Beep, Bleep, Oops! A Discussion on the Misuse of Advanced Driver

Assistance Systems (ADAS) and the Path Moving Forward

Oscar Oviedo-Trespalacios

Department of Values, Technology & Innovation (VTI), Faculty of Technology, Policy & Innovation (TPM),

Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

Keywords: Advanced Driver Assistance Systems, Behavioural Adaptation, Road Safety, Technology Misuse,

Driver Behaviour, Safety Policy.

Abstract: The potential of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) to enhance road safety and driver comfort is

significant. However, its realization can be compromised by driver misuse. This paper discusses the misuse

of ADAS, defined as the suboptimal, inappropriate, or incorrect utilization of these systems. Such misuse not

only diminishes their safety benefits but also poses new risks. In this paper, I argue that misuse encompasses

at least three distinct behaviours: Non-Use When Beneficial, Overuse, and Non-Compliant Use. Each presents

unique challenges to leveraging ADAS's full safety capabilities. Through an analysis of these behaviours, the

paper aims to shed light on the underlying reasons for ADAS misuse and its implications for road safety and

vehicle efficiency. The study underscores the importance of addressing these issues through the development

of more effective ADAS technologies, comprehensive education programs, and other interventions tailored

to encourage correct usage. By exploring the specific pathways of misuse and their impact on road safety, this

research contributes to the broader understanding of how to maximize the benefits of ADAS, ensuring they

serve their intended purpose of making roads safer for all users.

1 INTRODUCTION

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)

encompass a range of technologies designed to

enhance vehicle safety and driver comfort. These

systems leverage a combination of sensors, cameras,

and algorithms to offer features such as adaptive

cruise control, lane keeping assistance, automatic

emergency braking, and parking assistance, among

others. The primary goal of ADAS is to prevent the

ocurrence of crashes, mitigate the severity of those

that do occur, and generally make driving a safer and

more manageable task (Oviedo-Trespalacios et al.,

2021). Examples of ADAS in action include a car

automatically adjusting its speed to maintain a safe

distance from the vehicle ahead or alerting the driver

when it detects an unintended lane departure.

The integration of ADAS into modern vehicles

has been met with both enthusiasm and skepticism.

On one hand, there is a general expectation that these

systems will significantly increase road safety by

reducing human error and risky behaviors (Bayly et

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5916-3996

al., 2007; Haque et al., 2021). Recent analyses

support this view, indicating that the long-term

savings in terms of lives saved, injuries prevented,

and reductions in traffic congestion and vehicle

damage can outweigh the initial investment in ADAS

technology (Kuang et al., 2019; Masello et al., 2022).

However, the reality of ADAS adoption is fraught

with challenges. In particular, recent studies have

highlighted several issues, including instances of

misuse by drivers.

This paper aims to delve deeper into the nuanced

ways in which the misuse of ADAS may undermine

the anticipated benefits of these technologies.

Drawing on previous research, the focus will be on

explaining the specific pathways through which

behaviors manifest and impact road safety.

2 TYPES OF ADAS MISUSE

Misuse of ADAS technology involves incorrect,

inappropriate, or suboptimal use by drivers,

410

Oviedo-Trespalacios, O.

Beep, Bleep, Oops! A Discussion on the Misuse of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and the Path Moving Forward.

DOI: 10.5220/0012706200003702

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems (VEHITS 2024), pages 410-414

ISBN: 978-989-758-703-0; ISSN: 2184-495X

undermining safety benefits and introducing new

road risks. Enhancing the effectiveness of ADAS and

promoting its proper use requires a clear

understanding of misuse. As outlined in this paper,

misuse is categorized into at least three distinct types:

Non-Use When Beneficial, Overuse, and Non-

Compliant Use. Each presents a unique challenge to

maximizing ADAS's safety potential.

2.1 Non-Use when Beneficial

Non-Use when Beneficial occurs when drivers choose

not to utilize ADAS in situations where these systems

could significantly enhance their safety or driving

experience. For instance, a driver might disable lane-

keeping assistance because they prefer the feel of

manual control, even in heavy highway traffic where

the system could help maintain a safe lane position

amidst distractions or fatigue. Research by Lijarcio et

al. (2019) found that a significant portion of 1,207

Spanish drivers considered certain ADAS—such as

speed limiters (47.9%), adaptive cruise control

(41%), and automatic lighting (34.2%)—to be useless

or unnecessary, opting not to use such technologies.

Similarly, a study in the Netherlands found that some

ADAS, such as Cruise Control and Lane Keeping

Assist, have low utilization rates, 33.3%-9.8%

respectively (Boelhouwer et al., 2020). This is

problematic given that these technologies have

arguably great potential in reducing road crashes

(Bayly et al., 2007). ADAS can serve as a

redundancy, providing drivers with a layer of

protection in case proper vehicle control is not

sustained. Therefore, not using ADAS negates the

system's benefits by sidelining technologies designed

to reduce crash risks and improve road safety.

2.2 Overuse

Overuse (or dependency) is characterized by drivers

excessively relying in ADAS, resulting in a decline

and even atrophy of their driving skills. This form of

misuse typically becomes apparent when ADAS is

unavailable, revealing a deterioration in performance

compared to the baseline established before its use.

An illustrative example of this phenomenon is the

overreliance on parking assistance technologies.

Drivers may become so dependent on automatic

parking systems that they lose confidence in their

ability to manually parallel park or accurately judge

distances without assistance of the technology.

Previous research has highlighted situations

where the overuse of technologies has influenced

behaviour in their absence. Casner et al. (2016) point

out that navigation systems, designed to automate a

task at which people already seemed reasonably

competent, have led to a loss of navigational skills.

More recently, Miller et al. (2017) found that the use

of lane-keeping assist affects driving skills and

cognitive workload. In a study involving 48

participants across three driving simulator sessions, it

was observed that drivers who utilized lane-keeping

assist showed a decline in driving performance once

the system was deactivated. This was marked by an

increase in the standard deviation of lateral position

(SDLP) and a reduction in the time to collision (TTC)

relative to their performance before using ADAS.

Additionally, cognitive workload increased when

lane-keeping assist was withdrawn, indicating that

dependence on ADAS might complicate the

transition back to manual driving. These findings

underscore that while ADAS can enhance safety and

driving comfort, their intensive use followed by

discontinuation can result in lasting behavioural

changes, potentially introducing new risks.

Considering the impact of ADAS overuse, it is

crucial to differentiate the safety implications of skill

atrophy. The loss of navigational skills, for instance,

did not lead to major safety issues due to effective

technology substitution (Casner et al., 2016), despite

concerns like increased distraction (Oviedo-

Trespalacios et al., 2019). However, the reliance on

more critical systems like lane-keeping assist can

pose greater risks when these aids are withdrawn, as

they directly affect vehicle control and situational

awareness. Identifying scenarios where ADAS

dependency might lead to significant safety conflicts

is essential.

2.3 Non-Compliant Use

Non-Compliant Use emerges when ADAS leads to

unintended changes in driver behaviour, resulting in

less-than-optimal vehicle control. For instance,

drivers may incorrectly rely on systems like Tesla's

Autopilot as fully autonomous, removing their hands

from the wheel and not watching the road, wrongly

assuming the car can handle all tasks. Similarly, when

using parking assistance, there is a tendency to

monitor the car's displays rather than the parking

environment (Kidd et al., 2018). This indicates a clear

consequence of ADAS: it can lead to shifts in driving

behaviour that are not officially recommended.

Research has shown that drivers utilizing ADAS

might start engaging in other risky behaviours. For

example, some drivers using autopilot systems

become increasingly distracted by activities like

phone use or even engage in extreme behaviours such

Beep, Bleep, Oops! A Discussion on the Misuse of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and the Path Moving Forward

411

as sexual activities (Lin et al., 2018; Oviedo-

Trespalacios et al., 2022). Alarmingly, there's

evidence that ADAS features, such as Lane Departure

Warning, do not reduce distractions (Cades et al.,

2016). Additionally, a recent study identified a

positive correlation between safety systems and the

prevalence of speeding tickets, suggesting that safety

systems may encourage adaptive behaviour that

undermines their intended safety benefits (Vertlib et

al., 2023).

ADAS are not replacements for a human driver,

yet some individuals use them incorrectly as if they

were. Such reliance is not always for comfort but also

occurs when drivers use ADAS to manage their

physical impairments. Vaezipour et al. (2022) found

that individuals with chronic pain use ADAS to

reduce discomfort, utilizing features like cruise

control to avoid prolonged static postures and

minimize foot pain, and blind-spot warnings to

mitigate neck pain, thus easing the need to look over

the shoulder. However, this dependence on ADAS for

physical aid can lead to incorrect vehicle control and

reduced safety behaviours, as drivers may wrongly

believe that ADAS can completely compensate for

their limitations.

Non-compliant use can also occur among road

users who interact with vehicles equipped with

advanced technology. For example, Li et al. (2023a)

investigated how the presence of autonomous vehicles

might influence yielding behaviour and found that

drivers with existing risky behaviours might

exacerbate these tendencies, further reducing safety

margins during interactions with autonomous vehicles.

Similar findings have also been reported among

bicycle riders (Li et al., 2023b). This underscores the

urgent need for strategies to mitigate such behaviours

among non-users of the technology as well.

3 REASONS BEHIND ADAS

MISUSE

Research has identified a lack of knowledge and

dissatisfaction with ADAS as key reasons for its non-

use. Harms et al. (2020) explained that 83% of owners

not fully aware of their vehicle's features. Yet, once

informed, 95-98% of drivers actively use systems like

cruise control and navigation, emphasizing the

importance of awareness in ADAS usage. This

suggests that increasing awareness could

significantly enhance utilization rates.

Another key aspect related to non-use is that the

technology might not meet drivers' expectations.

Reimer (2004) noted that ADAS may not always

fulfill drivers' expectations, leading to dissatisfaction

and the deactivation of systems such as adaptive

cruise control, often due to discomfort with

unexpected behaviours like sudden acceleration. This

discomfort usually arises from a misunderstanding of

how these systems function, especially their design to

maintain a predetermined speed or distance from the

vehicle in front. Arguably, better design of ADAS

and awareness of its functioning could help prevent

this form of misuse.

Overuse and dependency on ADAS, though not

fully understood, might result from the technology's

perceived advantages and widespread acceptance

among users. If drivers hold positive perceptions and

experiences with ADAS, they are more inclined to

use it frequently. This notion aligns with technology

acceptance theory, a framework that explains

technology adoption and use (Kaye et al., 2022).

Currently, ADAS lack built-in controls to moderate

reliance on these systems and prevent skill

deterioration or atrophy. The significance of

incorporating "Safety-by-Design" principles

becomes apparent, highlighting the necessity for

manufacturers and designers to proactively integrate

safety considerations into the development phase of

technology. This strategy is aimed at foreseeing

potential misuse scenarios, creating systems that

either prevent unwanted behaviours or significantly

reduce their likelihood.

Non-compliant use often stems from a lack of

understanding of the technology. Kaye et al. (2022)

found that many drivers learn about ADAS from

vehicle manuals or through trial and error, approaches

that Oviedo-Trespalacios et al. (2021) noted do not

build accurate mental models of ADAS. Additionally,

Nandavar et al. (2023) noted instances of surprise

reactions from ADAS users with insufficient

knowledge, such as a 49-year-old male driver startled

by an early activation of the automatic braking system

and a 68-year-old female relying on both the rear-

view camera and traditional methods for better

precision. Pradhan et al. (2021) warned that drivers'

knowledge of ADAS could become outdated or

worsen over time, raising the accident risk if drivers

ignore or sidestep the system's advice. This highlights

a major gap in current driver education practices and

points to the need for enhanced training methods.

Finally, risky use is heavily influenced by

individual differences, such as gender, which

contribute to riskier behaviours with ADAS.

Research has shown that male drivers are more prone

to engaging in risky practices and may be more likely

to misuse ADAS for such behaviours when these

VEHITS 2024 - 10th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

412

systems are available (Rezaei et al., 2021). This

highlights the importance of considering individual

differences when addressing potential ADAS misuse,

ensuring that safety interventions are both effective

and comprehensive.

4 PATH MOVING FORWARD

The integration of ADAS and the advent of

autonomous vehicles present both opportunities and

challenges for enhancing road safety. To capitalize on

these technologies effectively, a unified approach by

practitioners, policymakers, and researchers is

imperative.

For Practitioners. It is essential for vehicle

manufacturers and technology developers to

incorporate safety as a fundamental aspect of design.

This includes creating ADAS features that not only

aid driving but also actively promote safe driving

practices. Ensuring ADAS are intuitive and support

the driver without fostering overreliance is crucial.

Developing mechanisms within vehicles that educate

and correct ADAS misuse in real-time could

significantly improve road safety.

For Policymakers. Updating regulatory frameworks

to reflect the latest technological advancements in

vehicles is necessary. Policies should facilitate the

safe integration of ADAS by setting standards that

encourage manufacturers to prioritize safety and

usability. Additionally, creating guidelines that

require the inclusion of comprehensive, accessible

education on ADAS within driver licensing and

renewal processes can help bridge the knowledge gap

and prevent misuse.

For Researchers. The field calls for continued

investigation into the behavioural effects of ADAS on

drivers. Understanding how these systems influence

driving habits, decision-making, and safety

perception is key to developing technologies that

truly benefit road safety.

A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to

address the nuanced challenges presented by the

integration of advanced driving technologies.

Through collaboration and innovation, stakeholders

can ensure that the development and adoption of

ADAS and autonomous vehicles genuinely

contribute to creating safer driving environments.

This approach requires continuous adaptation and

commitment to education, regulatory evolution, and

technological refinement to achieve the shared goal

of reducing road accidents and enhancing driver

safety.

5 CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, addressing the challenge of integrating

ADAS and autonomous vehicles into our roads

necessitates a concerted effort from manufacturers,

policymakers, and researchers. It is critical to not only

focus on the advancement of technology but also on

understanding and mitigating forms of ADAS

misuse. By embedding "Safety by Design" principles,

refining regulatory frameworks to encourage safe and

informed use, and deepening our research efforts into

the drivers' behavioural response to ADAS, we can

make significant strides toward enhancing road

safety. With a commitment to continuous education,

technological refinement, and adaptive policies, the

future of driving can be safer for everyone, marked

by a responsible and informed integration of ADAS

and autonomous driving technologies.

REFERENCES

Bayly, M., Fildes, B., Regan, M., & Young, K. (2007).

Review of crash effectiveness of intelligent transport

systems. Emergency, 3, 14.

Boelhouwer, A., Van den Beukel, A. P., Van der Voort, M.

C., Hottentot, C., De Wit, R. Q., & Martens, M. H.

(2020). How are car buyers and car sellers currently

informed about ADAS? An investigation among

drivers and car sellers in the Netherlands.

Transportation Research Interdisciplinary

Perspectives, 4, 100103.

Cades, D. M., Crump, C., Lester, B. D., & Young, D.

(2017). Driver distraction and advanced vehicle

assistive systems (ADAS): investigating effects on

driver behavior. In Advances in Human Aspects of

Transportation: Proceedings of the AHFE 2016

International Conference on Human Factors in

Transportation, July 27-31, 2016, Walt Disney

World®, Florida, USA (pp. 1015-1022). Springer

International Publishing.

Casner, S. M., Hutchins, E. L., & Norman, D. (2016). The

challenges of partially automated driving.

Communications of the ACM, 59(5), 70-77.

Haque, M. M., Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Sharma, A., &

Zheng, Z. (2021). Examining the driver-pedestrian

interaction at pedestrian crossings in the connected

environment: A Hazard-based duration modelling

approach. Transportation research part A: policy and

practice, 150, 33-48.

Harms, I. M., Bingen, L., & Steffens, J. (2020). Addressing

the awareness gap: A combined survey and vehicle

registration analysis to assess car owners’ usage of

ADAS in fleets. Transportation Research Part A:

Policy and Practice, 134, 65-77.

Kaye, S. A., Nandavar, S., Yasmin, S., Lewis, I., & Oviedo-

Trespalacios, O. (2022). Consumer knowledge and

Beep, Bleep, Oops! A Discussion on the Misuse of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and the Path Moving Forward

413

acceptance of advanced driver assistance systems.

Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and

behaviour, 90, 300-311.

Kidd, D. G., Reimer, B., Dobres, J., & Mehler, B. (2018).

Changes in driver glance behavior when using a system

that automates steering to perform a low-speed parallel

parking maneuver. Transportation research part F:

traffic psychology and behaviour, 58, 629-639.

Kuang, X., Zhao, F., Hao, H., & Liu, Z. (2019). Assessing

the socioeconomic impacts of intelligent connected

vehicles in China: A cost–benefit analysis.

Sustainability, 11(12), 3273.

Li, X., Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Afghari, A. P., Kaye, S.

A., & Yan, X. (2023a). Yield or not to yield? An inquiry

into drivers’ behaviour when a fully automated vehicle

indicates a lane-changing intention. Transportation

research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 95,

405-417.

Li, X., Afghari, A. P., Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Kaye, S.

A., & Haworth, N. (2023b). Cyclists perception and

self-reported behaviour towards interacting with fully

automated vehicles. Transportation research part A:

policy and practice, 173, 103713.

Lijarcio, I., Useche, S. A., Llamazares, J., & Montoro, L.

(2019). Availability, demand, perceived constraints and

disuse of ADAS technologies in Spain: Findings from

a national study. IEEE Access, 7, 129862-129873.

Lin, R., Ma, L., & Zhang, W. (2018). An interview study

exploring Tesla drivers' behavioural adaptation.

Applied ergonomics, 72, 37-47.

Masello, L., Castignani, G., Sheehan, B., Murphy, F., &

McDonnell, K. (2022). On the road safety benefits of

advanced driver assistance systems in different driving

contexts. Transportation research interdisciplinary

perspectives, 15, 100670.

Nandavar, S., Kaye, S. A., Senserrick, T., & Oviedo-

Trespalacios, O. (2023). Exploring the factors

influencing acquisition and learning experiences of cars

fitted with advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS).

Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and

behaviour, 94, 341-352.

Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Nandavar, S., & Haworth, N.

(2019). How do perceptions of risk and other

psychological factors influence the use of in-vehicle

information systems (IVIS)?. Transportation research

part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 67, 113-122.

Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Newton, J. D. A., Demant, D.,

Phillips, J. G., & Struckman-Johnson, C. (2022).

Understanding sexual activity while driving as a form

of distracted driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention,

169, 106621.

Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Tichon, J., & Briant, O. (2021). Is

a flick-through enough? A content analysis of

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) user

manuals. Plos one, 16(6), e0252688.

Pradhan, A. K., Pai, G., Knodler, M., Fitzpatrick, C., &

Horrey, W. J. (2021). Driver’s Mental Models of

Advanced Vehicle Technologies: A Proposed

Framework for Identifying and Predicting Operator

Errors, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 13, 7.

https://aaafoundation.org/wp-

content/uploads/2022/01/AAAFTS-

SaferSim_UMass_Yr1_Report-FINAL.pdf.

Reimer, B. (2014). Driver assistance systems and the

transition to automated vehicles: A path to increase

older adult safety and mobility?. Public Policy & Aging

Report, 24(1), 27-31.

Rezaei, M., Yazdani, M., Jafari, M., & Saadati, M. (2021).

Gender differences in the use of ADAS technologies: A

systematic review. Transportation research part F:

traffic psychology and behaviour, 78, 1-15.

Vaezipour, A., Andrews, N., Oviedo-Trespalacios, O.,

Amershi, F., Horswill, M., Johnston, V., & Delhomme,

P. (2022). Exploring driving behaviour from the

perspectives of individuals with chronic pain and health

professionals. Applied ergonomics, 102, 103755.

Vertlib, S. R., Rosenzweig, S., Rubin, O. D., & Steren, A.

(2023). Are car safety systems associated with more

speeding violations? Evidence from police records in

Israel. PLoS one, 18(8), e0286622.

VEHITS 2024 - 10th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems

414