Search Results

The goal of this interview analysis was to explore and document the perceptions of two unique lane centering systems (S90’s Pilot Assist and CT6’s Super Cruise). Both systems offer a similar type of functionality (adaptive cruise control and lane centering), but have significantly different design philosophies and HMI (Human-Machine Interface) implementations. Twenty-four drivers drove one of the two vehicle models for a month as part of a field operational test (FOT) study. Upon vehicle return, drivers took part in a 60-minute semi-structured interview covering their perceptions of the vehicle’s various advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS). Transcripts of the interviews were coded by two researchers, who tagged each statement with relevant system and perception code labels. For analysis, the perception codes were grouped into larger thematic bins of safety, comfort, driver attention, and system performance.

The popularity of new Human-Machine-Interfaces (HMIs) comes with growing concerns for driver distraction. In part, this concern stems from a rising challenge to design systems that can make functions accessible to drivers while maintaining drivers’ ability to cope with the complex driving task. Therefore, engineers need assessment methods which can evaluate how well a user interface achieves the dual-goal of making secondary tasks accessible, while allowing safe driving. Most prior methods have emphasized measuring off-road glances during HMI use. An alternative to this is to consider both on-road and off-road glances, as done in Kircher and Ahlstrom’s AttenD algorithm [1]. In this study, we compared two types of prevalent visual-manual user interfaces based on AttenD. The two HMIs of interest were a touchscreen-based interface (already in production) and a remote-rotary-controller-based interface (a high-fidelity prototype).

Driving behaviors change over the lifespan, and some of these changes influence how a driver allocates visual attention. The present study examined the allocation of glances during single-task (just driving) and dual-task highway driving (concurrently tuning the radio using either visual-manual or auditory-vocal controls). Results indicate that older drivers maintained significantly longer single glance durations across tasks compared to younger drivers. Compared to just driving, visual-manual radio tuning was associated with longer single glance durations for both age groups. Off-road glances were subcategorized as glances to the instrument cluster and mirrors (“situationally-relevant”), “center stack”, and “other”. During baseline driving, older drivers spent more time glancing to situationally-relevant targets. During both radio tuning task periods, in both age groups, the majority of glances were made to the center stack (the radio display).

Pedal misapplications may be rare, but the outcomes can be tragic. A naturalistic driving study with 30 drivers was conducted to gain a better understanding of foot pedal behaviors. Foot movements were observed from the moment subjects entered and positioned themselves in their vehicle, and continued through starting the ignition, shifting into gear, accelerating to driving speed, and finally, resting their foot after parking the vehicle. A coding methodology was developed to categorize the various foot movements and behaviors. Over 3,300 startup and parking sequences were coded. This paper describes the unique challenges involved in classifying foot movements and behaviors when drivers’ intentions are not known. For example, hesitant or interrupted foot movements often occurred when a driver was transitioning from a gas pedal press to a brake pedal press.

Objective tools that can assess the demands associated with in-vehicle human machine interfaces (HMIs) could assist automotive engineers designing safer interaction. This paper presents empirical evidence supporting one objective assessment approach, which compares the demand associated with in-vehicle tasks to the demand associated with “benchmarking” or “comparison tasks”. In the presented study, there were two types of benchmarking tasks-a modified surrogate reference task (SuRT) and a delayed digit recall task (n-back task) - representing different levels of visual demand and cognitive demand respectively. Twenty-four participants performed these two types of benchmarking tasks as well as two radio tasks while driving a vehicle on a closed-loop test track. Response measures included physiological (heart rate), glance metrics, driving performance (steering entropy) and subjective workload ratings.

An analysis of the first 35 back-over crashes reported by NHTSA's Special Crash Investigations unit was undertaken with two objectives: (1) to test a hypothesized classification of backing crashes into types, and (2) to characterize scenario-specific conditions that may drive countermeasure development requirements and/or objective test development requirements. Backing crash cases were sorted by type, and then analyzed in terms of key features. Subsequent modeling of these SCI cases was done using an adaptation of the Driving Reliability and Error Analysis Methodology (DREAM) and Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Methodology (CREAM) (similar to previous applications, for instance, by Ljung and Sandin to lane departure crashes [10]), which is felt to provide a useful tool for crash avoidance technology development.

This study examined whether the effect of subsidiary tasks on driving performance can be predicted from stationary (static) testing. Alternative methods for assessing the performance of drivers during their use of in-vehicle information systems were examined. These methods included static testing in stationary vehicles, as well as dynamic, on-road testing. The measures that were obtained from static tests were evaluated in terms of how well they could predict measures obtained from driving performance during on-road testing (which included concurrent use of secondary information systems). The results indicated that measures obtained in static test settings were highly correlated with corresponding measures obtained from on-road performance testing.