Assessing the visual and cognitive demands of in-vehicle information systems

Abstract

Background New automobiles provide a variety of features that allow motorists to perform a plethora of secondary tasks unrelated to the primary task of driving. Despite their ubiquity, surprisingly little is known about how these complex multimodal in-vehicle information systems (IVIS) interactions impact a driver’s workload. Results The current research sought to address three interrelated questions concerning this knowledge gap: (1) Are some task types more impairing than others? (2) Are some modes of interaction more distracting than others? (3) Are IVIS interactions easier to perform in some vehicles than others? Depending on the availability of the IVIS features in each vehicle, our testing involved an assessment of up to four task types (audio entertainment, calling and dialing, text messaging, and navigation) and up to three modes of interaction (e.g., center stack, auditory vocal, and the center console). The data collected from each participant provided a measure of cognitive demand, a measure of visual/manual demand, a subjective workload measure, and a measure of the time it took to complete the different tasks. The research provides empirical evidence that the workload experienced by drivers systematically varied as a function of the different tasks, modes of interaction, and vehicles that we evaluated. Conclusions This objective assessment suggests that many of these IVIS features are too distracting to be enabled while the vehicle is in motion. Greater consideration should be given to what interactions should be available to the driver when the vehicle is in motion rather than to what IVIS features and functions could be available to motorists. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s41235-019-0166-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The effects of information relevancy on driving behavior

“…Parnell et al (2019) argues that the legislations seen in several countries against handheld phone use might create a false sense of security that makes it easy to justify one's hand-free phone use while driving. Strayer et al (2019) argues that many IVIS features in commercial use today are in fact too distracting to be enabled while the vehicle is in motion.…”

Prospective Immersive Human-Machine Interface for Future Vehicles: Multiple Zones Turn the Full Windscreen Into a Head-Up Display

“…Our work is an actual implementation of an example concept that can potentially answer such needs. Furthermore, most recent studies support the idea that drivers still need to focus on the road to reduce the risk of accidents [2] and that in-vehicle infotainment systems are distracting [3]. Utilizing its full capabilities, including sensing capabilities achieved by employing multisensor systems, data acquisition for danger level detection [9]- [11], artificial intelligence, and vehicle-to-everything technology, a vehicle becomes a mobile platform that senses more and also visually warns preemptively even before the driver notices.…”

“…In a previous study [2], the authors note that long glances away from the road reduce situational awareness, may result in a loss of vital information, and can increase the risk of accidents. This is a more severe situation for manually operated vehicles, as this study focuses on partial automation.…”

Visual and Cognitive Demands of CarPlay, Android Auto, and Five Native Infotainment Systems

“…Following the procedures described by Strayer et al (2017), the raw dependent measures were used to derive cognitive, visual, and subjective demand scores. Each demand score was based on a different underlying measure (see Table 4) and standardized using performance in the single-task baseline condition and one (or both) of the high demand referent conditions.…”