Cognitive failures as predictors of driving errors, lapses, and violations

Abstract

Always cite the published version, so the author(s) will receive recognition through services that track citation counts, e.g. Scopus. If you need to cite the page number of the TSpace version (original manuscript or accepted manuscript) because you cannot access the published version, then cite the TSpace version in addition to the published version using the permanent URI (handle) found on the record page. AbstractDual-process models from the cognitive literature have proposed a taxonomy of cognitive failures in everyday activities, and this novel approach was applied to understanding driver behaviour. This framework was used to examine whether categories of cognitive failure would explain driving errors, driving lapses, and driving violations in a sample of undergraduates at a large urban university. Two types of cognitive failure were examined, one associated with missing affective information and the other associated with a failure to engage effortful processes to override an automatic response. Alexithymia was used as an indicator of missing affective information, and attention regulation, reactivity, and impulsivity were used as indicators of override failure. Relevant demographic variables included gender and hours typically driven. Override failures were significantly associated with driving behaviour in the correlational analyses. In the regression analyses, attention regulation predicted driving errors, and gender, attention regulation, and impulsivity predicted driving violations. The implications of this work include the potential application to driver training, to users of informatic devices (e.g., GPS, cellular phones, messaging systems), and for individuals diagnosed with attention and/or impulsivity problems.

Social desirability effects in driver behavior inventories

“…It has previously been reported that the DBQ is not correlated with social desirability (Wickens, Toplak, & Wiesenthal, 2008), a result that is in stark opposition to the present, very strong association for the violation scale. Two possible explanations can be forwarded for this discrepancy; the lie scale used by Wickens et al was not specifically about driving behavior, and the subjects used were psychology students.…”

Towards testing auditory–vocal interfaces and detecting distraction while driving: A comparison of eye-movement measures in the assessment of cognitive workload

“…Other measures, such as changes in the fixation locations and blink rate, should be studied more carefully with other types of tasks using different combinations of sensory modalities, codes, and reactions (Wickens, 2002;Wickens et al, 2008) in line with different realistic road and traffic conditions. Still, this paper presents further evidence that eye-tracking measures are very promising methods for monitoring a driver's state.…”

“…The primary task was aimed at driving in simulated traffic on a highway, while the secondary task was a delayed digit recall (n-back). This task engaged working memory workload and it consisted of audition as the input sensory modality, verbal codes (Wickens, 2002;Wickens et al, 2008), and vocal output. This experimental setup can, to some extent, imitate talking to another person or controlling voice-based in-vehicle systems.…”

Prevalence and characteristics of driving difficulties in Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom combat returnees

“…First, PTSD negatively affects cognitive functioning [24], especially in the domains of attention [25], executive functioning [26], and processing speed [27], all of which are essential to blocking out distractions, reacting to challenging situations, and using good judgment while driving. Second, a characteristic of the disorder is irritability an d outbursts of anger, which could lead to agg ressive driving and impulsive or risky driving behaviors [28]. Finally, increased startle response (e.g., becoming excessively alarmed at the sound of a backfiring car, screeching tires, etc.…”