{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02864816472694718, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.076086956521739, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Sooner the Better: Drivers’ Reactions to Two-Step Take-Over Requests in Highly Automated Driving

Driving behavior after take-over requests (TORs) is one of the most popular subjects in human factors re-search on highly automated driving. Many studies utilized one-step TOR procedures to prompt drivers to resume vehicle control. The present paper examines driver behavior when experiencing a two-step TOR procedure in different modalities. A two-step TOR gives drivers a choice to resume vehicle controls be-tween a warning (first step) and an alarm (second step). Our findings indicate that a substantial number of drivers resumes vehicle controls after the second step, resulting in a higher number of crashes. More generally, criticality of the driving situation increases with increasing reaction times. Driving and interview data suggest that step two of the TOR should be presented earlier. Alternatively, a multi-step TOR could be used to increase drivers’ situational awareness. Auditory TORs are associated with shorter reaction times than visual-auditory TORs. Implications on TOR design are discussed.