Enhanced auditory menu cues improve dual task performance and are preferred with in-vehicle technologies

Auditory display research for driving has mainly focused on collision warning signals, and recent studies on auditory in-vehicle information presentation have examined only a limited range of tasks (e.g., cell phone operation tasks or verbal tasks such as reading digit strings). The present study used a dual task paradigm to evaluate a plausible scenario in which users navigated a song list. We applied enhanced auditory menu navigation cues, including spearcons (i.e., compressed speech) and a spindex (i.e., a speech index that used brief audio cues to communicate the user's position in a long menu list). Twenty-four undergraduates navigated through an alphabetized song list of 150 song titles---rendered as an auditory menu---while they concurrently played a simple, perceptual-motor, ball-catching game. The menu was presented with text-to-speech (TTS) alone, TTS plus one of three types of enhanced auditory cues, or no sound at all. Both performance of the primary task (success rate of the game) and the secondary task (menu search time) were better with the auditory menus than with no sound. Subjective workload scores (NASA TLX) and user preferences favored the enhanced auditory cue types. Results are discussed in terms of multiple resources theory and practical IVT design applications.

[1]  Stephen Brewster,et al.  Using non-speech sound to overcome information overload , 1997 .

[2]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  LEARNING RATES FOR AUDITORY MENUS ENHANCED WITH SPEARCONS VERSUS EARCONS , 2007 .

[3]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Driver Performance Results from the Travtek IVHS Camera Car Evaluation Study , 1994 .

[4]  G. Matthews,et al.  Attentional Overload, stress, and simulate Driving Performance , 1996 .

[5]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Navigation Efficiency of Two Dimensional Auditory Menus Using Spearcon Enhancements , 2008 .

[6]  Albert Kircher,et al.  Using mobile telephones: cognitive workload and attention resource allocation. , 2004, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[7]  A. Bonnel,et al.  Divided attention between simultaneous auditory and visual signals , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  D. Strayer,et al.  Cell-Phone–Induced Driver Distraction , 2007 .

[9]  Gregory Kramer,et al.  Auditory Display: Sonification, Audification, And Auditory Interfaces , 1994 .

[10]  William J Horrey,et al.  Modeling drivers' visual attention allocation while interacting with in-vehicle technologies. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[11]  Meera Blattner,et al.  Earcons and Icons: Their Structure and Common Design Principles , 1989, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[12]  Kenneth W. Gish,et al.  Sensory and Cognitive Factors Affecting Automotive Head-Up Display Effectiveness , 1999 .

[13]  Judy Edworthy.  Does sound help us to work better with machines? A commentary on Rauterberg's paper ‘About the importance of auditory alarms during the operation of a plant simulator’ , 1998 .

[14]  Lynn A. Streeter,et al.  How to Tell People Where to Go: Comparing Navigational Aids , 1985, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[15]  Gregory Kramer,et al.  An introduction to auditory display , 1994 .

[16]  Tilman Dingler,et al.  Learnabiltiy of Sound Cues for Environmental Features: Auditory Icons, Earcons, Spearcons, and Speech , 2008 .

[17]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  Spearcon Performance and Preference for Auditory Menus on a Mobile Phone , 2009, HCI.

[18]  Sandra G. Hart,et al.  Nasa-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 Years Later , 2006 .

[19]  D Gopher,et al.  Different difficulty manipulations interact differently with task emphasis: evidence for multiple resources. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  Alarms in human supervisory control: a human factors perspective , 1992 .

[21]  Gary Burnett,et al.  An assessment of moving map and symbol-based route guidance systems , 1997 .

[22]  P C Burns,et al.  E-DISTRACTION: THE CHALLENGES FOR SAFE AND USABLE INTERNET SERVICES IN VEHICLES , 2001 .

[23]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  SPEARCONS: SPEECH-BASED EARCONS IMPROVE NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE IN AUDITORY MENUS , 2006 .

[24]  C D Wickens,et al.  Codes and Modalities in Multiple Resources: A Success and a Qualification , 1988, Human factors.

[25]  C. Spence,et al.  Assessing the effectiveness of various auditory cues in capturing a driver's visual attention. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[26]  Myounghoon Jeon,et al.  “Spindex”: Accelerated Initial Speech Sounds Improve Navigation Performance in Auditory Menus , 2009 .

[27]  Andrew Parkes,et al.  An evaluation of medium range "advance information" in route-guidance displays for use in vehicles , 1993, Proceedings of VNIS '93 - Vehicle Navigation and Information Systems Conference.

[28]  Brian F. Gore,et al.  Display Alternatives for In-Vehicle Warning and Sign Information: Message Style, Location, and Modality , 1999 .

[29]  Y C Liu,et al.  Comparative study of the effects of auditory, visual and multimodality displays on drivers' performance in advanced traveller information systems , 2001, Ergonomics.

[30]  S Ashley,et al.  Driving the info highway. , 2001, Scientific American.

[31]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Human Factors Field Evaluation of Automotive Headway Maintenance/Collision Warning Devices , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[32]  Ephraim P. Glinert,et al.  An experiment into the use of auditory cues to reduce visual workload , 1989, CHI '89.

[33]  T Falkmer,et al.  Effect of drivers' age and push button locations on visual time off road, steering wheel deviation and safety perception , 2006, Ergonomics.

[34]  Bruce N. Walker,et al.  EFFICIENCY OF SPEARCON-ENHANCED NAVIGATION OF ONE DIMENSIONAL ELECTRONIC MENUS , 2008 .

[35]  Terry C Lansdown,et al.  Distraction from multiple in-vehicle secondary tasks: vehicle performance and mental workload implications , 2004, Ergonomics.

[36]  Omer Tsimhoni,et al.  Visual Demand of Driving and the Execution of Display-Intensive in-Vehicle Tasks , 2001 .

[37]  Palle Klante.  Auditory Interaction Objects for Mobile Applications , 2004 .

[38]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Multiple resources and performance prediction , 2002 .

[39]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The Effects of Sensory Modality and Information Priority on In-Vehicle Signing and Information Systems , 1994 .

[40]  Robert McCall,et al.  Analysis of Visual Demands of In-Vehicle Text Displays Reveals an Age-Related Increase in Time Needed to Reallocate Attention to the Road , 2008 .

[41]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Driving and Side Task Performance: The Effects of Display Clutter, Separation, and Modality , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[42]  Thomas A. Ranney,et al.  Effects of Voice Technology on Test Track Driving Performance: Implications for Driver Distraction , 2005, Hum. Factors.

[43]  J. Walker,et al.  In-vehicle navigation devices: Effects on the safety of driver performance , 1990, Vehicle Navigation and Information Systems Conference, 1991.