SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2608.18801

A revised framework for the assessment of psychological safety in autonomous vehicles

Abstract

Despite recent technological progress in the development of autonomous vehicles (AVs), their societal acceptability remains a subject of debate as recent research findings point to psychological roadblocks. Concerns arise not only for physical safety but also for potential psychological risks resulting from human interaction with AVs. Psychological concepts such as trust, and perceived safety are well-studied in this context and are found to be determinant factors for the intention to use AVs. Unfortunately, there has been no formalization of the mechanism by which human interaction with AVs may lead to psychological hazards, threatening trust, perceived safety, and acceptability. Furthermore, there has been little prior research that conceptualizes the severity of psychological risk in AVs, and there are no clear guidelines for a systems designer on how to assess and address psychological risk in the AV development context. To address these limitations, this paper extends a theoretical framework for AV psychological safety risk assessment based on an early proposal. The proposed framework consists of an extended risk model for psychological safety including all the key concepts related to psychological safety in AVs, and an assessment method based on the Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP). We demonstrate the usefulness of the theoretical framework through a highly automated AV use case scenario, uncovering factors which may lead to psychological risk for an occupant. The use cases provide examples of how to use the framework to extensively evaluate psychological risk and determine vehicle behaviour that could lead to this risk. By developing a theoretical framework for AV psychological safety risk assessment, we provide a foundation and a method that were previously lacking to better enable responsible AV development regarding psychological safety.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yandika Sirgabsou, Benjamin Hardin, François Leblanc, Efi Raili, David Jackson, Pericle Salvini, Lars Kunze, Marina Jirotka. 2026-08-19. A revised framework for the assessment of psychological safety in autonomous vehicles. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18801

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

ShellVis: Sandboxed Live Programming for Shell Scripts

Live programming provides visibility to programmers by running and tracing programs as they are edited. However, for programs with potentially harmful side effects, liveness can turn mistakes into disasters. We propose enabling live programming in environments with side effects via sandboxing: confining effects to a simulation of the true environment. We apply sandboxed live programming in the challenging context of shell scripting: a ubiquitous and powerful---yet notoriously opaque and error-prone---tool. ShellVis provides line-by-line feedback on a shell script's run-time behavior, with file operations sandboxed via a safe overlay of the file system. A qualitative user evaluation finds ShellVis to be helpful to participants, replacing tedious existing practices and instilling confidence. Participant responses also reveal areas for future research, particularly bridging the gulf of execution alongside the gulf of evaluation. ShellVis serves as a case study of how sandboxing can bring live-programming techniques into the many real-world programming contexts where side effects are important.

cs.HC

Visual-Motion-Induced Modulation of Pedestrian Trajectories Using Spatially Distributed Multi-Display Signage in Public Spaces

Multi-display signage (MDS), now ubiquitous in urban environments, has the potential to influence human behavior and experience in public spaces. However, despite its unique capability to present spatially distributed dynamic visual stimuli, its current use is mainly limited to advertising. In this study, we propose a perception-based approach for laterally modulating pedestrian trajectories as a nonverbal means of guiding pedestrians in public spaces. The approach is motivated by vection, the illusion of self-motion, and uses laterally moving monochrome stripes, a standard stimulus in vection research, presented across spatially distributed displays to elicit postural responses that may bias pedestrian trajectories. We evaluated the approach through a controlled laboratory experiment and a real-world field deployment involving actual pedestrian flows in a national museum. The laboratory experiment examined whether the MDS setup induced trajectory shifts in the direction predicted by prior research on the behavioral effects of vection. The field deployment investigated whether comparable effects would emerge in aggregate pedestrian behavior during unconstrained movement under conditions closer to those of urban public spaces. In the laboratory, full-screen motion significantly biased walking trajectories in the direction of visual motion, whereas partial-stripe motion produced no significant directional effect. In the field deployment, opposing full-screen motion conditions produced direction-consistent differences in aggregate pedestrian positions. The field results, observed despite the substantial variability in real-world pedestrian flows, extend the controlled laboratory findings and provide ecologically valid evidence supporting practical MDS-based pedestrian modulation in public settings. The results further suggest that sufficient visual-motion coverage may be important.

cs.HC

How AI Coders Discuss, Disagree, and Reach Consensus: Challenges and Opportunities for LLM-Based Qualitative Coding

The utility of AI in multi-coder qualitative coding has been widely discussed, yet little empirical evidence exists to delineate the contexts in which it performs reliably. We address this gap by quantifying the effectiveness of multi-agent LLM coding across varied qualitative datasets, revealing key contextual and structural factors that mediate coding outcomes. We developed a literature-informed baseline pipeline that enables AI agents to independently code, debate, and reconcile disagreements. Results revealed that coding accuracy depends on factors such as codebook length, qualitative data similarity, and agent disagreement. Notably, intense and unresolved debates between agents led to higher accuracy. Our analysis showed that while LLMs emulate many human discussion behaviors, they lack adaptive responsiveness to context. From these findings, we offer design recommendations for building automated coding systems. Our open-source AI discussion dataset and methodological framework lay the groundwork for advancing the design of AI-mediated automated thematic analysis.

cs.HC