J J Scott1, Robert Gray. 1. United States Air Force, Edwards Air Force Base, California, USA. jeffrey.scott@edwards.af.mil
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effectiveness of rear-end collision warnings presented in different sensory modalities as a function of warning timing in a driving simulator. BACKGROUND: The proliferation of in-vehicle information and entertainment systems threatens driver attention and may increase the risk of rear-end collisions. Collision warning systems have been shown to improve inattentive and/or distracted driver response time (RT) in rear-end collision situations. However, most previous rear-end collision warning research has not directly compared auditory, visual, and tactile warnings. METHOD: Sixteen participants in a fixed-base driving simulator experienced four warning conditions: no warning, visual, auditory, and tactile. The warnings activated when the time-to-collision (TTC) reached a critical threshold of 3.0 or 5.0 s. Driver RT was captured from a warning below critical threshold to brake initiation. RESULTS: Drivers with a tactile warning had the shortest mean RT. Drivers with a tactile warning had significantly shorter RT than drivers without a warning and had a significant advantage over drivers with visual warnings. CONCLUSION: Tactile warnings show promise as effective rear-end collision warnings. APPLICATION: The results of this study can be applied to the future design and evaluation of automotive warnings designed to reduce rear-end collisions.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effectiveness of rear-end collision warnings presented in different sensory modalities as a function of warning timing in a driving simulator. BACKGROUND: The proliferation of in-vehicle information and entertainment systems threatens driver attention and may increase the risk of rear-end collisions. Collision warning systems have been shown to improve inattentive and/or distracted driver response time (RT) in rear-end collision situations. However, most previous rear-end collision warning research has not directly compared auditory, visual, and tactile warnings. METHOD: Sixteen participants in a fixed-base driving simulator experienced four warning conditions: no warning, visual, auditory, and tactile. The warnings activated when the time-to-collision (TTC) reached a critical threshold of 3.0 or 5.0 s. Driver RT was captured from a warning below critical threshold to brake initiation. RESULTS: Drivers with a tactile warning had the shortest mean RT. Drivers with a tactile warning had significantly shorter RT than drivers without a warning and had a significant advantage over drivers with visual warnings. CONCLUSION: Tactile warnings show promise as effective rear-end collision warnings. APPLICATION: The results of this study can be applied to the future design and evaluation of automotive warnings designed to reduce rear-end collisions.
Authors: Monica N Lees; Joshua Cosman; John D Lee; Shaun P Vecera; Jeffrey D Dawson; Matthew Rizzo Journal: Appl Ergon Date: 2011-12-26 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Mark C Schall; Michelle L Rusch; John D Lee; Jeffrey D Dawson; Geb Thomas; Nazan Aksan; Matthew Rizzo Journal: Hum Factors Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 2.888
Authors: Michelle L Rusch; Mark C Schall; Patrick Gavin; John D Lee; Jeffrey D Dawson; Shaun Vecera; Matthew Rizzo Journal: Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav Date: 2013-01