Conversation Disrupts Change Detection in Complex Traffic Scenes

McCarley, Jason S.; Vais, Margaret J.; Pringle, Heather; Kramer, Arthur F.; Irwin, David; Strayer, David L.

doi:10.1518/hfes.46.3.424.3784

Cited by 15 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies have shown that drivers detected (McCarley et al, 2004) and recognized (Strayer, Drews, & Johnston, 2003) fewer objects when performing a secondary task while driving as compared to driving only; however, the number of fixations on the target region were not different for the two conditions. The difficulty in responding to and recognizing previously fixated stimuli in a dual-task condition may relate to the tendency for one stimulus to interfere with the processing of a subsequent stimulus (Shapiro & Luck, 1999), such that drivers' attention to a nondriving task interferes with the consolidation of information into short-term memory during fixations.…”

Section: Visual Attention In Driving: the Effects Of Cognitive Load Amentioning

confidence: 94%

“…According to this paradigm, participants view a sequence of unaltered and altered images of a traffic scene from the driver's perspective, with a brief gray screen between the images (McCarley et al, 2004;Richard et al, 2002). Cognitive load undermined detection of driving-relevant (objects that contained important driving information) and driving-irrelevant (details that were not associated with driving) changes to a similar degree (Richard et al, 2002).…”

Section: Visual Attention In Driving: the Effects Of Cognitive Load Amentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visual Attention in Driving: The Effects of Cognitive Load and Visual Disruption

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study investigates the effect of cognitive load on guidance of visual attention. Background: Previous studies have shown that cognitive load can undermine driving performance, particularly drivers' ability to detect safety-critical events. Cognitive load combined with the loss of exogenous cues, which can occur when the driver briefly glances away from the roadway, may be particularly detrimental. Method: In each of two experiments, twelve participants engaged in an auditory task while performing a change detection task. A change blindness paradigm was implemented to mask exogenous cues by periodically blanking the screen in a driving simulator while a change occurred. Performance measures included participants' sensitivity to vehicle changes and confidence in detecting them. Results: Cognitive load uniformly diminished participants' sensitivity and confidence, independent of safety relevance or lack of exogenous cues. Periodic blanking, which simulated glances away from the roadway, undermined change detection to a greater degree than did cognitive load; however, drivers' confidence in their ability to detect changes was diminished more by cognitive load than by periodic blanking. Conclusion: Cognitive load and short glances away from the road are additive in their tendency to increase the likelihood of drivers missing safety-critical events. Application: This study demonstrates the need to consider the combined consequence of cognitive load and brief glances away from the road in the design of emerging in-vehicle devices and the need to provide drivers with better feedback regarding these consequences.

show abstract

Section: Visual Attention In Driving: the Effects Of Cognitive Load Amentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Visual Attention In Driving: the Effects Of Cognitive Load Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Attention in Driving: The Effects of Cognitive Load and Visual Disruption

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The same limitations of awareness undoubtedly underlie interactions with information technology (Levin & Baker, 2015;Varakin et al, 2004), effects of distracted driving (McCarley et al, 2004;Strayer et al, 2003), and other forms of distraction (Eriksen & Johnson, 1964;Stothart et al, 2015).…”

Section: Empirical Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The channel capacity of visual awareness divided among multiple moving objects

Lappin

Morse

Seiffert

2016

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If attention is distributed among multiple moving objects, how does this divided attention affect the temporal process for detecting a specific target motion? Well-trained observers in three experiments monitored ongoing random motions of multiple objects, trying to rapidly detect nonrandom target motions. Response time hazard rates revealed a simple lawful structure of the detection processes. Target detection rates (hazard rates, in bits/s) were inversely proportional to the number of observed objects. Detection rates at any response time and in any condition equaled a product of two parallel (functionally independent and concurrent) visual processes: visual awareness and motion integration. The rate of visual awareness was inversely proportional to Set Size (n = 1-12), constant over time, and invariant with integrated motion information. Thus, a single rate parameter, indicating a constant channel capacity of visual awareness, described detection rates over a wide range of conditions and response times. During an initial interval of roughly 0.5 s, detection rates increased proportionally with the duration and length of motion; but after this initial integration, detection rates were constant, independent of the time the target remained undetected. The relationship between the quantity of visual information and detection rates was simpler than anticipated by contemporary theories of attention, perception, and performance.

show abstract

“…Change blindness (CB) is an inability to detect large changes in a visual scene, often in association with a visual disruption, such as an eye-movement, blink, or film cut (McCarley et al, 2004;O'Regan, Rensink, & Clark, 1999;Pringle, Irwin, Kramer, & Atchley, 2001;Rizzo et al, submitted). Recent findings suggest that noticing changes requires both attention and visual working memory, the ability to store and compare visual information before and after a change occurs (Pringle et al, 2001;Simons & Ambinder, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Change Blindness, Attention, and Driving Performance

Lees

Sparks

Lee

et al. 2007

Proceedings of the 4th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary: Concern over older driver high traffic fatality rates has resulted in an effort to identify risk factors and to develop methods of assessment. This study examines two attention-related tasks, Useful Field of View (UFOV) and Change Blindness (CB), in relation to vision and cognitive test batteries and driving performance measures collected using a simulator and an instrumented vehicle. Eight older adults with Alzheimer's disease and nine comparison subjects between 64 and 81 participated. Factor analysis results indicate that UFOV and CB relate to different factors. While UFOV relates to memory, decision-making, attention, and visual spatial ability, CB relates to vision and attention. The type of images used on a CB task influence how the task relates to driving performance measures. Researchers should be thoughtful when selecting images to include in CB tasks to maximize insight into real-world driving.

show abstract

Conversation Disrupts Change Detection in Complex Traffic Scenes

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Visual Attention in Driving: The Effects of Cognitive Load and Visual Disruption

Visual Attention in Driving: The Effects of Cognitive Load and Visual Disruption

The channel capacity of visual awareness divided among multiple moving objects

Change Blindness, Attention, and Driving Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About