What Did My Car Say? Impact of Autonomous Vehicle Explanation Errors and Driving Context On Comfort, Reliance, Satisfaction, and Driving Confidence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.05731v2
• Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 16:25:58 GMT
• Title: What Did My Car Say? Impact of Autonomous Vehicle Explanation Errors and Driving Context On Comfort, Reliance, Satisfaction, and Driving Confidence
• Authors: Robert Kaufman, Aaron Broukhim, David Kirsh, Nadir Weibel,
• Abstract summary: We tested how autonomous vehicle (AV) explanation errors affected a passenger's comfort in relying on an AV. Despite identical driving, explanation errors reduced ratings of the AV's driving ability. Prior trust and expertise were positively associated with outcome ratings.
• Score: 7.623776951753322
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Explanations for autonomous vehicle (AV) decisions may build trust, however, explanations can contain errors. In a simulated driving study (n = 232), we tested how AV explanation errors, driving context characteristics (perceived harm and driving difficulty), and personal traits (prior trust and expertise) affected a passenger's comfort in relying on an AV, preference for control, confidence in the AV's ability, and explanation satisfaction. Errors negatively affected all outcomes. Surprisingly, despite identical driving, explanation errors reduced ratings of the AV's driving ability. Severity and potential harm amplified the negative impact of errors. Contextual harm and driving difficulty directly impacted outcome ratings and influenced the relationship between errors and outcomes. Prior trust and expertise were positively associated with outcome ratings. Results emphasize the need for accurate, contextually adaptive, and personalized AV explanations to foster trust, reliance, satisfaction, and confidence. We conclude with design, research, and deployment recommendations for trustworthy AV explanation systems.

Related papers

• Predicting Trust In Autonomous Vehicles: Modeling Young Adult Psychosocial Traits, Risk-Benefit Attitudes, And Driving Factors With Machine Learning [7.106124530294562]
  Low trust remains a significant barrier to Autonomous Vehicle (AV) adoption. We use machine learning to understand the most important factors that contribute to young adult trust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-13T16:52:24Z)
• A Transparency Paradox? Investigating the Impact of Explanation Specificity and Autonomous Vehicle Perceptual Inaccuracies on Passengers [14.394590436638232]
  We examined the effects of transparency mediated through varying levels of explanation specificity in autonomous driving. Specifically, our study focused on how different types of explanations (specific vs. abstract) affect passengers' perceived safety, anxiety, and willingness to take control of the vehicle. Our findings showed that passengers felt safer with specific explanations when the vehicle's perception system had minimal errors, while abstract explanations that hid perception errors led to lower feelings of safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-16T14:59:00Z)
• Exploring the Causality of End-to-End Autonomous Driving [57.631400236930375]
  We propose a comprehensive approach to explore and analyze the causality of end-to-end autonomous driving. Our work is the first to unveil the mystery of end-to-end autonomous driving and turn the black box into a white one.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-09T04:56:11Z)
• Work-in-Progress: Crash Course: Can (Under Attack) Autonomous Driving Beat Human Drivers? [60.51287814584477]
  This paper evaluates the inherent risks in autonomous driving by examining the current landscape of AVs. We develop specific claims highlighting the delicate balance between the advantages of AVs and potential security challenges in real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-14T09:42:21Z)
• A Diachronic Perspective on User Trust in AI under Uncertainty [52.44939679369428]
  Modern NLP systems are often uncalibrated, resulting in confidently incorrect predictions that undermine user trust. We study the evolution of user trust in response to trust-eroding events using a betting game.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T14:41:46Z)
• A Counterfactual Safety Margin Perspective on the Scoring of Autonomous Vehicles' Riskiness [52.27309191283943]
  This paper presents a data-driven framework for assessing the risk of different AVs' behaviors. We propose the notion of counterfactual safety margin, which represents the minimum deviation from nominal behavior that could cause a collision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-02T09:48:08Z)
• Did You Mean...? Confidence-based Trade-offs in Semantic Parsing [52.28988386710333]
  We show how a calibrated model can help balance common trade-offs in task-oriented parsing. We then examine how confidence scores can help optimize the trade-off between usability and safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-29T17:07:26Z)
• From the Head or the Heart? An Experimental Design on the Impact of Explanation on Cognitive and Affective Trust [13.274877222689168]
  This study investigates the effectiveness of explanations on both cognitive and affective trust. We expect these results to be of great significance in designing AV explanations to promote AV trust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-07T13:15:34Z)
• The Who in XAI: How AI Background Shapes Perceptions of AI Explanations [61.49776160925216]
  We conduct a mixed-methods study of how two different groups--people with and without AI background--perceive different types of AI explanations. We find that (1) both groups showed unwarranted faith in numbers for different reasons and (2) each group found value in different explanations beyond their intended design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-28T17:32:04Z)
• Explanations in Autonomous Driving: A Survey [7.353589916907923]
  We provide a comprehensive survey of the existing work in explainable autonomous driving. We identify and categorise the different stakeholders involved in the development, use, and regulation of AVs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-09T00:31:30Z)
• To Explain or Not to Explain: A Study on the Necessity of Explanations for Autonomous Vehicles [26.095533634997786]
  We present a self-driving explanation dataset with first-person explanations and associated measures of the necessity for 1103 video clips. Our research reveals that driver types and driving scenarios dictate whether an explanation is necessary. In particular, people tend to agree on the necessity for near-crash events but hold different opinions on ordinary or anomalous driving situations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-21T00:38:24Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.