An on-road assessment of cognitive distraction: impacts on drivers' visual behavior and braking performance.

In this on-road experiment, drivers performed demanding cognitive tasks while driving in city traffic. All task interactions were carried out in hands-free mode so that the 21 drivers were not required to take their visual attention away from the road or to manually interact with a device inside the vehicle. Visual behavior and vehicle control were assessed while they drove an 8 km city route under three conditions: no additional task, easy cognitive task and difficult cognitive task. Changes in visual behavior were most apparent when performance between the No Task and Difficult Task conditions were compared. When looking outside of the vehicle, drivers spent more time looking centrally ahead and spent less time looking to the areas in the periphery. Drivers also reduced their visual monitoring of the instruments and mirrors, with some drivers abandoning these tasks entirely. When approaching and driving through intersections, drivers made fewer inspection glances to traffic lights compared to the No Task condition and their scanning of intersection areas to the right was also reduced. Vehicle control was also affected; during the most difficult cognitive tasks there were more occurrences of hard braking. Although hands-free designs for telematics devices are intended to reduce or eliminate the distraction arising from manual operation of these units, the potential for cognitive distraction associated with their use must also be considered and appropriately assessed. These changes are captured in measures of drivers' visual behavior.

[1]  Karel Brookhuis,et al.  Human Factors in Design Safety and Management , 2005 .

[2]  Timothy L. Brown,et al.  Speech-Based Interaction with In-Vehicle Computers: The Effect of Speech-Based E-Mail on Drivers' Attention to the Roadway , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[3]  A J McKnight,et al.  The effect of cellular phone use upon driver attention. , 1993, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  Michael J. Goodman,et al.  Micro DAS: In-Vehicle Portable Data Acquisition System , 1999 .

[5]  Paul Green.  VISUAL AND TASK DEMANDS OF DRIVER INFORMATION SYSTEMS , 1999 .

[6]  Frank Drews,et al.  A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[7]  D. Geary,et al.  Cognitive addition: strategy choice and speed-of-processing differences in young and elderly adults. , 1991, Psychology and aging.

[8]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  The distraction effects of phone use during a crucial driving maneuver. , 2003 .

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

[10]  K Rumar,et al.  The basic driver error: late detection. , 1990, Ergonomics.

[11]  David Shinar,et al.  Effects of practice, age, and task demands, on interference from a phone task while driving. , 2005, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[12]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Driven to Distraction: Dual-Task Studies of Simulated Driving and Conversing on a Cellular Telephone , 2001, Psychological science.

[13]  M. A. Recarte,et al.  Mental workload while driving: effects on visual search, discrimination, and decision making. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[14]  Rod Barrett,et al.  Hands-free mobile phone speech while driving degrades coordination and control , 2004 .

[15]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  ATTENTION TO SAFETY AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SURPRISE , 2001 .

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

[17]  Toshimichi Moriwaki,et al.  Degraded voices through mobile phones and their neural effects: A possible risk of using mobile phones during driving , 2005 .

[18]  M. A. Recarte,et al.  Effects of verbal and spatial-imagery tasks on eye fixations while driving. , 2000 .

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

[20]  Matthew Witte,et al.  Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a braking response. , 2003, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[21]  Louis Tijerina,et al.  Using Cellular Telephones in Vehicles: Safe or Unsafe? , 1999 .

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

[23]  Rachel Smith,et al.  A study of driver visual behaviour while talking with passengers, and on mobile phones , 2004 .

[24]  Dot Hs.  The Impact of Driver Inattention On Near-Crash/Crash Risk: , 2006 .

[25]  P. Hancock,et al.  Human Mental Workload , 1988 .

[26]  R. G. Mortimer.  Brake force requirement study: driver-vehicle braking performance as a function of brake system design variables. Final report , 1970 .

[27]  G. Keppel,et al.  Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook , 1976 .

[28]  M. Woodward,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[29]  Matt Sundeen,et al.  Cell Phones and Highway Safety: 2006 State Legislative Update , 2003 .

[30]  Anne T McCartt,et al.  Cell Phones and Driving: Review of Research , 2006, Traffic injury prevention.