Linking Behaviour and Perception to Evaluate Meaningful Human Control over Partially Automated Driving
Ashwin George, Lucas Elbert Suryana, Lorenzo Flipse, Bart van Arem, David A. Abbink, Simeon Craig Calvert, Luciano Cavalcante Siebert, Arkady Zgonnikov

TL;DR
This study evaluates how drivers perceive meaningful human control in semi-automated driving, using behavioral and subjective data to inform design improvements for safety and engagement.
Contribution
It introduces empirical methods to assess MHC in automated driving, linking driver perceptions with system behaviors through telemetry and surveys.
Findings
Negative correlation between perceived vehicle understanding and steering conflict
Positive correlation between reaction times and perceived control
Qualitative insights on mismatches in driver-automation intentions
Abstract
Partial driving automation creates a tension: drivers remain legally responsible for vehicle behaviour, yet their active control is significantly reduced. This reduction undermines the engagement and sense of agency needed to intervene safely. Meaningful human control (MHC) has been proposed as a normative framework to address this tension. However, empirical methods for evaluating whether existing systems actually provide MHC remain underdeveloped. In this study, we investigated the extent to which drivers experience MHC when interacting with partially automated driving systems. Twenty-four drivers completed a simulator study involving silent automation failures under two modes - haptic shared control (HSC) and traded control (TC). We derived behavioural metrics from telemetry data, subjective perception scores from post-trial surveys and used them to test hypothesised relations…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
