When2Talk: When Should a Proactive In-Car Agent Talk?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Proactive in-cabin agents can help passengers understand automated-vehicle (AV) behavior, but communicating every ride event may introduce unnecessary interruptions. We investigated how communication should adapt to event priority and passenger activity. In a mixed-methods within-subject study, 41 participants rode as passenger in a VR simulated fully-automated vehicle. We compared an event-triggered (ET) policy that communicated immediately at every event with a context-sensitive (CS) policy that selected textitImmediate, textitDelayed, or textitSilent communications. CS increased communication appropriateness and substantially reduced perceived interruption. Perceived trust did not differ between policies, although baselines dispositional trust differentiated communication preferences. Findings highlight event consequence, passenger activity, continuing information value, and confirmation need as key considerations for selective in-cabin communication.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Sep 2026.
Builds on
6 of 54 references.
References · 6
- 2017CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulatorcited by 2,439
- 2024Need Help? Designing Proactive AI Assistants for Programmingcited by 43
- 2025Assistance or Disruption? Exploring and Evaluating the Design and Trade-offs of Proactive AI Programming Supportcited by 34
- 2019Look Who's Talking Now: Implications of AV's Explanations on Driver's Trust, AV Preference, Anxiety and Mental Workloadcited by 12
- 2023Comparison of Waymo Rider-Only Crash Data to Human Benchmarks at 7.1 Million Milescited by 8
- 2024What Did My Car Say? Impact of Autonomous Vehicle Explanation Errors and Driving Context On Comfort, Reliance, Satisfaction, and Driving Confidencecited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.