Advanced driver assistance systems: Using multimodal redundant warnings to enhance road safety.

This study investigated whether multimodal redundant warnings presented by advanced assistance systems reduce brake response times. Warnings presented by assistance systems are designed to assist drivers by informing them that evasive driving maneuvers are needed in order to avoid a potential accident. If these warnings are poorly designed, they may distract drivers, slow their responses, and reduce road safety. In two experiments, participants drove a simulated vehicle equipped with a forward collision avoidance system. Auditory, vibrotactile, and multimodal warnings were presented when the time to collision was shorter than five seconds. The effects of these warnings were investigated with participants performing a concurrent cell phone conversation (Exp. 1) or driving in high-density traffic (Exp. 2). Braking times and subjective workload were measured. Multimodal redundant warnings elicited faster braking reaction times. These warnings were found to be effective even when talking on a cell phone (Exp. 1) or driving in dense traffic (Exp. 2). Multimodal warnings produced higher ratings of urgency, but ratings of frustration did not increase compared to other warnings. Findings obtained in these two experiments are important given that faster braking responses may reduce the potential for a collision.

[1]  Fanxing Meng,et al.  Dynamic Vibrotactile Signals for Forward Collision Avoidance Warning Systems , 2015, Hum. Factors.

[2]  P. G. Gipps,et al.  A behavioural car-following model for computer simulation , 1981 .

[3]  John D Lee,et al.  Auditory alerts for in-vehicle information systems: The effects of temporal conflict and sound parameters on driver attitudes and performance , 2004, Ergonomics.

[4]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[5]  Daniela Kuhnt,et al.  The Wolf Is Crying in the Operating Room: Patient Monitor and Anesthesia Workstation Alarming Patterns During Cardiac Surgery , 2011, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[6]  S. Shapiro,et al.  A Comparative Study of Various Tests for Normality , 1968 .

[7]  Hong Z. Tan,et al.  Driver Reaction Time to Tactile and Auditory Rear-End Collision Warnings While Talking on a Cell Phone , 2009, Hum. Factors.

[8]  Claudio Mulatti,et al.  Speed of processing explains the picture–word asymmetry in conditional naming , 2010, Psychological research.

[9]  Cristy Ho,et al.  Tactile and Multisensory Spatial Warning Signals for Drivers , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[10]  D. Strayer,et al.  Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[11]  Dot Hs,et al.  Analyses of Rear-End Crashes and Near-Crashes in the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study to Support Rear-Signaling Countermeasure Development , 2007 .

[12]  Mark H. Draper,et al.  Effects of Image Scale and System Time Delay on Simulator Sickness within Head-Coupled Virtual Environments , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[13]  C Spence,et al.  Multisensory interface design for drivers: past, present and future , 2008, Ergonomics.

[14]  Cristiana Cavina-Pratesi,et al.  Redundant target effect and intersensory facilitation from visual-tactile interactions in simple reaction time , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  Johan Fagerlönn.  DISTRACTING EFFECTS OF AUDITORY WARNINGS ON EXPERIENCED DRIVERS , 2010, ICAD 2010.

[16]  Daniel V. McGehee,et al.  Human Performance Models and Rear-End Collision Avoidance Algorithms , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[17]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Preface to the Special Section on Human Factors and Automation in Vehicles , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[18]  Lee Skrypchuk,et al.  Use Your Brain (and Light) for Innovative Human-Machine Interfaces , 2017 .

[19]  John D. Lee,et al.  Alerts for In-Vehicle Information Systems: Annoyance, Urgency, and Appropriateness , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[20]  Andras Varhelyi,et al.  Auditory and Haptic Systems for in-Car Speed Management - A Comparative Real Life Study , 2008 .

[21]  Carryl L. Baldwin,et al.  Effect of Tactile Location, Pulse Duration, and Interpulse Interval on Perceived Urgency , 2014 .

[22]  Giovanni Galfano,et al.  Comparing Different Methods for Multiple Testing in Reaction Time Data , 2008 .

[23]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Measuring Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile , 2013 .

[25]  Frank Drews,et al.  Profiles in Driver Distraction: Effects of Cell Phone Conversations on Younger and Older Drivers , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[26]  Marcello Montanino,et al.  Thirty Years of Gipps’ Car-Following Model , 2012 .

[27]  Jeremy A. Salinger,et al.  Status of NHTSA's Rear-End Crash Prevention Research Program , 2005 .

[28]  Claudio Mulatti,et al.  Beeping ADAS: Reflexive effect on drivers’ behavior , 2014 .

[29]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Structure of Attentional Resources , 1980 .

[30]  Denis McKeown,et al.  Mapping Candidate Within-Vehicle Auditory Displays to Their Referents , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[31]  H. Pashler.  Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  Cristy Ho,et al.  To What Extent do the Findings of Laboratory-Based Spatial Attention Research Apply to the Real-World Setting of Driving? , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[33]  J. Edworthy,et al.  Alarms and human behaviour: implications for medical alarms. , 2006, British journal of anaesthesia.

[34]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Assessing Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile , 2015, Hum. Factors.

[35]  Robert Gray,et al.  A Comparison of Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Warnings for Rear-End Collision Prevention in Simulated Driving , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[36]  Cristy Ho,et al.  Multisensory In-Car Warning Signals for Collision Avoidance , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[37]  A. Hamish Jamson,et al.  Potential benefits of an adaptive forward collision warning system , 2008 .

[38]  Riccardo Rossi,et al.  Evaluating the Impact of Processing Spoken Words on Driving , 2012 .

[39]  D. Strayer,et al.  Provided for Non-commercial Research and Educational Use Only. Not for Reproduction, Distribution or Commercial Use. Cognitive Distraction While Multitasking in the Automobile , 2022 .

[40]  A. Diederich,et al.  Bimodal and trimodal multisensory enhancement: Effects of stimulus onset and intensity on reaction time , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  Dick de Waard,et al.  An Adaptive Driver Support System , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[42]  David L Strayer,et al.  Towards an understanding of driver inattention: taxonomy and theory. , 2014, Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference.

[43]  David N. Lee,et al.  A Theory of Visual Control of Braking Based on Information about Time-to-Collision , 1976, Perception.

[44]  Riccardo Rossi,et al.  Warning sound to affect perceived speed in approaching roundabouts: Experiments with a driving simulator , 2013 .

[45]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Examining the Impact of Cell Phone Conversations on Driving Using Meta-Analytic Techniques , 2006, Hum. Factors.