This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
The Influence of Driver’s Age on Glance Allocations during Single-Task Driving and Voice vs. Visual-Manual Radio Tuning
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published April 05, 2016 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
Driving behaviors change over the lifespan, and some of these changes influence how a driver allocates visual attention. The present study examined the allocation of glances during single-task (just driving) and dual-task highway driving (concurrently tuning the radio using either visual-manual or auditory-vocal controls). Results indicate that older drivers maintained significantly longer single glance durations across tasks compared to younger drivers. Compared to just driving, visual-manual radio tuning was associated with longer single glance durations for both age groups. Off-road glances were subcategorized as glances to the instrument cluster and mirrors (“situationally-relevant”), “center stack”, and “other”. During baseline driving, older drivers spent more time glancing to situationally-relevant targets. During both radio tuning task periods, in both age groups, the majority of glances were made to the center stack (the radio display). However, compared to visual-manual task periods, during the auditory-vocal periods, significantly more glances were made to situationally-relevant targets and fewer glances to the radio display. These results suggest that, while the auditory-vocal interface pulls some resources away from the forward roadway, it produces glance allocation profiles more similar to baseline driving. As with single-task driving, during the auditory-vocal radio task, older drivers made significantly longer glances off-road (173ms longer, on average), than younger drivers. These findings suggest that the assessment of glance behavior during on-road driving should consider that not all glances away from the forward roadway are necessarily “off-road”, i.e. diversions from driving-related attention.
|Technical Paper||The Role of Binocular Information for Distance Perception in Rear-Vision Systems|
|Technical Paper||Ergonomics of Electronic Displays|
|Technical Paper||DESIGN ELEMENTS Affecting SAFETY|
CitationDobres, J., Reimer, B., Mehler, B., Foley, J. et al., "The Influence of Driver’s Age on Glance Allocations during Single-Task Driving and Voice vs. Visual-Manual Radio Tuning," SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-1445, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-1445.
- Angell L, Auflick J, Austria P A, et al. 2006. Driver Workload Metrics Task 2 Final Report & Appendices. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration / US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC.
- Douglas Bates, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67, 1. http://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
- Carter C and Graham R. 2000. Experimental Comparison of Manual and Voice Controls for the Operation of in-Vehicle Systems. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 44, 20: 3-286-3-289. http://doi.org/10.1177/154193120004402016
- Chiang, D., Brooks, A., and Weir, D., "Comparison of Visual-Manual and Voice Interaction With Contemporary Navigation System HMIs," SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0433, 2005, doi:10.4271/2005-01-0433.
- Jeff Greenberg, Louis Tijerina, Reates Curry, et al. 2003. Driver Distraction: Evaluation with Event Detection Paradigm. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1843: 1-9. http://doi.org/10.3141/1843-01
- Harbluk J.L., Burns P C, Lochner M, and Patricia L Trbovich. 2007. Using the lane-change test (LCT) to assess distraction: Tests of visual-manual and speech-based operation of navigation system interfaces.
- Harbluk Joanne L, Noy Y Ian, Trbovich Patricia L, and Eizenman Moshe. 2007. An on-road assessment of cognitive distraction: Impacts on drivers’ visual behavior and braking performance. Accident Analysis & Prevention 39, 2: 372-379. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.08.013
- Jannette Maciej and Mark Vollrath. 2009. Comparison of manual vs. speech-based interaction with in-vehicle information systems. Accident Analysis & Prevention 41, 5: 924-930. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.05.007
- Bruce Mehler, David Kidd, Bryan Reimer, Ian Reagan, Jonathan Dobres, and Anne McCartt. 2015. Multi-modal assessment of on-road demand of voice and manual phone calling and voice navigation entry across two embedded vehicle systems. Ergonomics: 1-24. http://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1081412
- Mourant R R and Rockwell T H. 1972. Strategies of visual search by novice and experienced drivers. Human Factors 14.
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2013. Visual-Manual NHTSA Driver Distraction Guidelines For In-Vehicle Electronic Devices.
- Owens, J., McLaughlin, S., and Sudweeks, J., "On-Road Comparison of Driving Performance Measures When Using Handheld and Voice-Control Interfaces for Mobile Phones and Portable Music Players," SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars - Mech. Syst. 3(1):734-743, 2010, doi:10.4271/2010-01-1036.
- R Core Team. 2015. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
- Ranney Thomas A, Baldwin G H Scott, Parmer Ed, Joshua Domeyer, Martin John, and Mazzae Elizabeth N. 2011. Developing a Test to Measure Distraction Potential of In-Vehicle Information System Tasks in Production Vehicles. U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). http://doi.org/10.1037/e563342012-001
- Ranney Thomas A, Mazzae Elizabeth N, Baldwin G H Scott, and Salaani M Kamel. 2007. Characteristics of Voice-Based Interfaces for In-Vehicle Systems and Their Effects on Driving Performance. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Washington, DC. http://doi.org/10.1037/e729252011-001
- Reimer Bryan, Mehler Bruce, Dobres Jonathan, and Coughlin Joseph F. 2013. The effects of a production level “voice-command” interface on driver behavior: reported workload, physiology, visual attention, and driving performance. Cambridge, MA.
- Reimer Bryan, Mehler Bruce, Dobres Jonathan, et al. 2014. Effects of an “Expert Mode” Voice Command System on Task Performance, Glance Behavior & Driver Physiology. ACM, New York, New York, USA. http://doi.org/10.1145/2667317.2667320
- Shutko, J., Mayer, K., Laansoo, E., and Tijerina, L., "Driver Workload Effects of Cell Phone, Music Player, and Text Messaging Tasks with the Ford SYNC Voice Interface versus Handheld Visual-Manual Interfaces," SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-0786, 2009, doi:10.4271/2009-01-0786.
- Smith David L, Chang James, Glassco Richard, Foley James, and Cohen Daniel. 2005. Methodology for capturing driver eye glance behavior during in-vehicle secondary tasks. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1937, 1: 61-65.
- Tijerina L and Parmer E. 1998. Driver workload assessment of route guidance system destination entry while driving: A test track study. Proceedings of the 5th ITS World Congress, Seoul, South Korea.
- Victor Trent W, Harbluk Joanne L, and Engström Johan A. 2005. Sensitivity of eye-movement measures to in-vehicle task difficulty. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 8, 2: 167-190. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2005.04.014
- Wang Ying, Reimer Bryan, Dobres Jonathan, and Mehler Bruce. 2014. The sensitivity of different methodologies for characterizing drivers' gaze concentration under increased cognitive demand. Transportation Research Part F: Psychology and Behaviour 26, PA: 227-237. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.08.003
- Yager Christine. 2013. An Evaluation of The effectivness of voice-to-text programs at reducing incidences of distracted driving. Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, TX.
- Young Kristie L, Salmon Paul M, and Cornelissen Miranda. 2013. Missing links? The effects of distraction on driver situation awareness. Safety Science 56: 36-43. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.11.004