No abstract

There has been concern that automation may impair a person’s ability to detect and appropriately respond to environmental hazards. This study sought to examine a driver’s ability to not only detect hazards, but also to implement appropriate responses following extended Eyes-Off-Road (EOR) intervals. Thirty-six drivers were exposed to a series of filmed roadway vignettes with discernible hazards embedded within a range of traffic situations. Driver’s visual gaze was directed “off-road” for 2, 7 or 20 seconds, and then re-oriented to the roadway. Drivers were tasked to respond appropriately as quickly as possible once their gaze returned to the forward road scene by steering and/or braking in response to the hazards. Results found no significant differences among the EOR intervals in terms of the driver’s ability to detect and appropriately respond to the hazard when it emerged after the driver’s eyes were directed forward.

This study compared a touchpad-controlled High Forward Head-down Display (HF-HDD) and a conventional touchscreen Head-down Display (HDD) In-vehicle infotainment system (IVIS). These two systems differ from each other on two design factors. First, the HF-HDD has a shorter visual scanning distance between the forward road scene and the display. Second, the HF-HDD is remotely controlled by a touchpad in locations where the input device is more manually accessible. It has been argued, however, that such an indirect display-control system is less intuitive than the touchscreen HDD that is a direct display-control system. Seventeen users under the age of 35 performed secondary tasks using the HF-HDD with the touchpad and the touchscreen HDD while driving. The results showed that the HF-HDD with a touchpad was associated with more positive driver feedback and better secondary task performance than the touchscreen HDD, although, no difference was found in driving performance.