Novice and Young Drivers and Advanced Driver Assistant Systems: A Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study consists in a review focused on the effectiveness of ADAS on young drivers, according to the PRISMA framework. The Authors described accurately the bibliographic research method employed, and compared and discussed the main findings, grouping them into three main key themes.

Overall, the paper is clear, well written and potentially interesting as global overview on a crucial topic for road safety. Few minor suggestions are provided for improvement.  

Minor:

- Considering that the majority of ADAS systems is developed for cars, it could be interesting if the authors added this information, by indicating it in table 3. Even in the case that all the studies reported refer to ADAS for cars, a short comment about this point in the Discussion section could be included, considering that young people very often drive two-wheeled vehicles.

- I would suggest to change references, in the text, that could be interpreted as advertisement, in order to avoid potential risk of conflicts of interest (e.g. Honda Accord, Toyota). The ADAS systems considered in those points can be described on the basis of their main characteristics, as in all the other cases. Toyota's manufacturing information can be changed in “information from a car manufacturer”, or something like that.

- In Figure 3, It can be useful that the sample’s range of ages was indicated in all the cases in which participants were involved. It should be useful to have the same information also in the case of archive data.

Author Response

Comment 1: Considering that the majority of ADAS systems is developed for cars, it could be interesting if the authors added this information, by indicating it in table 3. Even in the case that all the studies reported refer to ADAS for cars, a short comment about this point in the Discussion section could be included, considering that young people very often drive two-wheeled vehicles

Reply: Many thanks for the helpful comment. More explanations have been added in lines 288, 305 and 306.

Comment 2: - I would suggest to change references, in the text, that could be interpreted as advertisement, in order to avoid potential risk of conflicts of interest (e.g. Honda Accord, Toyota). The ADAS systems considered in those points can be described on the basis of their main characteristics, as in all the other cases. Toyota's manufacturing information can be changed in “information from a car manufacturer”, or something like that.

Reply: Many thanks for the helpful comment. It is now changed to "a car manufacturer" in line 194 and "Toyota" in Table 3 has been removed as suggested

Comment 3: - In Figure 3, It can be useful that the sample’s range of ages was indicated in all the cases in which participants were involved. It should be useful to have the same information also in the case of archive data.

Reply: Many thanks for this comment. Age details for studies that specified their participants' ages have been included in Table 3.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. ADAS is a system designed for cars, and there is a limit on the age of vehicles that can be driven. Is it appropriate to provide examples of the 5-24 and 20-24 age groups in the first paragraph of the Introduction;

2. Reference 28 is not consistent with other formats, it is recommended to carefully review and revise it;

3. The unit chart of publication quantity in Figure 2 is not indicated;

4. Table 3 suggests organizing the content in chronological order.

Author Response

Comment 1: ADAS is a system designed for cars, and there is a limit on the age of vehicles that can be driven. Is it appropriate to provide examples of the 5-24 and 20-24 age groups in the first paragraph of the Introduction;

Reply: Many thanks for the helpful suggestion. In the first paragraph of the introduction, our primary goal is to highlight the high rate of road fatalities, particularly among young people. Since this section does not discuss ADAS, we believe it is not directly relevant to this part of the text.

Comment 2: Reference 28 is not consistent with other formats, it is recommended to carefully review and revise it;

Reply: Many thanks for the helpful suggestion. The authors tried to revise it.

Comment 3: The unit chart of publication quantity in Figure 2 is not indicated

Reply: Thank you. We have added "Number of Publications" on the vertical axis.

Comment 4: Table 3 suggests organizing the content in chronological order

Reply: Thank you for your comment. Table 3 serves as a summary of the Results section, and its organization was designed to align with the structure of that section for clarity and coherence.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic discussed in the article is of interest. The perspective on new drivers has been treated from different points of view. In this case, a review of the state of the art of its relationship with assistance systems is carried out. However, it is considered that several aspects of the article need to be improved: - The introduction is very long with excessive references (many generic references not focused on the specific topic). It is suggested that the introduction should be shortened and the information reorganized using subsections. - In a review of the state of the art, an original structuring of the information is key to differentiate it from other similar works and provide a new perspective to readers. In this case there is no structuring either by means of obtaining the information in the analyzed papers, or by the results, or by the assistance systems considered, etc. - Table 3 with the results of the articles is somewhat naive and with little processing by the authors. This aspect should be improved in line with the previous comment.

Author Response

Comment 1: The introduction is very long with excessive references (many generic references not focused on the specific topic). It is suggested that the introduction should be shortened and the information reorganized using subsections

Reply: Thank you for your comment. We have shortened the Introduction, and its revised structure is as follows:

• Crash data, particularly for young and novice riders
• Characteristics of novice rider crashes
• Measures to address the issue, including ADAS
• Overview of prior research on various ADAS types
• The significance of this study and aims
• The organization of the paper

Comment 2: In a review of the state of the art, an original structuring of the information is key to differentiate it from other similar works and provide a new perspective to readers. In this case there is no structuring either by means of obtaining the information in the analyzed papers, or by the results, or by the assistance systems considered, etc.

Reply: Many thanks for the helpful suggestion. More information in lines 84-99, 139-151

Comment 3: Table 3 with the results of the articles is somewhat naive and with little processing by the authors. This aspect should be improved in line with the previous comment

Reply: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have re-categorized the results in Table 3 to ensure consistency:

• Rows 1 to 7 correspond to studies focusing on the tendency to embrace ADAS (Section 3.1).
• Rows 8 to 21 include studies examining the positive impacts of ADAS on young and novice drivers (Section 3.2).
• Rows 22 to 32 cover studies investigating the negative impacts of ADAS on young and novice drivers (Section 3.3).

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Little changes have been introduced so I maintain my previous recommendation. Deeper changes are required. The paper does not present a real discussion with a novel approach of the state of the art and it is quite straight forward in describing a limited set of papers. All previos comments must be re-studied again.

Author Response

Reply to the Comments of Reviewer 3:

 

Comment 1: The introduction is very long with excessive references (many generic references not focused on the specific topic). It is suggested that the introduction should be shortened and the information reorganized using subsections

Reply: Thank you for your comment. We have shortened the Introduction, and subsections have been included in the introduction and are highlighted.

• Characteristics of novice rider crashes
• Countermeasures
• Overview of ADAS technologies
• Study significance and objectives
• Paper structure

Comment 2: In a review of the state of the art, an original structuring of the information is key to differentiate it from other similar works and provide a new perspective to readers. In this case there is no structuring either by means of obtaining the information in the analyzed papers, or by the results, or by the assistance systems considered, etc.

Reply: Many thanks for the helpful suggestion. The discussion section now has subsections for a better structure:

4.1.      Challenges in ADAS acceptance and behavioral adoption

4.2.      Optimizing ADAS design for novice drivers

4.3.      Addressing the gaps in ADAS research for young drivers

4.4.      Policy implications

A more detailed discussion can be found in the following lines:

323 to 325,

332 to 334,

339 to 341

361 to 369

Comment 3: Table 3 with the results of the articles is somewhat naive and with little processing by the authors. This aspect should be improved in line with the previous comment

Reply: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. We have re-categorized the results in Table 3 to ensure consistency:

• Rows 1 to 7 correspond to studies focusing on the tendency to embrace ADAS (Section 3.1).
• Rows 8 to 21 include studies examining the positive impacts of ADAS on young and novice drivers (Section 3.2).
• Rows 22 to 32 cover studies investigating the negative impacts of ADAS on young and novice drivers (Section 3.3).

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Some of my initial comments have been considered but I maintain my opinion that this is not the best way to present a state of the art paper providing a relevant point of view and the paper only includes a list of references with short comments and little contributions and discussion.

Author Response

Comment 1: Some of my initial comments have been considered but I maintain my opinion that this is not the best way to present a state of the art paper providing a relevant point of view and the paper only includes a list of references with short comments and little contributions and discussion.

Reply: Thank you for your comment.

“Additional research is essential to comprehensively comprehend the effects of ADAS on novice and young drivers. Longitudinal studies are crucial for assessing the driving behavior and accident rates of novice drivers over time, comparing those who employ Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) with those who do not. This will provide substantial insights into the lasting effects of ADAS on driving skills and safety outcomes. Naturalistic driving studies, which involve monitoring drivers in their own vehicles over extended periods, may provide substantial empirical data on the interactions of novice drivers with Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) in everyday driving situations. Simulator-based research offers a controlled environment for assessing the effects of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) on driving performance in various challenging conditions. These studies can evaluate the effectiveness of diverse training procedures. Future study should investigate the feasibility of creating adaptive training systems that customize training content to the specific demands and learning styles of each novice driver. Comprehending how inexperienced drivers perceive and trust Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) is essential for facilitating their efficient acceptance and utilization. Research should examine the determinants that affect driver acceptability of various ADAS features.”