Self-driving carsickness

This paper discusses the predicted increase in the occurrence and severity of motion sickness in self-driving cars. Self-driving cars have the potential to lead to significant benefits. From the driver's perspective, the direct benefits of this technology are considered increased comfort and productivity. However, we here show that the envisaged scenarios all lead to an increased risk of motion sickness. As such, the benefits this technology is assumed to bring may not be capitalised on, in particular by those already susceptible to motion sickness. This can negatively affect user acceptance and uptake and, in turn, limit the potential socioeconomic benefits that this emerging technology may provide. Following a discussion on the causes of motion sickness in the context of self-driving cars, we present guidelines to steer the design and development of automated vehicle technologies. The aim is to limit or avoid the impact of motion sickness and ultimately promote the uptake of self-driving cars. Attention is also given to less well known consequences of motion sickness, in particular negative aftereffects such as postural instability, and detrimental effects on task performance and how this may impact the use and design of self-driving cars. We conclude that basic perceptual mechanisms need to be considered in the design process whereby self-driving cars cannot simply be thought of as living rooms, offices, or entertainment venues on wheels

Beyond seasickness: A motivated call for a new motion sickness standard across motion environments

Motion sickness is known under several names in different domains, such as seasickness, carsickness, cybersickness, and simulator sickness. As we will argue, these can all be considered manifestations of one common underlying mechanism. In recent years, it has received renewed interest, largely due to the advent of automated vehicles and developments in virtual reality, in particular using head-mounted displays. Currently, the most widely accepted standard to predict motion sickness is ISO 2631-1 (1997), which is based on studies on seasickness and has limited applicability to these newer domains. Therefore, this paper argues for extending the ISO standard to cover all forms of motion sickness, to incorporate factors affecting motion sickness, and to consider various degrees of severity of motion sickness rather than just emesis. This requires a dedicated standard, separate from other effects of whole-body vibration as described in the current ISO 2631-1. To that end, we first provide a sketch of the historical origins of the ISO 2631-1 standard regarding motion sickness and discuss the evidence for a common mechanism underlying various forms of motion sickness. After discussing some methodological issues concerning the measurement of motion sickness, we outline the main knowledge gaps that require further research

Objective Evaluation of the Somatogravic Illusion from Flight Data of an Airplane Accident

(1) Background: It is difficult for accident investigators to objectively determine whether spatial disorientation may have contributed to a fatal airplane accident. In this paper, we evaluate three methods to reconstruct the possible occurrence of the somatogravic illusion based on flight data recordings from an airplane accident. (2) Methods: The outputs of two vestibular models were compared with the “standard” method, which uses the unprocessed gravito-inertial acceleration (GIA). (3) Results: All three methods predicted that the changing orientation of the GIA would lead to a somatogravic illusion when no visual references were available. However, the methods were not able to explain the first pitch-down control input by the pilot flying, which may have been triggered by the inadvertent activation of the go-around mode and a corresponding pitch-up moment. Both vestibular models predicted a few seconds delay in the illusory tilt from GIA due to central processing and sensory integration. (4) Conclusions: While it is difficult to determine which method best predicted the somatogravic illusion perceived during the accident without data on the pilot’s pitch perception, both vestibular models go beyond the GIA analysis in taking into account validated vestibular dynamics, and they also account for other vestibular illusions. In that respect, accident investigators would benefit from a unified and validated vestibular model to better explain pilot actions in accidents related to spatial disorientation

Knowing what's coming: Anticipatory audio cues can mitigate motion sickness

Being able to anticipate upcoming motion is known to potentially mitigate sickness resulting from provocative motion. We investigated whether auditory cues could increase anticipation and subsequently reduce motion sickness. Participants (N = 20) were exposed on a sled on a rail track to two 15-min conditions. Both were identical in terms of motion, being composed of the same repeated 9 m fore-aft displacements, with a semi-random timing of pauses and direction. The auditory cues were either 1) informative on the timing and direction of the upcoming motion, or 2) non-informative. Illness ratings were recorded at 1-min intervals using a 11-point scale. After exposure, average illness ratings were significantly lower for the condition that contained informative auditory cues, as compared to the condition without informative cues. This knowledge, i.e. that auditory signals can improve anticipation to motion, could be of importance in reducing carsickness in domains such as that of autonomous vehicles

An international survey on the incidence and modulating factors of carsickness

About two in three people have experienced carsickness at some point in their life (Reason & Brand, 1975). Little is known about current numbers of sufferers, cultural differences, or which modulating factors are being perceived as most relevant. Therefore, given a global increase of interest in carsickness driven by the development of automated vehicles, this survey intended to assess the status quo of carsickness in different parts of the world. We conducted an online survey with N = 4,479 participants in Brazil, China, Germany, UK and USA. 46% of participants indicated they had experienced some degree of carsickness in the past five years as a passenger in a car. When including childhood experiences, this rate increased to 59%, comparable to the 1975 findings by Reason and Brand. The highest and lowest incidence of carsickness was reported in China and Germany, respectively. In all countries, men and older participants reported a lower incidence of carsickness as compared to females and younger participants. The main modulating factors were found to be driving dynamics, visual activities, and low air quality. This study showed that carsickness still affects about 2/3 of passengers and discusses how its occurrence relates to in-transit activities and other modes of transport. The research provides a sound basis to further study how carsickness develops and to investigate countermeasures to potentially reduce it

Методи пом'якшення

The section describes mitigation methods.У розділі описано методи помякшення

Knowing what's coming: Unpredictable motion causes more motion sickness

This study explores the role of anticipation in motion sickness. We compared three conditions varying in motion predictability and assessed the effect of anticipation on subsequent illness ratings using a within-subjects design. Anticipation is thought to play a role in motion sickness by reducing the discrepancy between sensed and expected sensory information. However, both the exact role and potential magnitude of anticipation on motion sickness are unknown. Participants ( = 17) were exposed to three 15-min conditions consisting of repeated fore-aft motion on a sled on a 40-m rail (1) at constant intervals and consistent motion direction, (2) at constant intervals but varied motion direction, and (3) at varied intervals but consistent motion direction. Conditions were otherwise identical in motion intensity and displacement, as they were composed of the same repetitions of identical blocks of motion. Illness ratings were recorded at 1-min intervals using an 11-point motion sickness scale. Average illness ratings after exposure were significantly lower for the predictable condition, compared with both the directionally unpredictable condition and the temporally unpredictable condition. Unpredictable motion is significantly more provocative compared with predictable motion. Findings suggest motion sickness results from a discrepancy between sensed and expected motion, rather than from unpreparedness to motion. This study underlines the importance of an individual's anticipation to motion in motion sickness. Furthermore, this knowledge could be used in domains such as that of autonomous vehicles to reduce carsickness