Visual-manual in-car tasks decomposed

Kujala, Tuomo; Silvennoinen, Johanna; Lasch, Annegret

doi:10.1145/2516540.2516562

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With the Nuviz HUD the participant could scroll the list song-by-song by a single press of a physical button in the steering wheel controller. With the smartphone, the participant had to point the touchscreen and scroll the music player menu by means of kinetic scrolling, which has been found to be one of the most visually distracting activities with touchscreen in-vehicle devices [19,20]. In addition, the participant did not have to look down, far away from the driving environment, to see the selected song in the HUD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

Self Cite

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

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A comparative analysis of voluntary in-vehicle distractions of drivers' visual attention

Ojsteršek

Babić

Areh

et al. 2023

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviou

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critical Analysis on the NHTSA Acceptance Criteria for In-Vehicle Electronic Devices

Kujala

Lasch²,

Mäkelä

2014

Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested a commercial in-car navigation system prototype against the NHTSA criteria for acceptance testing of in-vehicle electronic devices, in order to see what types of in-car tasks fail the acceptance test and why. In addition, we studied the visual demands of the driving scenario recommended by NHTSA for task acceptance testing. In the light of the results, NHTSA guidelines and acceptance criteria need to be further developed. In particular visual demands of the driving scenario and for different simulators need to be standardized in order to enable fair testing and comparable test results. We suggest the visual occlusion method for finding a driving scenario that corresponds better with real-life driving in visual demands as well as for standardizing the visual demands of the scenario when applied to different driving simulators. Furthermore, the acceptance criteria need to be reevaluated. Especially the TEORT limit's applicability to a variety of test tasks needs to be validated and exceptions for certain task types considered. The utility of the average glance duration criterion should be reconsidered.

show abstract

Visual-manual in-car tasks decomposed

Cited by 9 publications

References 10 publications

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

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

A comparative analysis of voluntary in-vehicle distractions of drivers' visual attention

Critical Analysis on the NHTSA Acceptance Criteria for In-Vehicle Electronic Devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About