Magdalena Maria Schlemer’s research while affiliated with Technische Universität Dresden and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (1)


Screenshots of the crosswalk and roundabout environment; environments were manipulated between subjects. Figures in high resolution are available online (see data availability statement)
The cyan-colored (bottom) and magenta-colored (top) eHMIs used in this study. Note. The cyan-colored eHMI communicated that the vehicle was in automated mode. The design of the eHMIs was identical in all groups, but the meaning of the magenta-colored eHMI was manipulated between subjects. It was either introduced to the participants as a state eHMI (“I am braking”) or an intent eHMI (“I intend to yield to you”). The eHMIs behaved accordingly (state: always and only activate when decelerating/intent: always and only activate when yielding). CVs looked identical but had no eHMIs
Screenshots of yielding and non-yielding AVs in the crosswalk environment. Note. The mode eHMI was activated throughout. When the vehicle yielded, the state as well as the intent eHMI activated. When the vehicle did not yield, they did not activate. CV versions were identical except that they had no eHMIs. The videos are available on osf (see data availability statement)
Screenshots of yielding and non-yielding AVs in the roundabout environment. Note. The mode eHMI was activated throughout. When the vehicle yielded, the state as well as the intent eHMI activated. When the vehicle did not yield, however, the intent eHMI did not activate but the state eHMI activated for a short time, as the vehicle was braking to exit the roundabout. CV versions were identical except that they had no eHMIs. The videos are available on osf (see data availability statement)
Experimental setup. Note. The white stick figure and milky-white overlay signals the participant that his input (crossing initiation) was registered

+4

Should automated vehicles communicate their state or intent? Effects of eHMI activations and non-activations on pedestrians’ trust formation and crossing behavior
  • Article
  • Full-text available

December 2024

·

75 Reads

·

1 Citation

·

·

Magdalena Maria Schlemer

·

In recent years, there has been a debate on whether automated vehicles (AVs) should be equipped with novel external human–machine interfaces (eHMIs). Many studies have demonstrated how eHMIs influence pedestrians’ attitudes (e.g., trust in AVs) and behavior when they activate (e.g., encourage crossing by lighting up). However, very little attention has been paid to their effects when they do not activate (e.g., discourage crossing by not lighting up). We conducted a video-based laboratory study with a mixed design to explore the potential of two different eHMI messages to facilitate pedestrian-AV interactions by means of activating or not activating. Our participants watched videos of an approaching AV equipped with either a state eHMI (“I am braking”) or intent eHMI (“I intend to yield to you”) from the perspective of a pedestrian about to cross the road. They indicated when they would initiate crossing and repeatedly rated their trust in the AV. Our results show that the activation of both the state and intent eHMI was effective in communicating the AV’s intent to yield and both eHMIs drew attention to a failure to yield when they did not activate. However, the two eHMIs differed in their potential to mislead pedestrians, as decelerations accompanied by the activation of the state eHMI were repeatedly misinterpreted as an intention to yield. Despite this, user experience ratings did not differ between the eHMIs. Following a failure to yield, trust declined sharply. In subsequent trials, crossing behavior recovered quickly, while trust took longer to recover.

Download

Citations (1)


... Many traffic situations require communication between interaction partners to coordinate their actions. Communication can happen in various ways and through several modalities [1]- [3]. Implicit communication by means of the vehicle behavior is especially relevant in interactions between pedestrians and automated vehicles (AVs), since driver-focused communication cues such as eye contact are no longer available [2]. ...

Reference:

Optimal Behavior Planning for Implicit Communication using a Probabilistic Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction Model
Should automated vehicles communicate their state or intent? Effects of eHMI activations and non-activations on pedestrians’ trust formation and crossing behavior