Drivers’ ability to learn eco-driving skills; effects on fuel efficient and safe driving behaviour
DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2015.02.004
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 efficacy of different eco-driving feedback modalities—visual versus haptic—on fuel efficiency, safety, and skill acquisition. Motivated by the potential for eco-driving to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption, the research addresses the critical trade-off between providing drivers with real-time efficiency advice and maintaining safe driving behavior. Specifically, the authors examine which feedback type is most effective at conveying advice, which is easiest to learn, and whether drivers prioritize safety over eco-driving when traffic conditions become demanding. The researchers conducted a within-subjects simulator study with 22 participants using a high-fidelity driving simulator featuring a modified Jaguar S-type cab. Participants completed four 25-minute drives: a baseline drive with no assistance, and three experimental drives using either a visual dashboard display or one of two haptic accelerator pedal systems (force feedback and stiffness feedback). The visual system used color-coded symbols to indicate optimal pedal pressure, while the haptic systems altered pedal resistance to guide the driver. The driving scenario involved ascending and descending hills under both low and high traffic density conditions. Data collected included root mean squared pedal error (accuracy of eco-driving), percent road center gaze (visual attention/distraction), and subjective workload via the NASA-TLX questionnaire. Results indicated that all eco-driving systems significantly improved fuel-efficient performance compared to the baseline, with the visual system proving the most effective at reducing pedal error. However, this effectiveness came at a cost: the visual interface significantly reduced attention to the forward roadway and increased subjective workload. In contrast, haptic feedback resulted in lower visual distraction and less reported workload, though it was less effective than the visual system at guiding pedal usage. Regarding skill acquisition, there was no significant improvement in performance across repeated trials for any system, suggesting that drivers did not rapidly automate the eco-driving skills during the short experimental period. Crucially, when traffic density increased, drivers prioritized safety over eco-driving; pedal errors increased significantly in high-density traffic, and drivers shifted their gaze back to the road center, particularly when using the visual interface. The study concludes that while visual feedback offers superior guidance for eco-driving, it poses a distraction risk. Haptic feedback offers a safer alternative with minimal workload but lower efficacy. The authors suggest that a hybrid system, which adapts its feedback modality based on driver performance and traffic conditions, may offer the best compromise. The findings highlight that eco-driving systems must be designed to allow drivers to prioritize safety, as drivers naturally adjust their behavior to maintain safe following distances when traffic becomes dense, regardless of the feedback provided.
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.
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | Crossref | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-16 |
| archive | success | semantic_scholar | — | — | 6 | 2026-06-25 |
| extract | success | pdftotext | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-26 |
| clean | success | clean | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| chunk | success | chunk | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| embed | success | embed | Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| enrich | success | semantic_scholar | — | — | 5 | 2026-07-05 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-16 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 1 | 2026-06-25 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 6 | 2026-06-26 |
| verify | partial | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified_with_issues.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
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).
- Methodological Resource: tool software
- Theoretical Contribution: theory or model, computational model