Evaluating distraction of in-vehicle information systems while driving by predicting total eyes-off-road times with keystroke level modeling

Applied Ergonomics

Volumn 58, Issue , 2017, Pages 543-554

  Purucker, Christian ^a   Naujoks, Frederik ^a   Prill, Andy ^b   Neukum, Alexandra ^a  

^a Würzburg Institute for Traffic Sciences   (Germany)

^b Hyundai Motor Europe Technical Center GmbH (HMETC GmbH)   (Germany)

Author keywords

Automotive keystroke level modeling; In vehicle infotainment systems; Secondary tasks; Total eyes off road times

Indexed keywords

AUTOMOBILE DRIVERS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; ROADS AND STREETS; TRANSPORTATION; VEHICLES;

DEVELOPMENT PROCESS; ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES; IN-VEHICLE INFORMATION SYSTEM; KEY-STROKE LEVEL MODELS; PREDICTIVE PRECISION; SECONDARY TASKS; TOTAL EYES-OFF-ROAD TIMES; VEHICLE INFOTAINMENT;

OFF ROAD VEHICLES;

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; CAR DRIVING; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; FEMALE; GAZE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IN VEHICLE INFORMATION SYSTEM; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MALE; PREDICTION; RISK REDUCTION; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAFFIC SAFETY; VELOCITY; ADOLESCENT; CAR; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISTRACTED DRIVING; EYE MOVEMENT; MAN MACHINE INTERACTION; MIDDLE AGED; THEORETICAL MODEL; TIME FACTOR; VALIDATION STUDY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUTOMOBILES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISTRACTED DRIVING; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MALE; MAN-MACHINE SYSTEMS; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; TIME FACTORS; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84965034958     PISSN: 00036870     EISSN: 18729126     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2016.04.012     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. AAM, Statement of Principles, Criteria and Verification Procedures on Driver Interactions with Advanced In-vehicle Information and Communication Systems. 2006, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM). Driver Focus-Telematics Working Group, Washington.
2. Bach, K.M., Jaeger, M.G., Skov, M.B., Thomassen, N.G., Interacting with in-vehicle systems: understanding, measuring, and evaluating attention. Proc. of the 23rd Br. HCI Group Annu. Conf. on People and Comput.: Celebr. People and Technol., 2009, British Computer Society, Cambridge, 453–462.
3. Bärgman, J., Lisovskaja, V., Victor, T., Flannagan, C., Dozza, M., How does glance behavior influence crash and injury risk? A ‘what-if’ counterfactual simulation using crashes and near-crash from SHRP2. Transp. Res. Pt. F. 35 (2015), 152–169.
4. Burnett, G.E., Designing and evaluating in-car user interfaces. Lumsden, J., (eds.) Handbook of Research on User Interface Design and Evaluation for Mobile Technology, 2008, IGI Global, London, 217–235.
5. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newell, A., The keystroke-level model for user performance time with interactive systems. Commun. ACM 23:7 (1980), 396–410.
6. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newell, A., The Psychology of Human-computer Interaction. 1983, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale.
7. Cooke, N.J., Durso, F., Stories of Modern Technology Failures and Cognitive Engineering Successes. 2007, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
8. Dingus, T.A., Hulse, M.C., Mollenhauer, M.A., Fleischman, R.N., McGehee, D.V., Manakkal, N., Effects of age, system experience, and navigation technique on driving with an advanced traveler information system. Hum. Factors 39:2 (1997), 177–199.
9. Fox, J., Applied Regression Analysis and Generalized Linear Models. 2008, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
10. Gellatly, A.W., Kleiss, J.A., Visual attention demand evaluation of conventional and multifunction in-vehicle information systems. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 44:20 (2000), 282–285.
11. Green, P., American Human Factors Research on In-vehicle Navigation Systems. Technical Report UMTRI-92-47, 1992, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), Ann Arbor.
12. Green, P., The 15-second rule for driver information systems. Proc. of the ITS Am. Ninth Annu. Meet, 1999, Intell. Transp. Soc. of Am. Washington, CD-ROM.
13. Green, P., Estimating compliance with the 15-second rule for driver-interface usability and safety. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 43:18 (1999), 987–991.
14. Green, P., Visual and Task Demands of Driver Information Systems. Technical Report UMTRI-98-16, 1999, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), Ann Arbor.
15. Green, P., Crashes induced by driver information systems and what can be done to reduce them. Converg. 2000 Conf. Proc., 2000, Soc. of Automot. Eng. (SAE), Warrendale, 27–36.
16. Harvey, C., Stanton, N.A., Usability Evaluation for In-vehicle Systems. 2013, CRC Press, Boca Raton.
17. Holleis, P., Schmidt, A., Makeit: integrate user interaction times in the design process of mobile applications. Indulska, J., Patterson, D.J., Rodden, T., Ott, M., (eds.) Pervasive Computing, 2008, Springer, Berlin, 56–74.
18. Horrey, W.J., Wickens, C.D., In-vehicle glance duration: distributions, tails, and model of crash risk. Transp. Res. Rec. 1:2018 (2007), 22–28.
19. John, B.E., Jastrzembski, T.S., Exploration of costs and benefits of predictive human performance modeling. Salvucci, D.D., Gunzelmann, G., (eds.) Proc. of the 10th Int. Conf. on Cogn. Model., 2010, Psychology Press, Philadelphia, 115–120.
20. John, B.E., Prevas, K., Salvucci, D.D., Koedinger, K., Predictive human performance modeling made easy. CHI 2004. Proc. of the SIGCHI Conf. on Hum. Factors in Comput. Syst., 2004, ACM, New York, 455–462.
21. Kang, T., Lin, B.T., Green, P., Pettinato, S., Best, A., Usability of a Prototype Generation 4 Hyundai-kia Navigation-radio: Evidence from an Occlusion Experiment and SAE J2365 and Pettitt's Method Calculations. Technical Report UMTRI-2013-11, 2013, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), Ann Arbor.
22. Klauer, S.G., Dingus, T.A., Neale, V.L., Sudweeks, J.D., Ramsey, D.J., The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-crash/crash Risk: an Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data. Technical Report DOT HS 810 594, 2006, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Washington.
23. Klauer, S.G., Guo, F., Sudweeks, J., Dingus, T.A., An Analysis of Driver Inattention Using a Case-crossover Approach on 100-Car Data. Technical Report DOT HS 811 334, 2010, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Washington.
24. Liang, Y., Lee, J.D., Yekhshatyan, L., How dangerous is looking away from the road? Algorithms predict crash risk from glance patterns in naturalistic driving. Hum. Factors 54:6 (2012), 1104–1116.
25. Lee, J.D., Fifty years of driving safety research. Hum. Factors 50:3 (2008), 521–528.
26. Liu, Y., Feyen, R., Tsimhoni, O., Queueing Network-Model Human Processor (QN-MHP): a computational architecture for multitask performance in human-machine systems. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. 13:1 (2006), 37–70.
27. Manes, D., Green, P., Hunter, D., Prediction of Destination Entry and Retrieval Times Using Keystroke-level Models. Technical Report UMTRI-96-37, 1998, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI), Ann Arbor.
28. Neukum, A., Naujoks, F., Kappes, S., Wey, T., Kontrollierbarkeit unerwarteter Eingriffe eines Bremsassistenzsystems aus Perspektive des Folgeverkehrs. Färber, B., (eds.) 9. Workshop Fahrerassistenzsysteme – FAS 2014. Walting im Altmühltal, 26.-28. März 2014, 2014, Uni-DAS, Darmstadt, 115–126.
29. NHTSA, Visual-manual NHTSA Driver Distraction Guidelines for In-vehicle Electronic Devices. Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0053, 2012, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Washington.
30. Olson, R.L., Hanowski, R.J., Hickman, J.S., Bocanegra, J., Driver Distraction in Commercial Vehicle Operations. Technical Report FMCSA-RRR-09–042, 2009, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Washington, DC.
31. Olson, J.R., Nielsen, E., Analysis of the cognition involved in spreadsheet software interaction. Hum. Comput. Interact. 3:4 (1987), 309–349.
32. Peng, Y., Boyle, L.N., Ghazizadeh, M., Lee, J.D., Factors affecting glance behavior when interacting with in-vehicle devices: implications from a simulator study. Proc. of the 7th Int. Driv. Symp. on Hum. Factors in Driv. Assess., Train. and Veh. Des., 2013, PPC, New York, 474–480.
33. Pettitt, M.A., Visual Demand Evaluation Methods for In-vehicle Interfaces. Doctoral Thesis, 2008, University of Nottingham, Nottingham.
34. Pettitt, M.A., Burnett, G., Karbassioun, D., Applying the keystroke level model in a driving context. Bust, P.D., (eds.) Proc. Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2006, 2006, Taylor & Francis, London, 219–223.
35. Pettitt, M.A., Burnett, G., Stevens, A., An extended keystroke level model (KLM) for predicting the visual demand of in-vehicle information systems. CHI 2007. Proc. of the SIGCHI Conf. on Hum. Factors in Comput. Syst., 2007, ACM, New York, 1515–1524.
36. Purucker, C., Rüger, F., Schneider, N., Neukum, A., Färber, B., Comparing the perception of critical longitudinal distances between dynamic driving simulation, test track and vehicle in the loop. Stanton, N., Landry, S., Di Bucchianico, G., Vallicelli, A., (eds.) Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation: Part I., 2014, AHFE Conference; Danvers, 421–430.
37. Rothkopf, C.A., Ballard, D.H., Hayhoe, M.M., Task and context determine where you look. J. Vis. 7:14 (2007), 1–20.
38. Rüger, F., Purucker, C., Schneider, N., Neukum, A., Färber, B., Validierung von Engstellenszenarien und Querdynamik im dynamischen Fahrsimulator und Vehicle in the Loop. Färber, B., (eds.) 9. Workshop Fahrerassistenzsysteme – FAS 2014. Walting im Altmühltal, 26.-28. März 2014, 2014, Uni-DAS, Darmstadt, 137–146.
39. SAE J2364, SAE Recommended Practice: Navigation and Route Guidance Function Accessibility While Driving. 2004, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Warrendale.
40. SAE J2365, SAE Recommended Practice: Calculation of the Time to Complete In-vehicle Navigation and Route Guidance Tasks. 2002, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Warrendale.
41. Salvucci, D.D., Modeling driver behavior in a cognitive architecture. Hum. Factors 48:2 (2006), 362–380.
42. Schneegaß, S., Pfleging, B., Kern, D., Schmidt, A., Support for modeling interaction with automotive user interfaces. AutomotiveUI 2011. Proc. of the 3rd Int. Conf. on Automot. User Interfaces and Interact. Veh. Appl., 2011, ACM, New York, 71–78.
43. Stevens, A., Minton, R., In-vehicle distraction and fatal accidents in England and Wales. Accid. Anal. Prev. 33:4 (2001), 539–545.
44. Tijerina, L., Parmer, E., Goodman, M.J., Driver workload assessment of route guidance system destination entry while driving: a test track study. Proc. of the 5th ITS World Congr., 1998, ITS Seoul, CD-ROM.
45. Urbas, L., Leuchter, S., Usability engineering of “in vehicle information systems” with multi-tasking GOMS. Proc. Dachkongress Patientensicherh. und Medizintech. APS 2008, 3. Jahrestag. des Aktionsbündnis Patientensicherh. e.V. und MEK 2008, 5. Medizintech. und Ergon. Kongr., 2008, VDE Verlag Berlin, CD-ROM.
46. Victor, T., Dozza, M., Bärgman, J., Boda, C.-N., Engström, J., Flannagan, C., Lee, J.D., Markkula, G., Analysis of Naturalistic Driving Study Data: Safer Glances, Driver Inattention, and Crash Risk. Technical Report S2-S08A-RW-1, 2015, SAFER Vehicle and Traffic Safety Centre, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
47. Wierwille, W.W., Antin, J.F., Dingus, T.A., Hulse, M.C., Visual attentional demand of an in-car navigation display system. Gale, A.G., Freeman, M.H., Haslegrave, C.M., Smith, P., Taylor, S.P., (eds.) Vis. in Veh. II, 1988, 307–316 Nottingham, United Kingdom.