Learning effects in the lane change task (LCT)--realistic secondary tasks and transfer of learning.

Driver distraction is a factor that is heavily involved in traffic crashes. With in-vehicle devices like navigation systems or mobile phones on the rise, the assessment of their potential to distract the driver has become a pressing issue. Several easy-to-use methods have been developed in recent years to allow for such an assessment in the early stages of product development. One of these methods is the lane change task (LCT), a simple driving simulation in which the driver has to change lanes as indicated by different signs along the road. Although the LCT is an ISO sanctioned procedure, there are still open questions. One issue are learning effects which have been found in previous studies and which have the potential to compromise the comparability of test results. In this paper, we present results on two experiments that further explored the effect of previous experience on LCT and secondary task performance. The results confirm that learning effects occur when combining the LCT with a realistic secondary task. Also, we found evidence for the transfer of learning from one secondary task to another to some degree, provided that the two tasks are sufficiently similar.

[1]  John D. Lee,et al.  Driver Distraction : Theory, Effects, and Mitigation , 2008 .

[2]  Tony Jianqiang Ye,et al.  Driver electronic device use in 2010. , 2013, Annals of emergency medicine.

[3]  Josef F. Krems,et al.  Learning effects in the lane change task (LCT)—Evidence from two experimental studies , 2011 .

[4]  Michael G. Lenné,et al.  Sensitivity of the lane change test as a measure of in-vehicle system demand. , 2011, Applied ergonomics.

[5]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The identification and transfer of timesharing skills , 1980 .

[6]  T. Carr,et al.  Automaticity in skill acquisition: Mechanisms for reducing interference in concurrent performance. , 1989 .

[7]  T. Rothengatter,et al.  Traffic and Transport Psychology: Theory and Application , 1997 .

[8]  Louis Tijerina,et al.  MODELLING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DRIVER IN-VEHICLE VISUAL DEMANS AND ACCIDENT OCCURRENCE , 1998 .

[9]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  Learning the Lane Change Task: comparing different training regimes in semi-paced and continuous secondary tasks. , 2012, Applied ergonomics.

[10]  Mark Vollrath,et al.  Alcohol-related impairment in the Lane Change Task. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[11]  A. Hartley,et al.  Age differences in dual-task interference are localized to response-generation processes. , 2001, Psychology and aging.

[12]  Daniel I. Manes,et al.  Evaluation of a driver interface: effects of control type (knob versus buttons) and menu structure (depth versus breadth) , 1997 .

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

[14]  Paul Milgram,et al.  The Development of a Time-Related Measure to Describe Driving Strategy , 1984 .

[15]  Arthur F Kramer,et al.  Training effects on dual-task performance: are there age-related differences in plasticity of attentional control? , 2005, Psychology and aging.

[16]  A Stevens,et al.  DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SAFETY OF IN-VEHICLE INFORMATION SYSTEMS , 2002 .

[17]  Georg Jahn,et al.  Skill Acquisition While Operating In-Vehicle Information Systems: Interface Design Determines the Level of Safety-Relevant Distractions , 2009, Hum. Factors.

[18]  Peter Burns,et al.  The importance of task duration and related measures in assessing the distraction potential of in-vehicle tasks , 2010, AutomotiveUI.

[19]  J. Cerella,et al.  Aging and dual-task performance: a meta-analysis. , 2003, Psychology and aging.

[20]  Scott W. Brown.  Automaticity versus timesharing in timing and tracking dual-task performance , 1998 .

[21]  J. E. Korteling.  Effects of Skill Integration and Perceptual Competition on Age-Related Differences in Dual-Task Performance , 1991, Human factors.

[22]  Eric Rodgman,et al.  The role of driver distraction in traffic crashes , 2001 .

[23]  J Lockhart,et al.  The effects of practice with MP3 players on driving performance. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[24]  E. Poulton,et al.  MEASURING THE SPARE ‘MENTAL CAPACITY ’OF CAR DRIVERS BY A SUBSIDIARY TASK , 1961 .

[25]  Katja Kircher,et al.  Driver distraction : a review of the literature , 2007 .

[26]  G Pachiaudi,et al.  TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORT PSYCHOLOGY : THEORY AND APPLICATION. CHAPTER 18. SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION OF THE MENTAL WORKLOAD IN THE DRIVING CONTEXT , 1997 .

[27]  H. R. Jex,et al.  A ``Critical'' Tracking Task for Manual Control Research , 1966 .

[28]  T. Salthouse,et al.  Division of attention: Age differences on a visually presented memory task , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[29]  Corinne Brusque,et al.  Consistency and sensitivity of lane change test according to driving simulator characteristics , 2008 .

[30]  John F. Larish,et al.  Training for attentional control in dual task settings: A comparison of young and old adults , 1995 .

[31]  Stefan Mattes,et al.  Surrogate Distraction Measurement Techniques: The Lane Change Test , 2009 .

[32]  I. Brown,et al.  Vision in Vehicles III , 1991 .

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