User evaluation of comfortable deceleration profiles for highly automated driving: Findings from a test track study.

• An experimental test track study explored the impact of three deceleration approaches and a non-driving activity on passenger comfort in diverse driving scenarios. • A linear deceleration profile was compared to two stepwise profiles derived from a trained chauffeur's driving data. • The linear deceleration was preferred for stops at Stop Signs, while smoother stepwise profiles were favoured overall. • Passenger engagement in a non-driving activity didn't affect comfort or profile preferences. • Participants reported perceiving a lower intensity of longitudinal vehicle movements when visually distracted during the drive. As automated vehicles advance and become more widespread, it is increasingly important to ensure optimal driving comfort for passengers. Recent research has focused on developing driving styles for automated vehicles that are perceived to be most comfortable. However, there is still little understanding of whether, and how, possible driving styles need to be adjusted for specific traffic scenarios. In this study, 36 participants experienced three different deceleration profiles (a linear deceleration profile 'One-Step', and two versions of stepwise deceleration profiles 'Two-Step V1 and V2') across different driving scenarios (deceleration before curves, approaching a speed-limit sign, and a stop sign). Deceleration profiles were rated by participants and the impact of non-driving related activities on driving comfort was investigated. Results showed a positive rating for all deceleration profiles in terms of comfort. For decelerations to a standstill at a Stop Sign, participants seemed to prefer the One-Step approach, in which there is a continuous, and constant deceleration. However, participants described the Two-Step V1 as a gentle and calmer approach and ranked it more frequently as a personal favourite than the One-Step profile or the Two-Step V2 profile. The visual distraction of the passenger through a non-driving activity had no impact on passenger comfort or profile preferences for the scenarios tested within this study. Nonetheless, participants reported perceiving a lower intensity of longitudinal vehicle movements when visually distracted during the drive. The results of the study provide insights into the design and implementation of comfortable deceleration profiles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]