Sentiment de contrôle et acceptabilité sociale a priori des aides à la conduite

Résumé Fr En

RÉSUMÉ Les deux recherches présentées ici portent sur l’acceptabilité sociale a priori de dispositifs visant à mieux gérer les interdistances (projet ARCOS). Nous faisions l’hypothèse que les dispositifs les moins acceptables seraient ceux réduisant fortement le sentiment de contrôle de l’individu (cf. norme d’internalité : Dubois, 2003). Nous avons ainsi comparé les jugements portés sur les utilisateurs potentiels de quatre modes d’automation différents. Chacun de ces modes d’automation était illustré par deux films d’environ deux minutes, l’un mettant en scène un conducteur, l’autre une conductrice. Les participants devaient répondre à un questionnaire évaluant en lui-même le dispositif présenté et porter un jugement sur une personne qui choisirait de l’utiliser. Les résultats sont conformes à nos attentes : si les participants s’accordent sur le fait que les dispositifs présentés devraient tous améliorer leur confort de conduite et leur sentiment de sécurité en voiture, ils jugent plus négativement les utilisateurs des dispositifs très automatisés que les utilisateurs des dispositifs peu automatisés (expérience 1) et adoptent des stratégies d’autoprésentation les amenant eux-mêmes à choisir les dispositifs les moins automatisés (expérience 2).

PERSONNAL CONTROL AND SOCIAL ACCEPTABILITY OF DRIVER SUPPORT SYSTEMS In this article we put forward the idea that the measure of the social acceptability of technological products such as driver support systems does not only depend on how the needs of individuals are met or on driver’s motivations. Indeed the judgement made towards users of such devices must also be taken into account : are they considered as good drivers to which one would want to identify oneself or, on the contrary, are they perceived to be bad drivers and ones definitely not to be associated with ? Attitudes towards users constitute, undoubtedly, a determinant variable in predicting the use rate of driving aids. Our arguments for this idea are based on results obtained as part of the ARCOS 2004 project. ARCOS (Research Action for Secure Driving) is a pre-competitive research project. It takes place into the PREDIT program (Land Transport Experimentation and Innovation Research Programme). ARCOS considers vehicles, drivers and infrastructures as a whole system. Thus, the project aims at enhancing driving safety on the basis of four safety functions : 1 / controlling inter-vehicle distances ; 2 / avoiding collisions with fixed or slowly moving obstacles ; 3 / avoiding lane exit ; 4 / alerting other vehicles of accidents. The various modes of automation set forth within ARCOS range from poorly-automated devices, which offer the driver a simple recap of information, to heavily-automated devices that provide a complete control over driving functions. Considering the fact that it is socially attractive to exhibit mastery over one’s actions and how events unfold (cf. Dubois, 2003), we put forward the hypothesis that : the less-acceptable devices should be those that considerably reduce the individual’s feeling of control over his driving. The hypothesis was tested within the scope of the « inter-distance management » function. Four types of automations were planned for this function, i.e. the « regulated », « limit », « warning » and « perceptive » modes. These four modes were illustrated by two films of about two minutes each, one was shot with a male driver, and the other with a female driver. After viewing one of the films, the participants were asked both to fill out a questionnaire evaluating the device itself and to cast judgment on an individual who would opt to use such a device, especially in terms of « good vs. poor driver » (Experiment 1). In the second experiment, half of the participants were asked to indicate the device they would choose to create a positive image of themselves, particularly as a driver, while the other half expressed the device they would choose to create a poor image of themselves. The results show that most people agree on the fact that the presented systems, whatever their operating mode, should improve their driving comfort and their feeling of safety in their vehicle. However, and in accordance with the initial assumptions, the people interrogated pass a negative judgement on individuals choosing to use a system that takes excessive control over their driving.