Search

New production vehicles equipped with multiple screens have various functions and technologies at the user's fingertips that create informative and immersive cockpits not only for the driver but also for the passenger. Despite the growing popularity of the co-pilot display, surprisingly little is known about the impact of its engagement on drivers. Engagement, in the context of this paper, is defined as visual, auditory, and mental involvement but no manual involvement. The present study sought to investigate the effects of co-pilot display engagement on drivers' visual workload, cognitive workload, and driving performance and offered a deeper insight into the design factors and task involvement of the co-pilot display. The study involved a driving simulator testing of 25 participants in five automobiles with a co-pilot display. Our analysis found increased driver visual workload and cognitive workload in the conditions of co-pilot display engagement. Participants exhibited more erratic driving behavior (standard deviation of speed and standard deviation of lane position) while the front passenger was watching a video. Furthermore, five linear mixed models were built to further analyze the effects of task type, screen size, screen layout, and task involvement on dependent measures. Potential applications of this research include refinements to the co-pilot display and workload estimation of co-pilot display engagement. • Increased visual workload and cognitive workload in the conditions of co-pilot display engagement were found. • Participants exhibited more erratic driving behavior while the front passenger was watching a video via co-pilot display. • The effects of task type, screen size, screen layout, and task involvement were adopted to investigate the distraction potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Touchscreen Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs) are a well-established and popular choice to provide the primary control interface between driver and vehicle, yet inherently demand some visual attention. Employing a secondary device with the touchscreen may reduce the demand but there is some debate about which device is most suitable, with current manufacturers favouring different solutions and applying these internationally. We present an empirical driving simulator study, conducted in the UK and China, in which 48 participants undertook typical in-vehicle tasks utilising either a touchscreen, rotary-controller, steering-wheel-controls or touchpad. In both the UK and China, the touchscreen was the most preferred/least demanding to use, and the touchpad least preferred/most demanding, whereas the rotary-controller was generally favoured by UK drivers and steering-wheel-controls were more popular in China. Chinese drivers were more excited by the novelty of the technology, and spent more time attending to the devices while driving, leading to an increase in off-road glance time and a corresponding detriment to vehicle control. Even so, Chinese drivers rated devices as easier-to-use while driving, and felt that they interfered less with their driving performance, compared to their UK counterparts. Results suggest that the most effective solution (to maximise performance/acceptance, while minimising visual demand) is to maintain the touchscreen as the primary control interface (e.g. for top-level tasks), and supplement this with a secondary device that is only enabled for certain actions; moreover, different devices may be employed in different cultural markets. Further work is required to explore these recommendations in greater depth (e.g. during extended or real-world testing), and to validate the findings and approach in other cultural contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As more devices and services are integrated into vehicles, drivers face new opportunities to perform additional tasks while driving. While many studies have explored the detrimental effects of varying task demands on driving performance, there has been little attention devoted to tasks that vary in terms of personal interest or investment-a quality we liken to the concept of task engagement. The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of task engagement on driving performance, subjective appraisals of performance and workload, and various physiological measurements. In this study, 31 participants (M = 37 yrs) completed three driving conditions in a driving simulator: listening to boring auditory material; listening to interesting material; and driving with no auditory material. Drivers were simultaneously monitored using near-infrared spectroscopy, heart monitoring and eye tracking systems. Drivers exhibited less variability in lane keeping and headway maintenance for both auditory conditions; however, response times to critical braking events were longer in the interesting audio condition. Drivers also perceived the interesting material to be less demanding and less complex, although the material was objectively matched for difficulty. Drivers showed a reduced concentration of cerebral oxygenated hemoglobin when listening to interesting material, compared to baseline and boring conditions, yet they exhibited superior recognition for this material. The practical implications, from a safety standpoint, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The primary purposes of a vehicle driver's seat, is to allow them to complete the driving task comfortably and safely. Within each class of vehicle (e.g. passenger, commercial, industrial, agricultural), there is an expected driving position to which a vehicle cabin is designed. This paper reports a study that compares two driving positions, in relation to Light Commercial Vehicles (LCVs), in terms of driver performance and driver discomfort. In the ‘elevated’ driving position, the seat is higher than usually used in road vehicles; this is compared to a standard driving position replicating the layout for a commercially available vehicle. It is shown that for a sample of 12 drivers, the elevated position did not, in general, show more discomfort than the standard position over a 60 min driving simulation, although discomfort increased with duration. There were no adverse effects shown for emergency stop reaction time or for driver headway for the elevated posture compared to the standard posture. The only body part that showed greater discomfort for the elevated posture compared to the standard posture was the right ankle. A second experiment confirmed that for 12 subjects, a higher pedal stiffness eliminated the ankle discomfort problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This study analyzes the effects of attention disruption factors, such as sending text messages (STM) and performing searching navigation (SN) on driving performance patterns while actively driving, centering on motion signals. To this end, it analyzes not only data on control of the vehicle including the Anterior-Posterior Coefficient of Variation (APCV), Medial-Lateral Coefficient of Variation (MLCV), and Deviation of Vehicle Speed but also motion data such as the Jerk-Cost function (JC). A total of 55 drivers including 28 males (age: 24.1 ± 1.5, driving experience: 1.8years ± 1.7 years) and 27 females (age: 23.8 ± 2.6, driving experience: 1.5 ± 1.0) participated in this study. All subjects were instructed to drive at a constant speed (90 km/h) for 2 min while keeping a distance of 30 m from the front car also running at a speed of 90 km/h. They were requested to drive for the first 1 min and then drive only (Driving Only) or conduct tasks while driving for the subsequent 1 min (Driving + STM or Driving + SN). The information on APCV, MLCV, and deviation of speed were delivered by a driving simulator. Furthermore, the motion signal was measured using 4 high-speed infrared cameras and based on the measurement results, JCs in a total of 6 parts including left shoulder (L.shoulder), left elbow (L.elbow), left hand (L.hand), right knee (R.knee), right ankle (R.ankle), and right toe (R.toe) were calculated. Differences among the results of 3 conditions of experiment, Driving Only, Driving + STM, and Driving + SN, were compared and analyzed in terms of APCV, MLCV, Deviation of Vehicle Speed, and JC. APCV and Deviation of Vehicle Speed increased in Driving + SN, rather than in Driving Only. MLCV increased in Driving + STM and Driving + SN, rather than in Driving Only. In the case of most JCs except that of L.hand, the values increased in Driving + SN, compared to Driving Only. This study indicated that JC could be a reliable parameter for the evaluation of driving performance patterns. In addition, it was discovered that additional tasks under driving, such as STM and SN, impaired smoothness or proficiency in driving motion, thereby increasing anterior-posterior and medio-lateral variability and deviation of speed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Interface design is an important factor in assessing the potential effects on safety of interacting with an in-vehicle information system while driving. In the current study, the layout of information on a visual display was manipulated to explore its effect on driving performance in the context of music selection. The comparative effects of an auditory–verbal (cognitive) task were also explored. The driving performance of 30 participants was assessed under both baseline and dual task conditions using the Lane Change Test. Concurrent completion of the music selection task with driving resulted in significant impairment to lateral driving performance (mean lane deviation and percentage of correct lane changes) relative to the baseline, and significantly greater mean lane deviation relative to the combined driving and the cognitive task condition. The magnitude of these effects on driving performance was independent of layout concept, although significant differences in subjective workload estimates and performance on the music selection task across layout concepts highlights that potential uncertainty regarding design use as conveyed through layout concept could be disadvantageous. The implications of these results for interface design and safety are discussed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Driving performance deteriorates at high ambient temperatures. Less is known about the effect of low ambient temperatures and the role of subjective aspects like thermal comfort and having control over the ambient temperature. Therefore, an experiment was constructed in which 50 subjects performed a road-tracking task in a cold (5°C), a thermoneutral (20°C) or a warm (35°C) climate. All subjects had a heater/blower (H/B) which generated a fixed amount of heat/wind that could either be controlled or not controlled.In the cold climate, averaged leg skin temperature dropped to 18.5°C and head skin temperature to 24.9°C; the thermal comfort was rated between ‘cold’ and ‘very cold’. In the warm climate, averaged leg skin temperature rose to 36.6°C and head skin temperature to 30.8°C; the thermal comfort was rated as ‘hot’. Driving performance in the ambient temperature extremes decreased 16% in the cold environment and 13% in the warm situation.Having control over the local head temperature by adjusting a H/B affected neither thermal comfort nor driving performance. In agreement with the literature on priming effects, subjects who started with the no-control condition performed much better in all driving tasks because they were primed to focus on the driving task as such, rather than the complex combination of temperature controls and driving task.It can be concluded that a thermoneutral temperature in a car enhances driving performance and may thus positively affect safety. Using manual climatic controls in hot or cold cars may interfere with the driving task. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Chronotype refers to individual differences in the timing of circadian sleep-wake cycles and subjective alertness throughout the day. It is a potential factor influencing people's driving behaviour, but no research has explored the mechanisms underlying this topic. The current study aimed to explore the relationship between morningness-eveningness preferences and driving behaviour and the mediating effect of visual search between them. Thirty-eight drivers were selected to participate in this study based on their chronotype. They were divided into morning-type and evening-type groups by their score on the reduced Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (rMEQ). Both groups completed a visual search task and a simulated driving task in a morning session and an evening session. The results showed that morningness-eveningness preferences had synchronous effects on basic driving performance; specifically, morning-type drivers showed better driving behaviour in the morning than in the evening, and evening-type drivers showed the opposite trend. Furthermore, visual search abilities showed a mediating effect between morningness-eveningness preference and driving performance. The mechanisms underlying these results are discussed. Related results and data could aid with schedule arrangements for professional drivers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study investigated effects of cognitive and visual loads on driving performance after take-over request (TOR) in an automated driving task. Participants completed automated driving in a driving simulator without a non-driving related task, with an easy non-driving related task, and with a difficult non-driving related task. The primary task was to monitor the environment and the system state. An N-back task and a Surrogate Reference Task (SuRT) were adapted to induce cognitive and visual loads respectively. The system followed a front vehicle automatically. Driving performance was measured by responses to a critical event (appearance of a broken-down car) after the automated system issued TOR and then terminated. High subjective difficulty of the N-back task was related to increased time and increased steering angle variance in the time course from onset of steering control to lane change, while high subjective difficulty of SuRT was related to increased steering angle variance in the time course after lane change. This suggests that both cognitive and visual loads affect driving performance after TOR in automated driving, but the effects appear in different time courses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]