aiqbench analysis
This paper proposes a systems-theoretic framework that extends the STAMP model to formally assess and mitigate psychological risks in autonomous vehicles, such as trust deficits and perceived loss of control. By introducing hazard analysis methods like AV-PsySafe and defining a Psychological Safety Integrity Level (PsySIL), it offers engineers practical tools to co-assess human-centric factors alongside traditional physical safety metrics. The validation results confirm the framework's feasibility for standardizing how developers address non-physical barriers that limit societal acceptance of self-driving technology.
Engineering Psychological Safety in Autonomous Vehicles: A Systems-Theoretic Framework for Psychological Safety in Autonomous Vehicles and its Validation in Real-World Scenarios
arXiv:2608.18778v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Despite rapid technological advances, the societal acceptability of autonomous vehicles (AVs) remains limited by psychological barriers that extend beyond traditional concerns of physical safety. While factors such as trust and perceived safety are known to influence user acceptance, there is a lack of formalized mechanisms and engineering methods to systematically identify, assess, and mitigate psychological risks arising from human-AV interactions. To address this gap, this work proposes and validates a systems-theoretic framework for the assessment of psychological safety in autonomous vehicles. First, a comprehensive psychological safety risk model is defined, extending the Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) to incorporate key psychological constructs such as trust, perceived control, predictability, and perceived support. Based on this model, a hazard analysis method (AV-PsySafe) is developed to systematically identify psychological hazards, unsafe control actions, and loss scenarios, while introducing a Psychological Safety Integrity Level (PsySIL) to support risk prioritization. Second, the applicability and relevance of the framework are evaluated through its deployment in realistic autonomous vehicle scenarios. A structured validation approach is implemented, including a methodological guide, standardized analysis templates, and the collection of analyst feedback. The results demonstrate that the framework can be consistently applied by practitioners, producing meaningful insights into psychological risks. Overall, this work establishes both the theoretical foundations and practical feasibility of a unified approach to co-assessing psychological and physical safety in autonomous systems, contributing to more human-centred and trustworthy AV development.
Abstract:Despite rapid technological advances, the societal acceptability of autonomous vehicles (AVs) remains limited by psychological barriers that extend beyond traditional concerns of physical safety. While factors such as trust and perceived safety are known to influence user acceptance, there is a lack of formalized mechanisms and engineering methods to systematically identify, assess, and mitigate psychological risks arising from human-AV interactions. To address this gap, this work proposes and validates a systems-theoretic framework for the assessment of psychological safety in autonomous vehicles. First, a comprehensive psychological safety risk model is defined, extending the Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) to incorporate key psychological constructs such as trust, perceived control, predictability, and perceived support. Based on this model, a hazard analysis method (AV-PsySafe) is developed to systematically identify psychological hazards, unsafe control actions, and loss scenarios, while introducing a Psychological Safety Integrity Level (PsySIL) to support risk prioritization. Second, the applicability and relevance of the framework are evaluated through its deployment in realistic autonomous vehicle scenarios. A structured validation approach is implemented, including a methodological guide, standardized analysis templates, and the collection of analyst feedback. The results demonstrate that the framework can be consistently applied by practitioners, producing meaningful insights into psychological risks. Overall, this work establishes both the theoretical foundations and practical feasibility of a unified approach to co-assessing psychological and physical safety in autonomous systems, contributing to more human-centred and trustworthy AV development.
Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2608.18778 [cs.HC]
(or arXiv:2608.18778v1 [cs.HC] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.18778 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 329 words
Related coverage

Smart Car Researcher Wants to Eliminate Stoplights
IEEE Spectrum · Oct 2, 2026

Amazon Research Awards recipients announced
Amazon Science · May 27, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jun 7, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026