Gestaltungsdimensionen der Kommunikation von automatisierten Fahrzeugen und anderen Verkehrsteilnehmenden Design dimensions of the communication between automated vehicles and other road users

Joisten, Philip; Freund, Anton; Abendroth, Bettina · 2020 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1007/s41449-020-00199-7

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 addresses the challenge of designing communication strategies between automated vehicles and other road users to ensure safe and efficient traffic flow. As automated vehicles replace human drivers, the implicit and explicit communication cues traditionally used by humans must be substituted by technical systems. The authors aim to derive and analyze design dimensions for this communication, specifically asking how a communication strategy can be structured to facilitate cooperation. To answer this research question, the authors first theoretically derive a framework based on communication theory (specifically Clark, 2006) and the Man-Technology-Organization (MTO) approach. They identify six design dimensions: Who (participants), Why (goals), In which situation (context), What (content), When (timing), and How (modality). To empirically validate and explore these dimensions, the authors conducted two studies focusing on pedestrian interactions with automated buses. Study 1 involved semi-structured interviews with 30 pedestrians in Bad Birnbach, Germany, assessing their decision-making behavior and preferences for explicit communication signals in various scenarios (e.g., crossing at zebra crossings vs. unsignalized crossings). Study 2 consisted of field observations of 308 pedestrian interactions with automated buses in Frankfurt am Main over 15 hours, documenting behaviors such as waiting, crossing, or testing the vehicle’s reaction. The empirical results reveal distinct pedestrian behaviors and communication needs. In the survey, pedestrians’ decisions to cross depended heavily on the infrastructure; 73% of respondents waited to cross at unsignalized crossings, compared to 31% at zebra crossings. Many pedestrians expressed a lack of trust in the technology, preferring to wait until the bus stopped completely. The observational study identified five categories of pedestrian behavior: crossing before the bus, moving parallel to the bus, changing trajectory, stopping to let the bus pass, and "testing" the bus by entering its path. The analysis highlights that pedestrians often rely on explicit signals to resolve uncertainty, particularly regarding right-of-way. The significance of this work lies in the proposed framework, which structures the complex task of designing vehicle-pedestrian communication. By categorizing design requirements into six dimensions, the framework supports the development of technical systems that can effectively substitute human communicative functions. The findings underscore the need for further research into the future roles of road users and the specific design of explicit signals (visual, auditory, or gestural) to build trust and ensure cooperation in mixed traffic environments. The paper concludes that applying this framework is essential for ensuring the necessary cooperation between automated vehicles and conventional road users.

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.

• ehmi external hmi
• odd communication

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).

• Theoretical Contribution: conceptual framework