OBJECTIVE: We assess the driving distraction potential of texting with Google Glass (Glass), a mobile wearable platform capable of receiving and sending short-message-service and other messaging formats. BACKGROUND: A known roadway danger, texting while driving has been targeted by legislation and widely banned. Supporters of Glass claim the head-mounted wearable computer is designed to deliver information without concurrent distraction. Existing literature supports the supposition that design decisions incorporated in Glass might facilitate messaging for drivers. METHOD: We asked drivers in a simulator to drive and use either Glass or a smartphone-based messaging interface, then interrupted them with an emergency brake event. Both the response event and subsequent recovery were analyzed. RESULTS: Glass-delivered messages served to moderate but did not eliminate distracting cognitive demands. A potential passive cost to drivers merely wearing Glass was also observed. Messaging using either device impaired driving as compared to driving without multitasking. CONCLUSION: Glass in not a panacea as some supporters claim, but it does point the way to design interventions that effect reduced load in multitasking. APPLICATION: Discussions of these identified benefits are framed within the potential of new in-vehicle systems that bring both novel forms of distraction and tools for mitigation into the driver's seat.
OBJECTIVE: We assess the driving distraction potential of texting with Google Glass (Glass), a mobile wearable platform capable of receiving and sending short-message-service and other messaging formats. BACKGROUND: A known roadway danger, texting while driving has been targeted by legislation and widely banned. Supporters of Glass claim the head-mounted wearable computer is designed to deliver information without concurrent distraction. Existing literature supports the supposition that design decisions incorporated in Glass might facilitate messaging for drivers. METHOD: We asked drivers in a simulator to drive and use either Glass or a smartphone-based messaging interface, then interrupted them with an emergency brake event. Both the response event and subsequent recovery were analyzed. RESULTS: Glass-delivered messages served to moderate but did not eliminate distracting cognitive demands. A potential passive cost to drivers merely wearing Glass was also observed. Messaging using either device impaired driving as compared to driving without multitasking. CONCLUSION: Glass in not a panacea as some supporters claim, but it does point the way to design interventions that effect reduced load in multitasking. APPLICATION: Discussions of these identified benefits are framed within the potential of new in-vehicle systems that bring both novel forms of distraction and tools for mitigation into the driver's seat.
Authors: Ryan McKendrick; Raja Parasuraman; Rabia Murtza; Alice Formwalt; Wendy Baccus; Martin Paczynski; Hasan Ayaz Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Răzvan Gabriel Boboc; Gheorghe Daniel Voinea; Ioana-Diana Buzdugan; Csaba Antonya Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-24 Impact factor: 4.614