Tamara von Sawitzky

Cyclists frequently face numerous hazards on the road. Often those hazards are posed by motorised vehicles. Advanced support systems that alert cyclists to potential dangers could enhance their safety. However, research in this area, particularly regarding hazard notifications for cyclists, remains sparse. This work assesses bi-modal early hazard notification concepts (combining visual cues with either auditory or tactile feedback) provided at head level (smart glasses with speakers, tactile headband). They are detailing the nature of the hazard, its direction relative to the cyclist, and the timing of exposure. This work investigates cyclists' preference and perception of the proposed concepts for two hazardous situations originating from interactions with vehicles: ‘dooring’, the hazard of a potential collision with an opening door of a parked vehicle (evaluated through a test track study, N = 32) and ‘being overtaken’ which poses the hazard of being cut off or hit by the overtaking vehicle (assessed in a bicycle simulator study, N = 21). The study involved comparisons of supported and unsupported rides, focusing on their impact on usability, intuitiveness, workload, and perceived safety. Our findings reveal varied preferences for the supporting feedback modality, with 56% favouring visual-auditory and 31% visual-tactile. The participants rated user experience, intuitiveness and perceived safety for the use of both concepts quite high. Further, the workload for assisted rides was rated as equally low as for unassisted rides.

Cyclists are exposed to numerous potential hazards in traffic, often due to interactions with motorized vehicles. Early notifications about these hazards could help cyclists react more consciously and proactively before a hazard materializes. Future technologies, such as connected traffic systems, could provide real-time hazard information via smart glasses. Similar to head-up displays in vehicles, relevant information is presented in the cyclist’s direct line of sight. A crucial aspect for usability is how visual information is presented to support cyclists, ensuring quick comprehension of notifications without causing additional distraction. Our study involved focus group discussions with two groups: cycling HCI researchers (NR=3) and user experience design master’s students (NU=4). We explored key aspects of delivering information through smart glasses for cyclists. Furthermore, we asked participants to generate visual notification concepts they deemed suitable for providing hazard information. Many of these concepts involve integrating augmented reality overlays with real-world objects, posing a specific challenge in overlay placement due to the HUD moving with the cyclist’s head. Additionally, it is essential to identify which hazards are relevant for notification to not overload cyclists with excessive information by indicating every potential hazard.

Cycling plays an essential role in sustainable mobility, health, and socializing. This workshop aims to collect and discuss the lessons learned from Cycling Human-Computer Interaction (CyclingHCI). For this, we will gather researchers and experts in the field to discuss what we learned from designing, building, and evaluating CyclingHCI systems. We will start the workshop with three lessons learned from CyclingHCI defined by the organizers and their experience in the field, which include (1) a lack of theories, tools, and perspectives, (2) knowledge about designing for safety and inclusive cycling, and (3) evaluation methods and environments. Taken together, with this work, we aim to promote interactive technology to get more people cycling, profiting from the many associated benefits.

The development of automated vehicles (AVs) brings new challenges to human-vehicle communication, primarily in urban environments. One way to facilitate communication is seen in the use of external human-machine interfaces (eHMIs). These indicate the current status as well as the intentions of AVs to other road users. This paper focuses on designing and evaluating eHMIs for communication between multiple AVs and pedestrians at multi-lane intersections. For this purpose, we analyzed the current situation with traffic signals and future scenarios with eHMIs. We designed an eHMI concept suitable for scenarios with many vehicles and different intersection situations. In an online survey (N=104), we used videos from four test scenarios for a comparative evaluation (baseline: traffic signals). The results show that the eHMI concept received higher ratings for user experience and emotional state in some cases, but also highlight the need for consistent behavior across different vehicles, which would be the default with traffic lights.

One way to improve road safety for cyclists is the development of hazard notification systems. Instead of in field experiments, such systems could be tested in safe and more controlled simulated environments; however, their validity needs verification. We evaluated the validity of mixed reality (MR) simulation for bicycle support systems notifying of dooring hazards. In a mixed-design study (N=43) with environment type(MR/test track) as within and hazard notifications (with/without) as between factor, comparing subjective and objective measures across environments. In conclusion, MR simulation is absolutely valid for user experience and perceived safety and relatively valid for workload, standard deviation of lateral position, and speed. However, MR simulation was not valid for lateral distance, as participants cycled more in the center of the street than on the test track, perhaps to avoid simulator sickness. Thus, we conclude that MR simulation is valuable for studying bicycle safety.

The sense of presence is commonly defined as the recipient’s subjective sense of being there in a virtual environment. In the context of HCI research in traffic, virtual reality methods as well as simulators of all kinds, including driving simulators, bicycle simulators or pedestrian simulators, are part of the standard research repertoire today. In these simulated traffic environments, it is usually the aim to produce a realistic impression of the corresponding real-world situation, creating a high sense of presence as well as realistic driving behavior. Throughout the course of the presented workshop, we intend to collect measures and exchange views about methods which can be applied to increase the sense of presence in driving simulation, avoiding so called "breaks in presence". Different measures to increase presence shall be generated and evaluated by the workshop participants. We further seek to discuss different components of presence, and how these relate to various types of simulation, as well as simulation validity. Summarizing, the present workshop aims to establish current knowledge regarding the concept of presence, while identifying promising future measures to increase the sense of presence in simulated traffic environments.

As the development of mixed reality (MR) technology continues to progress, the range of applications and purposes within vehicles and for road users is expanding. MR holds the potential to enhance road safety, enable drivers to engage in non-driving related tasks (NDRTs), and improve passenger experiences. Moreover, the utilization of head/helmet-mounted displays (HMDs) with MR technology for cyclists can augment their vision and contribute to the safety of both cyclists and pedestrians. Furthermore, MR can play a crucial role in facilitating the transition towards automated driving. Nevertheless, there remain several challenges associated with the application of MR in vehicles, as well as human factors issues that require resolution. Additionally, virtual reality (VR) has the capability to immerse passengers in virtual worlds, offering opportunities for enjoyable passenger experiences. Presently, most MR research primarily focuses on individual users at a particular point along the reality-virtuality continuum. In this workshop, we will examine the potential, limitations, impact, role, and suitability of MR in driving applications and simulations. This will encompass topics such as holistic MR experiments, transitional interfaces, and HMDs specifically designed for cyclists. The primary objective of this workshop is to establish a research agenda for the application of MR utilized by road users over the next 3 to 5 years and beyond.

In a fully automated vehicle (SAE L5), the vehicle performs lateral and longitudinal vehicle controls entirely. The former driver no longer has to intervene in the driving process, monitor it, or respond to take-over requests. At this automation level, vehicle occupants can focus exclusively on non-driving-related tasks. However, passengers might still want to influence driving behavior by choosing a different route or altering travel speed. Therefore, collaborative driving could be a viable option. However, it needs to be clarified how to realize those interactions with the vehicle best, as previous input modalities such as steering wheel and pedals could be left out in the future. In a prototyping workshop, we explored different interactions for collaborative driving with automated vehicles. We propose two interaction concepts in the accompanying video: 1) a mobile button with a turn and slide function and 2) by shifting weight in the seat to convey the desired intentions.

Fully automated vehicles (SAE Level 5) will eliminate the need for a human driver, allowing passengers to focus on non-driving activities, such as those provided by infotainment services. There has been previous research on the use of non-driving related content on windshield displays. However, the placement area is limited and the content is likely to be viewable only from a single viewpoint (perspective issues). Therefore, we propose to detach content from the windshield and instead use an augmented reality space to provide infotainment content to passengers. In a within-subject virtual reality user study (N=19), we examined how front seat passengers would place infotainment content windows (and with whatproperties) in the open space using controllers while seated in a fully automated vehicle (within-factor: seating position, driver’ or front passenger’s seat). We also looked at the similarities and differences based on sitting position (left or right). We found that most content was not placed on top of windows/the windshield, with the exception of video content, which raises the question of whether windshield displays are the right medium for fully automated vehicles. In addition, between 40 to 63% of content was placed in mirrored positions when comparing between seating positions.