Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Evaluating driver distraction countermeasures
2005 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Statistics showing that in-vehicle driver distraction is a major contributing cause in road accidents is presented. Driver distraction is defined building on the driving theory by Gibson and Crooks. The idea to use driver distraction countermeasures as a way of mitigating the effects of the driver distraction problem is then introduced. A requirement list is formulated with ten requirements that distraction countermeasures should meet. A simplification of regarding distraction as a gaze direction problem makes way for designing an experiment to evaluate two driver distraction countermeasures in which new eye- tracking technology plays a key role. The experiment also makes use of a simulator, a surrogate in-vehicle information system as a distractor, and thirty subjects. The most important dependent measures were in-vehicle glance time and a steering wheel reaction time measure. The evaluated countermeasures - a blue flash at middle of the road position and a kinesthetic brake pulse - could, however, not be shown to meet the most important of the requirements formulated. The lack of effect of the countermeasures in the experiment may either depend on their actual inefficiency or on methodological shortcomings of the experiment. These alternatives are discussed. It is speculated that the biggest problems with the possible lack of actual efficiency have to do with that the theoretical basis for using a flash did not transfer to the driving setting, and that the brake pulse used was too weak. The methodological problems have to do with the non-validated dependent measures used, missing data, nuisance warnings, insufficient distractors, non-precise hypotheses, and difficulties with separating the effect of the countermeasures from the psychological force to look on the road.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Statens väg- och transportforskningsinstitut, 2005. , 59 p.
Series
VTI notat, 38A-2005
Keyword [en]
Driver, Behaviour, Accident prevention, Attention, In vehicle information, Simulator, Eye movement, Reaction time
National Category
Applied Psychology
Research subject
Road: Traffic safety and accidents, Road: Road user behaviour
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:vti:diva-1564OAI: oai:DiVA.org:vti-1564DiVA: diva2:670276
Available from: 2013-12-03 Created: 2013-12-03 Last updated: 2014-09-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(928 kB)65 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 928 kBChecksum SHA-512
881fc2b651ea377f0761bbaffe523cb931a6dd2e0930fd653f2efa932a007a988183e6728ede58bca5eb02377f7290d9540ae1372b5b3bfb6ded443d0b6f384e
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Applied Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 65 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 256 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf