Auditory and Visual Peripheral Detection Tasks and the Lane Change Test with High and Low Cognitive Load

Chong, Isis; Mirchi, Tannaz; Silva, Hector I.; Strybel, Thomas Z.

doi:10.1177/1541931214581458

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, according to the cognitive control hypothesis, the DRT should be sensitive to interference from cognitively loading secondary tasks. This prediction is confirmed by a large number of studies reporting that cognitively loading tasks increase DRT response times relative to a baseline (no-task) condition, with effects typically in the range of 100 to 300 ms (Bruyas & Dumont, 2013; Chong et al, 2014; Conti, Dlugosch, Vilimek, Keinath, & Bengler, 2012; Diels, 2011; Engström, Åberg, Johansson, & Hammarbäck, 2005; Engström, Larsson, & Larsson, 2013; Harbluk, Burns, Hernandez, Tam, & Glazduri, 2013; Mantzke & Keinath, 2015; Merat & Jamson, 2008; Merat, Kountouriotis, Tomlinson, Carsten, & Engström, 2015; Nilsson et al, 2017; Patten, Kircher, Östlund, & Nilsson, 2004; Ranney et al, 2011; Törnros & Bolling, 2005; Young, 2013; see further references in ISO, 2016).…”

Section: Experimental Effects Of CL On Driving Performancementioning

confidence: 60%

“…The DRT (formerly known as the Peripheral Detection Task) is an increasingly popular method specifically addressing effects of CL on OED. The method, which is defined by an international standard (ISO, 2016), involves responding to visual or tactile (and in some cases auditory; Chong, Mirchi, Silva, & Strybel, 2014) stimuli presented at intervals of 3 to 5 s. Effects of CL are measured in terms of response time or miss rate. Despite its simplicity, the DRT is typically not extensively practiced, thus not automatized, and hence relies on cognitive control (as mentioned earlier, Shiffrin and Schneider [1977] found that thousands of trials were needed for a similar task to become automatized).…”

Section: Experimental Effects Of CL On Driving Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Cognitive Load on Driving Performance: The Cognitive Control Hypothesis

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The objective of this paper was to outline an explanatory framework for understanding effects of cognitive load on driving performance and to review the existing experimental literature in the light of this framework. Background: Although there is general consensus that taking the eyes off the forward roadway significantly impairs most aspects of driving, the effects of primarily cognitively loading tasks on driving performance are not well understood. Method: Based on existing models of driver attention, an explanatory framework was outlined. This framework can be summarized in terms of the cognitive control hypothesis: Cognitive load selectively impairs driving subtasks that rely on cognitive control but leaves automatic performance unaffected. An extensive literature review was conducted wherein existing results were reinterpreted based on the proposed framework. Results: It was demonstrated that the general pattern of experimental results reported in the literature aligns well with the cognitive control hypothesis and that several apparent discrepancies between studies can be reconciled based on the proposed framework. More specifically, performance on nonpracticed or inherently variable tasks, relying on cognitive control, is consistently impaired by cognitive load, whereas the performance on automatized (well-practiced and consistently mapped) tasks is unaffected and sometimes even improved. Conclusion: Effects of cognitive load on driving are strongly selective and task dependent. Application: The present results have important implications for the generalization of results obtained from experimental studies to real-world driving. The proposed framework can also serve to guide future research on the potential causal role of cognitive load in real-world crashes.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Effects Of CL On Driving Performancementioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Experimental Effects Of CL On Driving Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Cognitive Load on Driving Performance: The Cognitive Control Hypothesis

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the driving performance, the participant's position in the driving task was compared to a pre-calculated ideal path in terms of lateral deviation in meters with a 33 Hz sampling rate. A standardized procedure (ISO 26022:2010) commonly used to access the LCT driving performance [13,14,21,46,68,85]. The results were sorted into their corresponding tasks and different metrics including average deviation, median, minimum and maximum, and standard deviation.…”

Section: Data Preprocessing and Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s on your mind? A Mental and Perceptual Load Estimation Framework towards Adaptive In-vehicle Interaction while Driving

Gomaa

Alles

Meiser

et al. 2022

Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several researchers have focused on studying driver cognitive behavior and mental load for in-vehicle interaction while driving. Adaptive interfaces that vary with mental and perceptual load levels could help in reducing accidents and enhancing the driver experience. In this paper, we analyze the effects of mental workload and perceptual load on psychophysiological dimensions and provide a machine learning-based framework for mental and perceptual load estimation in a dual task scenario for in-vehicle interaction (https://github.com/amrgomaaelhady/MWL-PL-estimator). We use off-the-shelf non-intrusive sensors that can be easily integrated into the vehicle's system. Our statistical analysis shows that while mental workload influences some psychophysiological dimensions, perceptual load shows little effect. Furthermore, we classify the mental and perceptual load levels through the fusion of these measurements, moving towards a real-time adaptive invehicle interface that is personalized to user behavior and driving conditions. We report up to 89% mental workload classification accuracy and provide a real-time minimally-intrusive solution. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → User centered design; • Applied computing → Psychology; • Computing methodologies → Classification and regression trees.

show abstract

“…Primary tasks that are more cognitively demanding are assumed to produce greater response latencies and more misses than tasks that are less cognitively demanding. The PDT has been used previously as a measure of workload (Chong, Mirchi, Silva, & Strybel, 2014;Van der Horst & Martens, 2010;Olsson & Burns, 2000;Patton, Kircher, Ostlund, Lilsson, & Svenson, 2006), including investigations of cognitive tunneling (e.g., Martens & Van Winsum, 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Out of Sight, Out of Mind? The Effect of Visual Field of View Restrictions on Working Memory

Pasma¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual field of view (FoV) restrictions have been found to impair performance on a variety of tasks, including estimating distances, locomotion, target tracking, and the development of spatial representations, as well as in specific domains such as aviation.Explanations for these impairments have largely focused on the restrictions to the physical environment and lack of peripheral information available to the user. The goal of this thesis was to provide a more complete account of these performance impairments by examining whether restrictions to the visual field affected working memory, a cognitive component responsible for the maintenance, integration, and retrieval of visual information.Three experiments were conducted in which the impact of restricted FoV on memory for simple geons was examined. In Experiment 1, restricting FoV was shown to decrease performance on a Geon Memory Task (GMT). Experiment 2 established the relative difficulties of four secondary tasks commonly used in dual-task paradigms (counting, counting/tapping, spatial tapping, and random tapping) to tax individual working memory components and used as secondary working memory tasks in Experiment 3. Experiment 3 examined the relationship between FoV, working memory, and performance on the GMT using a dual-task paradigm. Results from Experiment 3 were consistent with those of Experiment 1 and further supported the hypothesis that FoV negatively affects phonological and visuo-spatial working memory. The central executive was not negatively affected by FoV restrictions. The present findings suggest a more complete account of the impact of FoV restrictions than the lack of peripheral information alone and offer important contributions to the working memory literature.iii

show abstract

Auditory and Visual Peripheral Detection Tasks and the Lane Change Test with High and Low Cognitive Load

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

Effects of Cognitive Load on Driving Performance: The Cognitive Control Hypothesis

Effects of Cognitive Load on Driving Performance: The Cognitive Control Hypothesis

What’s on your mind? A Mental and Perceptual Load Estimation Framework towards Adaptive In-vehicle Interaction while Driving

Out of Sight, Out of Mind? The Effect of Visual Field of View Restrictions on Working Memory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About