takeo Igarashi. 2017. Eyes on a Car: An Interface Design for Communication Between an Autonomous Car and a Pedestrian. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17). 65--73.
[14]
Vicky Charisi, Azra Habibovic, Jonas Andersson, Jamy Li, and Vanessa Evers. 2017. Children's Views on Identification and Intention Communication of Self-driving Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 399--404.
[15]
Michael Clamann, Miles Aubert, and Mary L Cummings. 2017. Evaluation of vehicle-to-pedestrian communication displays for autonomous vehicles. Technical Report.
[16]
Debargha Dey, Marieke Martens, Berry Eggen, and Jacques Terken. 2017. The Impact of Vehicle Appearance and Vehicle Behavior on Pedestrian Interaction with Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications Adjunct (AutomotiveUI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 158--162.
[17]
Grace Eden. 2018. Transforming Cars into Computers: Interdisciplinary Opportunities for HCI. In Proceedings of 32nd BCS HCI Conference, Belfast, UK, 2018. British Human Computer Interaction (BHCI).
[18]
Grace Eden, Benjamin Nanchen, Randolf Ramseyer, and Florian Evéquoz. 2017. On the road with an autonomous passenger shuttle: integration in public spaces. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1569--1576.
[19]
Daniel J Fagnant and Kara Kockelman. 2015. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 77 (2015), 167--181.
[20]
Moran Furman and Xiao-Jing Wang. 2008. Similarity effect and optimal control of multiple-choice decision making. Neuron 60, 6 (2008), 1153--1168.
[21]
Nikhil Gowda, Wendy Ju, and Kirstin Kohler. 2014. Dashboard Design for an Autonomous Car. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. ACM, 1--4.
[22]
Nicolas Guéguen, Sébastien Meineri, and Chloé Eyssartier. 2015. A pedestrian's stare and drivers' stopping behavior: A field experiment at the pedestrian crossing. Safety science 75 (2015), 87--89.
[23]
Azra Habibovic, Victor Malmsten Lundgren, Jonas Andersson, Maria KlingegÃěrd, Tobias LagstrÃűm, Anna Sirkka, Johan FagerlÃűnn, Claes Edgren, Rikard Fredriksson, Stas Krupenia, Dennis SaluÃd'Ãdr, and Pontus Larsson. 2018. Communicating Intent of Automated Vehicles to Pedestrians. Frontiers in Psychology 9 (2018), 1336.
[24]
Jeffrey Heer and Michael Bostock. 2010. Crowdsourcing graphical perception: using mechanical turk to assess visualization design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 203--212.
[25]
Kyeil Kim, Guy Rousseau, Joel Freedman, and Jonathan Nicholson. 2015. The travel impact of autonomous vehicles in metro atlanta through activity-based modeling. In The 15th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
[26]
Jeamin Koo, Jungsuk Kwac, Wendy Ju, Martin Steinert, Larry Leifer, and Clifford Nass. 2015. Why did my car just do that? Explaining semi-autonomous driving actions to improve driver understanding, trust, and performance. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) 9, 4 (2015), 269--275.
[27]
Miltos Kyriakidis, Riender Happee, and Joost CF de Winter. 2015. Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour 32 (2015), 127--140.
[28]
T Lagstrom and Victor Malmsten Lundgren. 2015. AVIP-Autonomous vehicles interaction with pedestrians. Master of Science Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology (2015).
[29]
John D Lee and Katrina A See. 2004. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human factors 46, 1 (2004), 50--80.
[30]
Duri Long, Mikhail Jacob, and Brian Magerko. 2019. Designing Co-Creative AI for Public Spaces. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition (C&C '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 271--284.
[31]
Victor Malmsten Lundgren, Azra Habibovic, Jonas Andersson, Tobias Lagström, Maria Nilsson, Anna Sirkka, Johan Fagerlönn, Rikard Fredriksson, Claes Edgren, Stas Krupenia, et al. 2017. Will There Be New Communication Needs When Introducing Automated Vehicles to the Urban Context? In Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. Springer, 485--497.
[32]
Karthik Mahadevan, Elaheh Sanoubari, Sowmya Somanath, James E. Young, and Ehud Sharlin. 2019. AV-Pedestrian Interaction Design Using a Pedestrian Mixed Traffic Simulator. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 475--486.
[33]
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 (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 429, 12 pages.
[34]
Milecia Matthews, Girish Chowdhary, and Emily Kieson. 2017. Intent Communication between Autonomous Vehicles and Pedestrians. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.07123 (2017).
[35]
Alexander Meschtscherjakov, Alina Krischkowsky, Katja Neureiter, Alexander Mirnig, Axel Baumgartner, Verena Fuchsberger, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2016. Active corners: Collaborative in-car interaction design. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, 1136--1147.
[36]
Jonas Meyer, Henrik Becker, Patrick M Bösch, and Kay W Axhausen. 2017. Autonomous vehicles: The next jump in accessibilities? Research in Transportation Economics 62 (2017), 80--91.
[37]
Adam Millard-Ball. 2018. Pedestrians, Autonomous Vehicles, and Cities. Journal of Planning Education and Research 38, 1 (2018), 6--12.
[38]
Sina Nordhoff, Joost de Winter, Ruth Madigan, Natasha Merat, Bart van Arem, and Riender Happee. 2018. User acceptance of automated shuttles in Berlin-Schöneberg: A questionnaire study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 58 (2018), 843--854.
[39]
Robert M Nosofsky. 1986. Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of experimental psychology: General 115, 1 (1986), 39.
[40]
Enrica Papa and António Ferreira. 2018. Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions. Urban Science 2, 1 (2018), 5.
[41]
Anantha Krishna Pillai. 2017. Virtual Reality based Study to Analyse Pedestrian attitude towards Autonomous Vehicles.
[42]
Ioannis Politis, Stephen Brewster, and Frank Pollick. 2015. Language-based Multimodal Displays for the Handover of Control in Autonomous Cars. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3--10.
[43]
Amir Rasouli, Iuliia Kotseruba, and John K Tsotsos. 2017. Agreeing to cross: How drivers and pedestrians communicate. In Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2017 IEEE. IEEE, 264--269.
[44]
Amir Rasouli, Iuliia Kotseruba, and John K Tsotsos. 2018. Understanding pedestrian behavior in complex traffic scenes. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles 3, 1 (2018), 61--70.
[45]
Amir Rasouli and John K Tsotsos. 2019. Autonomous vehicles that interact with pedestrians: A survey of theory and practice. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2019).
[46]
Zeheng Ren, Xiaobei Jiang, and Wuhong Wang. 2016. Analysis of the Influence of Pedestrians' eye Contact on Drivers' Comfort Boundary During the Crossing Conflict. Procedia engineering 137 (2016), 399--406.
[47]
Malte Risto, Colleen Emmenegger, Erik Vinkhuyzen, Melissa Cefkin, and Jim Hollan. 2017. Human-Vehicle Interfaces: The Power of Vehicle Movement Gestures in Human Road User Coordination. (2017).
[48]
Yvonne Rogers. 2011. Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory. interactions 18, 4 (2011), 58--62.
[49]
Dirk Rothenbücher, Jamy Li, David Sirkin, Brian Mok, and Wendy Ju. 2016. Ghost driver: A field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 795--802.
[50]
Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak. 2014. Public opinion about self-driving vehicles in China, India, Japan, the US, the UK, and Australia. (2014).
[51]
Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak. 2014. A survey of public opinion about autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the US, the UK, and Australia. (2014).
[52]
Christopher Stanton and Catherine J Stevens. 2014. Robot pressure: the impact of robot eye gaze and lifelike bodily movements upon decision-making and trust. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 330--339.
[53]
Andrea Thomaz, Guy Hoffman, Maya Cakmak, et al. 2016. Computational human-robot interaction. Foundations and Trends® in Robotics 4, 2-3 (2016), 105--223.
[54]
Marcel Walch, Kristin Lange, Martin Baumann, and Michael Weber. 2015. Autonomous Driving: Investigating the Feasibility of Car-driver Handover Assistance. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '15). 11--18.
[55]
Wei Xu. 2019. Toward human-centered AI: a perspective from human-computer interaction. interactions 26, 4 (2019), 42--46.
[56]
Rosemarie E Yagoda and Douglas J Gillan. 2012. You want me to trust a ROBOT? The development of a human-robot interaction trust scale. International Journal of Social Robotics 4, 3 (2012), 235--248.
[57]
Su Yang. 2017. Driver behavior impact on pedestrians' crossing experience in the conditionally autonomous driving context.
[58]
Raphael Zimmermann and Reto Wettach. 2017. First Step into Visceral Interaction with Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 58--64.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Lessons learned from the trial operation of an autonomous urban passenger ferryTransportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives10.1016/j.trip.2024.10114226(101142)Online publication date: Jul-2024
  • (2023)Scoping Out the Scalability Issues of Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian InteractionProceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3580585.3607167(167-177)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2023
  • (2023)Will It YieldCompanion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3568294.3580091(292-296)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Pedestrians and Visual Signs of Intent: Towards Expressive Autonomous Passenger Shuttles

    Recommendations

    Comments

    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 3, Issue 3
    September 2019
    1415 pages
    EISSN:2474-9567
    DOI:10.1145/3361560
    Issue’s Table of Contents
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 09 September 2019
    Published in IMWUT Volume 3, Issue 3

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. AV Intentions
    2. AV-Pedestrian Interaction
    3. Autonomous Passenger Shuttles (APS)
    4. Autonomous Vehicles (AVs)
    5. Classes of Visual Signals
    6. Comparative Study
    7. Urban Public Transportation

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)97
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12
    Reflects downloads up to 21 Oct 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Lessons learned from the trial operation of an autonomous urban passenger ferryTransportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives10.1016/j.trip.2024.10114226(101142)Online publication date: Jul-2024
    • (2023)Scoping Out the Scalability Issues of Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian InteractionProceedings of the 15th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3580585.3607167(167-177)Online publication date: 18-Sep-2023
    • (2023)Will It YieldCompanion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3568294.3580091(292-296)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2023
    • (2023)What is Human-Centered about Human-Centered AI? A Map of the Research LandscapeProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3580959(1-23)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
    • (2023)Design for Inclusivity in Driving Automation: Theoretical and Practical Challenges to Human-Machine Interactions and Interface DesignConnected and Automated Vehicles: Integrating Engineering and Ethics10.1007/978-3-031-39991-6_4(63-85)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2023
    • (2022)Quasi-Experiment to Assess the Role of Real-Life Tests for the Acceptance of Technology for Mobility as a ServiceChallenges and Opportunities for Transportation Services in the Post-COVID-19 Era10.4018/978-1-7998-8840-6.ch009(177-193)Online publication date: 6-May-2022
    • (2022)Designing Interactions With Shared AVs in Complex Urban Mobility ScenariosFrontiers in Computer Science10.3389/fcomp.2022.8662584Online publication date: 11-May-2022
    • (2022)Exploring Emotion Responses toward Pedestrian Crossing Actions for Designing In-vehicle Empathic InterfacesExtended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491101.3519764(1-6)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2022
    • (2022)Evaluating the Understandability of Light Patterns and Pictograms for Autonomous Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication FunctionsIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems10.1109/TITS.2022.316588123:10(18668-18680)Online publication date: Oct-2022
    • (2022)Displaying the Driving State of Automated Vehicles to Other Road Users: An International, Virtual Reality-Based Study as a First Step for the Harmonized Regulations of Novel Signaling DevicesIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems10.1109/TITS.2020.303277723:4(2904-2918)Online publication date: Apr-2022
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    Full Access

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media