Driver performance, rewards and motivation: A simulator study

It has been suggested that effort invested in a task may be moderated by the perception of the nature of reward offered, e.g., whether social or financial in nature. If levels of payment for empirical work meaningfully influence the effort invested in tasks by participants, the implications may be serious and wide-ranging for the reliability and validity of published data. The study reported in this paper, examines this thesis in a driving context. Thirty-six participants were allocated to either a No payment, Low payment or Medium payment condition in a driving simulator. They undertook both easy and difficult driving scenarios in which performance was measured. Subjective workload and performance results indicated that task difficulty was successfully manipulated with the study. However, in contrast to the previous research in non-driving contexts, participants not receiving rewards were found to perform more poorly and experience increased time pressure.

[1]  A. Fiske.  The four elementary forms of sociality: framework for a unified theory of social relations. , 1992, Psychological review.

[2]  M Vousden.  The highway code. , 1998, Nursing times.

[3]  J Törnros,et al.  Driving behavior in a real and a simulated road tunnel--a validation study. , 1998, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  Johan Engström,et al.  Sensitivity of eye-movement measures to in-vehicle task difficulty , 2005 .

[5]  D. Ariely,et al.  Effort for Payment , 2004, Psychological science.

[6]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Collision Avoidance Behavior of Unalerted Drivers Using a Front-to-Rear-End Collision Warning Display on the Iowa Driving Simulator , 1997 .

[7]  C. H. Baker,et al.  A STUDY TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTS OF PLACEBOS UPON PERFORMANCE IN A VIGILANCE TASK , 1964 .

[8]  Shrawan Kumar.  Advances in industrial ergonomics and safety IV , 2014 .

[9]  Walters Le.  The use of medical records for research at Georgetown University: final report of the ad hoc committee. , 1981 .

[10]  L. Newton.  Inducement, due and otherwise. , 1982, IRB.

[11]  B. Reimer,et al.  Using self-reported data to assess the validity of driving simulation data , 2006, Behavior research methods.

[12]  Ricky W. Griffin,et al.  Objective and social sources of information in task redesign: A field experiment. , 1983 .

[13]  Thomas J Triggs,et al.  Driving simulator validation for speed research. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[14]  S J Westerman,et al.  Mobile (cellular) phone use and driving: a critical review of research methodology , 2001, Ergonomics.

[15]  Susan G. Hill,et al.  Traditional and raw task load index (TLX) correlations: Are paired comparisons necessary? In A , 1989 .

[16]  Valdimar Briem,et al.  The effect of concurrent task difficulty on working memory during simulated driving , 1999 .

[17]  Pharmaceutical research involving the homeless. , 2002, The Journal of medicine and philosophy.

[18]  R. Grant,et al.  Ethics in human subjects research: do incentives matter? , 2004, The Journal of medicine and philosophy.

[19]  Trevor Smith.  Ethics in Medical Research: A Handbook of Good Practice , 1999 .

[20]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Refining the measurement of mood: The UWIST Mood Adjective Checklist , 1990 .

[21]  R. Macklin,et al.  'Due' and 'Undue' Inducements: On Pasing Money to Research Subjects , 1981 .

[22]  Lisbeth Harms,et al.  Driving performance on a real road and in a driving simulator: Results of a validation study , 1996 .

[23]  Stephen Lofthouse.  A Fair Day's Wages for a Fair Day's Work , 1995 .

[24]  J. Siegrist.  Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. , 1996, Journal of occupational health psychology.

[25]  W H Brouwer,et al.  Divided Attention in Experienced Young and Older Drivers: Lane Tracking and Visual Analysis in a Dynamic Driving Simulator , 1991, Human factors.

[26]  Gill Haddow,et al.  Promoting research participation: why not advertise altruism? , 2008, Social science & medicine.

[27]  Terry C Lansdown,et al.  Individual differences during driver secondary task performance: verbal protocol and visual allocation findings. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[28]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  New time-series statistic for detecting rhythmic co-occurrence in the frequency domain: the weighted coherence and its application to psychophysiological research. , 1980 .

[29]  Errol R. Hoffmann,et al.  Steering Reversals as a Measure of Driver Performance and Steering Task Difficulty , 1975 .

[30]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment , 2006 .

[31]  Raymond C. Peck,et al.  Problem driver remediation: a meta-analysis of the driver improvement literature. , 2004 .

[32]  Dennis H. Holding.  Counting backward during chess move choice , 1989 .

[33]  Bryan Reimer,et al.  The validity of driving simulation for assessing differences between in-vehicle informational interfaces: A comparison with field testing , 2010, Ergonomics.

[34]  Mark W. Scerbo,et al.  Effects of Instruction Type and Boredom Proneness in Vigilance: Implications for Boredom and Workload , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[35]  Johan Engström,et al.  Effects of Working Memory Load and Repeated Scenario Exposure on Emergency Braking Performance , 2010, Hum. Factors.

[36]  John L. M. Tse,et al.  Facets of job effort in bus driver health: deconstructing "effort" in the effort-reward imbalance model. , 2007, Journal of occupational health psychology.