Purpose In-car support systems focus increasingly on improving\ntraffic flow and throughput. Advisory systems allow\nfor fast market penetration, advising drivers how to drive in\norder to improve general flow. By following the advice,\ndrivers cannot create a beneficial effect by themselves but rely\non other road users to comply as well. Drivers who sense a\nlow compliance among other road users may be discouraged\nto use the system themselves. The present experiment investigated\nwhether drivers are able to distinguish between various\ncompliance rates to Connected Cruise Control (CCC), an\nadvisory driver support system that gives headway, speed\nand lane advice to improve throughput on motorways.\nMethod Forty-two participants estimated the compliance of\nother road users to CCC in a driving simulator. Actual system\ncompliance was varied between 10, 50 and 90 %. Half of the\nparticipants received detailed information about the advice\nand the manifestation of compliant behaviour in traffic.\nResults Compliance estimates showed no effect of actual\ncompliance rates. Overall compliance ratings were higher for\nparticipants who had not received additional information\nabout the system. Difference scores between compliance estimate\nand actual compliance indicate that additional information\ndid not improve estimation accuracy, neither did it increase\nparticipants� confidence with their estimate.\nConclusions When actual compliance is low, drivers still\nshow high compliance estimates which can have beneficial\neffect on system acceptance. Additional information does not\nimprove compliance estimates.
Loading....