Driver conflict response during supervised automation: Do hands on wheel matter?

Securing appropriate driver responses to conflicts is essential in automation that not perfect (because the needed as a fall-back for system limitations and failures). However, this recognized major challenge human factors literature. Moreover, in-depth knowledge lacking regarding mechanisms affecting response process. The first aim of study was investigate how conflict while using highly reliable (but perfect) supervised differ drivers (a) crash or avoid object (b) report high trust low object. second understand influence on two specific factors: hands-on-wheel requirement (with vs. without), type (garbage bag stationary vehicle). Seventy-six participants drove with but 30 min test track. Thereafter they static revealed by lead-vehicle cut-out. assessed through process: timepoints surprise reaction, hands-on-wheel, steering, braking. Crashers generally responded later all actions process compared non-crashers. In fact, some crashers collided without even putting their hands wheel. Driver independent requirement. High-trust than low-trust at all, only crashed. larger vehicle triggered an earlier reaction garbage bag, steering were similar types. To conclude, crashing associated delay addition, does change changes trust-level type. Simply holding wheel sufficient prevent collisions elicit responses. High late crashing, whereas response. A trigger reactions.