ArticleScientific reports2026
The role of take-over cue informativity in interrupted take-over requests in a semi-automated driving scenario.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trial-wise awareness ratings do not capture the dynamics of masked priming.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In semi-automated driving, take-over requests (TOR) signal the driver to take over control, if the car's driving system is not able to handle a particular traffic situation autonomously. While previous research indicated that providing informative TORs aids take-over behavior, related experimental research on task cuing suggested that informative cues might also be harmful, if interrupted by another task. Hence, the present study tested whether the advantage of informative TORs diminishes if after a TOR cue an interrupting task is presented. This should resemble a scenario, where drivers are about to take over control in response to a TOR, but then are distracted, for example by an incoming phone call. To this end, we presented participants with videos of a semi-automated driving situation, where task-specific informative or generic, non-informative TOR cues indicated an upcoming take-over action. Crucially, in half of the trials, this TOR cue was interrupted. Results showed informative TOR cues to generally improve take-over performance, but the interrupting task to reduce the advantage of providing informative TORs. However, this effect took some time until it reached its maximum and vanished with further practice. In sum, the present study identified interrupting, distracting information and practice as factors moderating the effectiveness of TOR cues, which demand further consideration in the research of semi-automated driving.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.