Individual glance strategies and their effect on the NHTSA visual manual distraction test

Broström, Robert; Bengtsson, Peter; Aust, Mikael Ljung

doi:10.1016/j.trf.2015.10.017

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The individual in-car glance length preference was found across the different in-car tasks as in previous studies [1,2,14,18,21]. However, correlation between the occlusion distances and the in-car glance distances was not found.…”

Section: Experiments 1 -Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Visual Distraction Effects of In-Car Text Entry Methods

Kujala

Grahn

2017

Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three text entry methods were compared in a driving simulator study with 17 participants. Ninety-seven drivers' occlusion distance (OD) data mapped on the test routes was used as a baseline to evaluate the methods' visual distraction potential. Only the voice recognition-based text entry tasks passed the set verification criteria. Handwriting tasks were experienced as the most demanding and the voice recognition tasks as the least demanding. An individual in-car glance length preference was found, but against expectations, drivers' ODs did not correlate with incar glance lengths or visual short-term memory capacity. The handwriting method was further studied with 24 participants with instructions and practice on writing eyeson-road. The practice did not affect the test results. The findings suggest that handwriting could be visually less demanding than touch screen typing but the reliability of character recognition should be improved or the driver well-experienced with the method to minimize its distraction potential.

show abstract

Section: Experiments 1 -Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Visual Distraction Effects of In-Car Text Entry Methods

Kujala

Grahn

2017

Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such a reference model is currently lacking. In fact, there are many unanswered questions about the reference values currently available [16], [18], [21]: Which glance metrics are the most sensitive indicators of driver inattention? Are the results from experiments based on commanded tasks ecologically valid?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Bayesian Reference Model for Visual Time-Sharing Behaviour in Manual and Automated Naturalistic Driving

Morando

Victor

Dozza

2020

IEEE Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The participant sample validation by using their occlusion distances driven during an occlusion trial ensure that the driver sample includes both, "short-glancers" and "long-glancers". This validation is an important part of the testing method since previous studies have indicated that drivers have individual off-road glance duration tendencies [2,16] and these individual differences in glance durations could affect the results of the distraction testing [3,23].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Distraction Effects between In-Vehicle Tasks with a Smartphone and a Motorcycle Helmet-Mounted Head-Up Display

Grahn

Kujala

2018

Proceedings of the 22nd International Academic Mindtrek Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Besides motorists, also motorcyclists need safer user interfaces to interact with useful applications on the road. In this paper, distraction effects of in-vehicle tasks conducted with a head-up display (HUD) for motorcyclists were compared to smartphone tasks with 24 participants in a driving simulator. Compared to the smartphone tasks, the head-up display tasks decreased the percentage of inappropriately long glances by 45 percent. The head-up display tasks were also experienced as less demanding than the smartphone tasks. Additionally, the use of head-up display for navigation did not lead to gaze concentration effects compared to baseline driving. The head-up display is concluded to be a safer option for the tested tasks for motorcyclists than a smartphone. Based on earlier research, we assume that the use of peripheral vision allowed drivers to better maintain situational awareness during the head-up display tasks compared to the head-down smartphone tasks. In addition, the easy-to-learn haptic design of the head-up display handlebar controller could be used without vision. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing~User studies • Human-centered computing~Laboratory experiments • Human-centered computing~Touch screens • Human-centered computing~Haptic devices • Human-centered computing~Empirical studies in HCI

show abstract

Individual glance strategies and their effect on the NHTSA visual manual distraction test

Cited by 18 publications

References 6 publications

Visual Distraction Effects of In-Car Text Entry Methods

Visual Distraction Effects of In-Car Text Entry Methods

A Bayesian Reference Model for Visual Time-Sharing Behaviour in Manual and Automated Naturalistic Driving

Visual Distraction Effects between In-Vehicle Tasks with a Smartphone and a Motorcycle Helmet-Mounted Head-Up Display

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About