Short answer

Prioritize smoother, staged acceleration and deceleration profiles in automated vehicle control systems to enhance passenger comfort and reduce motion sickness.

Field
Human Factors
Source
Academic Publication (2023)
Method
Experimental study with within-subjects design
Sample
31 participants
Evidence
Moderate effect

Implementing a two-step driving profile in automated vehicles can mitigate subjective motion sickness experienced by passengers, particularly those susceptible to it. This human factors research insight is drawn from a 2023 study published in Academic Publication. Using Experimental study with within-subjects design with 31 participants, researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: Prioritize smoother, staged acceleration and deceleration profiles in automated vehicle control systems to enhance passenger comfort and reduce motion sickness.

Study
Human FactorsRecentModerate effect

Two-step driving profiles reduce motion sickness in automated vehicles

Implementing a two-step driving profile in automated vehicles can mitigate subjective motion sickness experienced by passengers, particularly those susceptible to it.

Academic Publication · 2023

01

Key Findings

  • 01The two-step driving profile significantly reduced the development of motion sickness as assessed by the MSAQ scale.
  • 02Neither the seat belt tensioner nor the two-step driving profile showed a significant difference in motion sickness development on the MSTT scale during the drive.
  • 03Both countermeasures showed potential to positively influence the perception of the automation as safer, more trustworthy, and more reliable.
02

Application

Design takeaway

Prioritize smoother, staged acceleration and deceleration profiles in automated vehicle control systems to enhance passenger comfort and reduce motion sickness.

How to apply

When designing or tuning the driving algorithms for automated vehicles, implement a 'two-step' acceleration and deceleration strategy, where changes in velocity are gradual and potentially broken into two phases to smooth out the motion.

Project actions

  • 01Consider how the motion of a vehicle affects the user's ability to perform tasks like reading or working.
  • 02Investigate different ways to control vehicle dynamics to improve passenger comfort.
03

Method & Evidence

AimTo investigate the effectiveness of active seat belt retractions and a two-step driving profile in reducing motion sickness and improving ride comfort and acceptance during reading in fully automated vehicles.
MethodExperimental study with within-subjects design
ProcedureParticipants susceptible to motion sickness undertook a 25-minute drive in a fully automated vehicle on a test track, engaging in reading on a tablet. They experienced three conditions: a control (no countermeasure), active seat belt tensioner, and a two-step driving profile. Motion sickness was assessed using the MSTT scale during the drive and the MSAQ scale pre and post-drive. Subjective ratings of vehicle behavior and countermeasures were also collected.
Sample31 participants
ContextAutomated vehicle passenger experience, in-vehicle comfort

Variables

IV["Driving condition (control, active seat belt tensioner, two-step driving profile)"]
DV["Subjective motion sickness (MSTT, MSAQ)","Ride comfort ratings","Acceptance of automation (perceived safety, trustworthiness, reliability)"]
CV["Duration of drive (25 minutes)","Activity during drive (reading on a tablet)","Vehicle type (fully automated)","Test track environment","Participant susceptibility to motion sickness"]
04

Strengths & Limitations

Strengths

  • +Investigated multiple countermeasures for motion sickness.
  • +Used established scales for motion sickness assessment.
  • +Included subjective ratings of ride comfort and automation acceptance.

Limitations

The study's findings might be specific to the type of vehicle and test track used. The subjective nature of motion sickness means individual susceptibility can vary greatly.

Reliability & validity

The use of established scales (MSTT, MSAQ) contributes to the validity of the motion sickness measurements. The within-subjects design helps control for individual differences, enhancing reliability. However, the reliance on subjective ratings introduces potential for bias, and the test track environment may limit generalizability.

Think critically

How might the effectiveness of a two-step driving profile vary depending on road conditions, traffic density, and the specific type of automated driving system?

05

Design Principles

"Passenger comfort is a critical factor in the acceptance and usability of automated vehicle technology, and can be influenced by dynamic driving profiles."

As vehicles become more automated, passengers will increasingly engage in activities like reading, making motion sickness a significant barrier to adoption and user experience. Designing driving profiles that prioritize passenger comfort is crucial for the successful integration of autonomous technology.

06

What This Means for Your Design

Making cars drive more smoothly, especially when speeding up or slowing down, can stop people from feeling sick when they're reading inside.

How to use in your project

  • 1.Use this research to justify the importance of passenger comfort and motion sickness mitigation in your design project.
  • 2.Refer to the 'two-step driving profile' as a potential solution for reducing motion sickness in your design proposals.
07

Add to My Project

08

Quick Cite

Paragraph starter

Research indicates that implementing a two-step driving profile in automated vehicles can significantly reduce subjective motion sickness experienced by passengers, particularly those prone to it. This suggests that designing smoother, multi-stage acceleration and deceleration strategies is a viable approach to enhance in-vehicle comfort and user acceptance.

09

Source

Academic Publication

How to Make Reading in Fully Automated Vehicles a Better Experience? Effects of Active Seat Belt Retractions and a 2-Step Driving Profile on Subjective Motion Sickness, Ride Comfort and Acceptance

journal · 2023

View source

Questions About This Research

What does the research say about two-step driving profiles reduce motion sickness in automated vehicles?
Prioritize smoother, staged acceleration and deceleration profiles in automated vehicle control systems to enhance passenger comfort and reduce motion sickness. Evidence: Academic Publication (2023).
Why does "Two-step driving profiles reduce motion sickness in automated vehicles" matter for design?
As vehicles become more automated, passengers will increasingly engage in activities like reading, making motion sickness a significant barrier to adoption and user experience. Designing driving profiles that prioritize passenger comfort is crucial for the successful integration of autonomous technology.
How can designers apply this research?
Prioritize smoother, staged acceleration and deceleration profiles in automated vehicle control systems to enhance passenger comfort and reduce motion sickness.
What were the main findings?
The two-step driving profile significantly reduced the development of motion sickness as assessed by the MSAQ scale.. Neither the seat belt tensioner nor the two-step driving profile showed a significant difference in motion sickness development on the MSTT scale during the drive.. Both countermeasures showed potential to positively influence the perception of the automation as safer, more trustworthy, and more reliable.
What research method was used?
Experimental study with within-subjects design with 31 participants.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence strength is rated Moderate effect, based on a 2023 journal from Academic Publication.
What should I do differently in my next project?
When designing or tuning the driving algorithms for automated vehicles, implement a 'two-step' acceleration and deceleration strategy, where changes in velocity are gradual and potentially broken into two phases to smooth out the motion.
What are the limitations?
The study was conducted on a test track, which may not fully replicate real-world driving conditions. The MSTT scale did not show significant differences during the drive, suggesting potential limitations in its sensitivity or the duration of the intervention.