Driver behaviour with adaptive cruise control

Stanton, Neville A.; Young, Mark S. · 2005 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1080/00140130500252990

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

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

Summary

This study investigates the psychological impact of Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) on drivers, addressing a gap in research that often focuses on system failures rather than normal operational use. The authors aim to determine how ACC affects six key psychological variables: locus of control, trust, situation awareness, mental models, workload, and stress. The research is motivated by the need for proactive ergonomic design in vehicle automation, shifting focus from reactive safety measures to optimizing driver performance and experience. The experiment utilized a fixed-base driving simulator modeled after a Jaguar XK8, involving 110 participants recruited to reflect the UK driving population. The study employed a mixed-design approach with three independent variables: automation (manual vs. ACC), workload (low, medium, and high traffic levels defined by vehicle throughput), and feedback (low, medium, and high levels of system information display). Participants completed 20-minute motorway drives under both manual and ACC conditions. Data were collected using standardized psychometric tools, including the NASA-TLX for workload, the Dundee Stress State Questionnaire, the Situation Awareness Rating Technique, and specific scales for trust and locus of control. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the effects of these variables on driving behavior and psychological states. The results indicated that ACC significantly reduced overall workload, mental demand, physical demand, temporal demand, and perceived effort compared to manual driving. Stress metrics, particularly anger and tense arousal, were also lower in the ACC condition. However, situation awareness was found to be reduced when using ACC, although this effect was modulated by traffic levels and feedback quality; specifically, low feedback in low-traffic conditions led to higher situation awareness ratings than high feedback. Contrary to some hypotheses, locus of control and trust were unaffected by the presence of ACC or variations in feedback and traffic. Mental model accuracy showed no significant differences across conditions. Driving behavior analysis revealed that speed and lateral position were significantly influenced by traffic density, with drivers slowing down and moving right as traffic increased. The study concludes that while ACC effectively reduces driver workload and stress, it may compromise situation awareness. The authors suggest that system design should incorporate cues to help drivers predict vehicle trajectory and identify conflicts to mitigate this loss of awareness. The findings support the implementation of ACC for reducing driver burden but highlight the necessity of careful interface design to maintain situational understanding. This research contributes to the field of cognitive ergonomics by providing empirical evidence on the trade-offs between automation benefits and psychological engagement, advocating for designs that balance workload reduction with sustained driver awareness.

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 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

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

• situational awareness
• trust calibration
• automation surprise
• mode awareness
• automation

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: theory or model, computational model