Overall, the rate of vehicle-bicycle collisions is continually increasing. In the United States alone, bicyclist fatalities contributed to 2.3 percent of all crash related fatalities in 2015. In most of these cases, crashes occur due to distracted drivers who are unable to correctly anticipate the bicyclists at the hazardous locations on the roadways such as, intersections and curves. The objective of the current study is to contribute to the divisive literature surrounding cell phone use while driving by specifically measuring, the effects of a secondary mock cell phone task on hazard anticipation performance across common vehicle-bicycle conflict situations. Two groups of 20 drivers each, navigated seven unique scenarios on a driving simulator while being monitored by an eye tracker. One group of participants performed a hands free mock cellphone task while driving, while the second group drove without any additional tasks outside of the primary task of driving. Analysis of the proportion of anticipatory glances using a logistic regression model revealed a significant main effect of the mock cellphone task at reducing the proportion of such glances made by the drivers towards potential bicyclist threats on the roadway.

The objective of the current study is to evaluate the use of virtual reality (VR) headsets to measure driving performance. This is desirable because they are several orders of magnitude less expensive than simulators and, if validated, could greatly extend the powers of simulation. Out of several possible measures of performance that could be considered for evaluating VR headsets, the current study specifically examines drivers’ latent hazard anticipation behavior both because it has been linked to crashes and because it has been shown to be significantly poorer in young drivers compared with their experienced counterparts in traditional driving simulators and in open road studies. In a between-subject design, 48 participants were equally and randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions—two young driver cohorts (18–21 years) and two middle-aged driver cohorts (30–55 years) navigating either a fixed-based driving simulator or a VR headset-based simulator. All participants navigated six unique scenarios while their eyes were continually tracked. The proportion of latent hazards anticipated by participants which constituted the primary dependent measure, was found to be greater for middle-aged drivers than young drivers across both platforms. The difference in the magnitude of performance between the young and middle-aged drivers was similar across the two platforms. The study provides some justification for the use of VR headsets as a way of understanding drivers’ hazard anticipation behavior.

Vehicle–bicycle collisions are increasing alarmingly. A recent study shows that cognitively distracted drivers who are glancing on the forward roadway are also less likely to glance toward areas for potential vehicle–bicyclist conflicts. But this study did not determine whether cognitively distracted drivers who did glance toward the appropriate area were as likely to process the information as drivers who were not cognitively distracted. Evidence that drivers who were cognitively distracted and glanced toward the bicyclist were not as likely to process the information could be inferred either from shorter fixations in the area where a bicyclist could appear or from smaller reductions in the speed of their vehicle to mitigate a potential conflict. This study intends to add to previous results by examining only glance and vehicle behaviors of participants who glance toward the latent hazardous events involving bicyclists. Specifically, the durations of the glances toward the latent hazardous events of participants who are and are not cognitively distracted are compared as well as their velocity while approaching the potential strike zones. Two groups of 20 participants (one distracted, one not distracted) each drove through seven scenarios on a fixed-based driving simulator while their eye movements were continuously tracked using an eye tracker. Analysis of the participants’ longest glance duration toward the latent hazardous events indicated that distracted drivers made shorter glances toward the latent hazardous events when compared with their non-distracted counterparts. However, there was no difference in vehicle velocity between distracted and non-distracted drivers near the potential strike zones.

Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) promise improved driving performance and safety. With ADAS taking on more vehicle control tasks, the driver’s role may be reduced to that of passive supervision. This in turn may increase drivers’ engagement in non-driving-related tasks, thereby potentially reducing any promised safety benefit. We conducted a systematic review, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, to study the relationship between ADAS use and driver distraction. Four research questions were addressed—two questions examined the effect of ADAS on secondary task engagement, and the quality of secondary task performance, and two addressed the effects of ADAS on driver attention and on driver behavior changes caused by secondary task engagement. Twenty-nine papers were selected for full text synthesis. The majority of the papers indicate an association between ADAS and increased secondary task engagement, as well as improved secondary task performance. Ten papers reported that drivers tend to divert their attention to secondary tasks and away from driving tasks. These outcomes highlight the continued importance of the role of the human driver despite vehicle automation, especially in the context of driver distraction, and that user understanding of ADAS functionalities and limitations is essential to appropriate and effective use of these systems.

No abstract