Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Antizipation (2) (remove)
Institute
- Institut für Psychologie (2) (remove)
Forward Collision Alarms (FCA) intend to signal hazardous traffic situations and the need for an immediate corrective driver response. However, data of naturalistic driving studies revealed that approximately the half of all alarms activated by conventional FCA systems represented unnecessary alarms. In these situations, the alarm activation was correct according to the implemented algorithm, whereas the alarms led to no or only minimal driver responses. Psychological research can make an important contribution to understand drivers’ needs when interacting with driver assistance systems.
The overarching objective of this thesis was to gain a systematic understanding of psychological factors and processes that influence drivers’ perceived need for assistance in potential collision situations. To elucidate under which conditions drivers perceive alarms as unnecessary, a theoretical framework of drivers’ subjective alarm evaluation was developed. A further goal was to investigate the impact of unnecessary alarms on drivers’ responses and acceptance. Four driving simulator studies were carried out to examine the outlined research questions.
In line with the hypotheses derived from the theoretical framework, the results suggest that drivers’ perceived need for assistance is determined by their retrospective subjective hazard perception. While predictions of conventional FCA systems are exclusively based on physical measurements resulting in a time to collision, human drivers additionally consider their own manoeuvre intentions and those attributed to other road users to anticipate the further course of a potentially critical situation. When drivers anticipate a dissolving outcome of a potential conflict, they perceive the situation as less hazardous than the system. Based on this discrepancy, the system would activate an alarm, while drivers’ perceived need for assistance is low. To sum up, the described factors and processes cause drivers to perceive certain alarms as unnecessary. Although drivers accept unnecessary alarms less than useful alarms, unnecessary alarms do not reduce their overall system acceptance. While unnecessary alarms cause moderate driver responses in the short term, the intensity of responses decrease with multiple exposures to unnecessary alarms. However, overall, effects of unnecessary alarms on drivers’ alarm responses and acceptance seem to be rather uncritical.
This thesis provides insights into human factors that explain when FCAs are perceived as unnecessary. These factors might contribute to design FCA systems tailored to drivers’ needs.
The aim of the present thesis was to explore how food deprivation and reward expectancy versus frustrative nonreward change implicit and explicit food-liking and food-wanting. As a result, Experiment 1-3 were successful in revealing that liking- and wanting-related associations toward food stimuli dissociate as a function of food deprivation, given that participants were not rewarded with real food during the experiment. More specifically, whereas food-deprived participants showed more wanting-related associations toward food stimuli than satiated participants, the liking-related associations did not differ across both conditions of hunger. Overall, this effect could be replicated in 3 experiments using different manipulations of nonreward versus reward expectancy. However, neither food deprivation nor nonreward were found to influence participants’ self-reported mood and frustration. Moreover, participants of Experiment 2 anticipating food consumption showed the same liking- and wanting-related responses due to food deprivation than participants in the nonreward condition. But providing participants with individual control over food consumption abolished the dissociation of liking- and wanting-related associations. In this condition, however, participants’ liking- and wanting-related associations were not moderated by need state, maybe due to the (partial) consumption of snack food before the implicit attitude assessment. This, in turn, may have reduced participants’ disposition to respond with more liking- and wanting-related associations when being hungry. Finally, Experiment 4 revealed that the presentation of need-relevant vs. need-irrelevant stimuli prompted different liking-related associations depending on the time participants had fasted before the experiment. Specifically, it could be demonstrated that whereas moderately-hungry compared to satiated participants responded with more positive associations toward need-relevant stimuli, 15 hours food-deprived participants responded with more negative associations compared to moderately-hungry and satiated participants. Respectively, a significant curvilinear function of need state was obtained. In addition, participants were found to immediately respond more negatively to need-irrelevant stimuli as soon as they became moderately hungry, evidencing devaluation effects (see Brendl, Markman, & Messner, 2003) to also occur on an implicit level of responding. Contrary to the implicit liking- and wanting-related evaluations, self-reported explicit food-liking and food-wanting did not dissociate as a function of food deprivation and nonreward, revealing that participants’ explicit self-reports of food-liking and food-wanting did not mirror their implicit responses. As the most important result, it could be demonstrated that explicit food-liking and food-wanting varied positively as a function of need state. The results were discussed on the background of different theoretical assumptions on the malleability of implicit and explicit need-relevant attitudes (e.g. motivational theories, frustrative nonreward).