Safety-critical data, such as crash and near-crash records, are crucial to improving autonomous vehicle (AV) design and development. Sharing such data across AV companies, academic researchers, regulators, and the public can help make all AVs safer. However, AV companies rarely share safety-critical data externally. This paper aims to pinpoint why AV companies are reluctant to share safety-critical data, with an eye on how these barriers can inform new approaches to promote sharing. We interviewed twelve AV company employees who actively work with such data in their day-to-day work. Findings suggest two key, previously unknown barriers to data sharing: (1) Datasets inherently embed salient knowledge that is key to improving AV safety and are resource-intensive. Therefore, data sharing, even within a company, is fraught with politics. (2) Interviewees believed AV safety knowledge is private knowledge that brings competitive edges to their companies, rather than public knowledge for social good. We discuss the implications of these findings for incentivizing and enabling safety-critical AV data sharing, specifically, implications for new approaches to (1) debating and stratifying public and private AV safety knowledge, (2) innovating data tools and data sharing pipelines that enable easier sharing of public AV safety data and knowledge ; (3) offsetting costs of curating safety-critical data and incentivizing data sharing.

We review the state of open science and the perspectives on open data sharing within the automotive user research community. Openness and transparency are critical not only for judging the quality of empirical research, but also for accelerating scientific progress and promoting an inclusive scientific community. However, there is little documentation of these aspects within the automotive user research community. To address this, we report two studies that identify (1) community perspectives on motivators and barriers to data sharing, and (2) how openness and transparency have changed in papers published at AutomotiveUI over the past 5 years. We show that while open science is valued by the community and openness and transparency have improved, overall compliance is low. The most common barriers are legal constraints and confidentiality concerns. Although research published at AutomotiveUI relies more on quantitative methods than research published at CHI, openness and transparency are not as well established. Based on our findings, we provide suggestions for improving openness and transparency, arguing that the motivators for open science must outweigh the barriers. All supporting materials are freely available at: https://osf.io/zdpek/

The design of self-driving vehicles requires an understanding of the social interactions between drivers in resolving vague encounters, such as at un-signalized intersections. In this paper, we make the case for social situation awareness as a model for understanding everyday driving interaction. Using a dual-participant VR driving simulator, we collected data from driving encounter scenarios to understand how (N=170) participant drivers behave with respect to one another. Using a social situation awareness questionnaire we developed, we assessed the participants’ social awareness of other driver’s direction of approach to the intersection, and also logged signaling, speed and speed change, and heading of the vehicle. Drawing upon the statistically significant relationships in the variables in the study data, we propose a Social Situation Awareness model based on the approach, speed, change of speed, heading and explicit signaling from drivers.

Motion capture systems, used across various domains, make body representations concrete through technical processes. We argue that the measurement of bodies and the validation of measurements for motion capture systems can be understood as social practices. By analyzing the findings of a systematic literature review (N=278) through the lens of social practice theory, we show how these practices, and their varying attention to errors, become ingrained in motion capture design and innovation over time. Moreover, we show how contemporary motion capture systems perpetuate assumptions about human bodies and their movements. We suggest that social practices of measurement and validation are ubiquitous in the development of data- and sensor-driven systems more broadly, and provide this work as a basis for investigating hidden design assumptions and their potential negative consequences in human-computer interaction.