Mitigating psychological discomfort during automation error: A mixed methods research

Area of Science:

• Human-computer interaction
• Automotive engineering
• Psychology

Background:

• Automated driving errors can negatively impact occupant psychological comfort.
• Effective in-vehicle recovery communication is needed to mitigate these impacts.
• Recovery strategies are system responses designed to restore positive human-automation interaction.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine the influence of four recovery strategies (explanation, apology, promise, denial) and two speech styles (machine-like, human-like) on occupant psychological comfort after automation errors.
• To operationalize psychological comfort as perceived safety and pleasure.
• To understand how different communication approaches affect user experience in automated vehicles.

Main Methods:

• A mixed-methods approach combining a driving simulator experiment with semi-structured interviews.
• Thirty-four participants experienced simulated automated driving errors.
• Within-subjects design evaluated four recovery strategies and two speech styles.

Main Results:

• Explanation and promise strategies most effectively enhanced both perceived safety and pleasure.
• Denial significantly impaired occupant experience.
• Apology's effect was style-dependent: human-like apology increased pleasure but decreased perceived safety.
• Machine-like delivery generally improved perceived safety, but effects varied with strategy content.

Conclusions:

• Recovery communication strategies should be carefully chosen based on the error context.
• Aligning strategy content with informational demands and delivery style with expressive registers is key for optimal occupant experience.
• Findings inform the design of more effective and user-centered automated driving systems.