Perceptions of Risk and Control: Understanding Acceptance of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems

Joshi, Somya; Bellet, Thierry; Bodard, Vanessa; Amditis, Angelos · 2009 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-03655-2_58

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This paper investigates the relationship between drivers' perceptions of risk and control and their acceptance of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). As ADAS technologies like adaptive cruise control and collision warning systems moved from development to market deployment, research focus shifted toward understanding the human factors influencing their implementation. The central research question examines how the level of perceived criticality or risk influences a driver’s willingness to accept automated assistance. The study aims to integrate diverse driver attitudes toward risk and control into the design of intelligent in-car systems, recognizing that technological feasibility is no longer the primary barrier to adoption. The methodology combined qualitative interpretative analysis with a simulator-based experimental design conducted within the European HUMANIST network. Twenty subjects with diverse backgrounds in age (24–66), driving experience (1–48 years), mileage, and license history participated. The experiment consisted of three stages: orientation, non-assistance, and assistance. During the non-assistance phase, drivers navigated critical and non-critical scenarios without automation. In the assistance phase, drivers experienced similar conditions with automated braking, steering control, and speed reduction, accompanied by audio and visual warnings. Post-simulation, participants completed questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to provide subjective data on their perceptions of risk, control, and system acceptance. The findings indicate that driver acceptance of ADAS is heavily contingent on the preservation of perceived control. Drivers who identified as risk-takers often accepted risk only when they felt in charge of the situation, emphasizing awareness and mastery over speed and surroundings. The study highlights that individuals differ in both their willingness to accept risk and their ability to perceive it. A key finding is the phenomenon of behavioral adaptation or compensation, where drivers may rely on technical artifacts to compensate for their own limitations, such as poor visibility in fog or night-time driving. However, this dependency can lead to unintended negative effects, such as diverted attention or a shift of risk burden to vulnerable road users outside the vehicle, similar to effects observed with seat belt legislation. The paper concludes that shifting perceptions of risk and control determine the efficacy and acceptance of ADAS. It underscores the importance of considering behavioral adaptation and the illusion of control in system design. The authors suggest that future research should further analyze driver diversity in risk-taking and integrate findings from parallel studies on sensation-seekers to better understand user acceptance and the potential safety implications of automated driving support.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• behavioral adaptation risk compensation
• risk taking
• acceptance adoption
• decision making risk perception
• situational awareness
• automation surprise

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Empirical Findings: self report data
• Theoretical Contribution: computational model, theory or model