No abstract

Objective: A driving simulator study was conducted to comparatively evaluate the effects of three camera monitor system (CMS) display layouts and the traditional side-view mirror arrangement on the physical demands of driving. Background: Despite the possible benefits of CMS displays in reducing the physical demands of driving, little empirical evidence is available to substantiate these benefits. The effects of CMS display layout designs are not well understood. Method: The three CMS display layouts varied in the locations of the side-view displays: (A) inside the car near the conventional side-view mirrors, (B) on the dashboard at each side of the steering wheel, and (C) on the center fascia with the displays joined side by side. Twenty-two participants performed a safety-critical lane changing task with each design alternative. The dependent measures were the following: spread of eye movement, spread of head movement, and perceived physical demand. Results: Compared with the traditional mirror system, all three CMS display layouts showed a reduction in physical demands, albeit differing in the types/magnitudes of physical demand reduction. Conclusion: Well-designed CMS display layouts could significantly reduce the physical demands of driving. The physical demands were reduced by placing the CMS displays close to the position of the driver’s normal line-of-sight when looking at the road ahead and locating each CMS display on each side of the driver, that is, at locations compatible with the driver’s expectation. Application: Physical demand reductions by CMS displays would especially benefit drivers frequently checking the side-view mirrors with large eye/head movements and physically weak/impaired drivers.

No abstract

Evaluating physical discomfort of designed gestures is important for creating safe and usable gesture-based interaction systems; yet, gestural discomfort evaluation has not been extensively studied in HCI, and few evaluation methods seem currently available whose utility has been experimentally confirmed. To address this, this study empirically demonstrated the utility of the subjective rating method after a small number of gesture repetitions (a maximum of four repetitions) in evaluating designed gestures in terms of physical discomfort resulting from prolonged, repetitive gesture use. The subjective rating method has been widely used in previous gesture studies but without empirical evidence on its utility. This study also proposed a gesture discomfort evaluation method based on an existing ergonomics posture evaluation tool (Rapid Upper Limb Assessment) and demonstrated its utility in evaluating designed gestures in terms of physical discomfort resulting from prolonged, repetitive gesture use. Rapid Upper Limb Assessment is an ergonomics postural analysis tool that quantifies the work-related musculoskeletal disorders risks for manual tasks, and has been hypothesized to be capable of correctly determining discomfort resulting from prolonged, repetitive gesture use. The two methods were evaluated through comparisons against a baseline method involving discomfort rating after actual prolonged, repetitive gesture use. Correlation analyses indicated that both methods were in good agreement with the baseline. The methods proposed in this study seem useful for predicting discomfort resulting from prolonged, repetitive gesture use, and are expected to help interaction designers create safe and usable gesture-based interaction systems.

No abstract