On-the-move destination entry for vehicle navigation systems: Unsafe by any means?

This paper outlines the arguments (and supporting evidence) both for and against allowing drivers to enter a destination with a vehicle navigation system while active in the primary driving task (‘on-the-move’). The benefits and limitations of various safety-related interventions are discussed, including the use of warnings/instructions, safeguards and design improvements. Whilst it is clear that the visual, manual and cognitive demands associated with entering destinations using current vehicle navigation systems can be high, it is concluded that inhibiting the use of this functionality whilst on-the-move, particularly through the use of reactionary legislation, will not be the ideal solution. Rather, human factors research must investigate the potential for novel user-interfaces, develop reliable and valid methods for assessing the safety impact of different designs, and consider the wider issues of system use and behavioural adaptation.

[1]  L Parmer Tijerina.  DRIVER WORKLOAD ASSESSMENT OF ROUTE GUIDANCE SYSTEM DESTINATION ENTRY WHILE DRIVING: A TEST TRACK STUDY , 1998 .

[2]  Christopher Klachan,et al.  Occlusion Paradigm as a Tool to Assess Visual Distraction from In-Vehicle Telematics , 2002 .

[3]  R. Leiser.  Driver-vehicle interface: dialogue design for voice input , 1993 .

[4]  Gary E. Burnett.  'Turn right at the King's Head' : drivers' requirements for route guidance information , 1998 .

[5]  G E Burnett.  USABLE VEHICLE NAVIGATION SYSTEMS : ARE WE THERE YET? , 2000 .

[6]  Paul Green,et al.  THE 15-SECOND RULE FOR DRIVER INFORMATION SYSTEMS , 1999 .

[7]  P G Jackson,et al.  In search of better route guidance instructions. , 1998, Ergonomics.

[8]  Eric Bergman,et al.  Information appliances and beyond : interaction design for consumer products , 2000 .

[9]  Thomas Jaworski,et al.  Frequency of Use of Automotive Stereo Controls , 1998 .

[10]  Gary Burnett,et al.  ‘Turn right at the Traffic Lights’: The Requirement for Landmarks in Vehicle Navigation Systems , 2000, Journal of Navigation.

[11]  Paul Milgram,et al.  A spectacle-mounted liquid-crystal tachistoscope , 1987 .

[12]  Paul Green,et al.  Estimating Compliance with the 15-Second Rule for Driver-Interface Usability and Safety , 1999 .

[13]  A Stevens,et al.  In-vehicle distraction and fatal accidents in England and Wales. , 2001, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[14]  David Causeur,et al.  HMI ASPECTS OF THE USABILITY OF INTERNET SERVICES WITH AN IN-CAR TERMINAL ON A DRIVING SIMULATOR , 2001 .

[15]  Scott Weiss.  Handheld usability , 2002, DIS '02.

[16]  Raghavan Srinivasan.  Overview of Some Human Factors Design Issues for In-Vehicle Navigation and Route Guidance Systems , 1999 .

[17]  Steve Summerskill,et al.  Feeling your way home: the use of haptic interfaces within cars to make safety pleasurable , 2003 .

[18]  George A. Peters,et al.  Automotive Vehicle Safety , 2002 .

[19]  P Moriarty,et al.  Safety impacts of vehicular information technology , 2003 .

[20]  T Luke,et al.  OCCLUSION AS A TECHNIQUE FOR MEASURING IN-VEHICLE INFORMATION SYSTEM (IVIS) VISUAL DISTRACTION: A RESEARCH LITERATURE REVIEW , 2004 .

[21]  Omer Tsimhoni,et al.  DESTINATION ENTRY WHILE DRIVING: SPEECH RECOGNITION VERSUS A TOUCH- SCREEN KEYBOARD , 2002 .

[22]  van Fl Floris Nes,et al.  Hidden functionality: how an advanced car radio is really used , 1990 .

[23]  David H. Weir,et al.  An Experimental Study of Destination Entry with an Example Automobile Navigation System , 2001 .

[24]  Gary E. Burnett,et al.  Ubiquitous computing within cars: designing controls for non-visual use , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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