Driver secondary tasks in Germany: Using interviews to estimate prevalence

Huemer, Anja Katharina; Vollrath, Mark

doi:10.1016/j.aap.2011.03.029

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using a survey methodology Ferreira et al [8] found drivers were least likely to use their phone on city roads, were slightly more likely to use them on main and rural roads and were most willing to use them on highways (auto routes). Conversely, Huemer and Vollrath [9] found, when investigating occupational and private car users' secondary task engagement behaviour, that both demographics had similar engagement rates on an auto route and this was lower than reported for city driving. It was further found that time spent engaged with the task varied depending on the road type with a far shorter task time in city environments and far longer when on an auto route.…”

Section: Of How the Use Of That Device Interferes With Driving And Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers’ willingness to engage with their mobile phone: the influence of phone function and road demand

Hancox

Richardson

Morris

2013

IET Intelligent Transport Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Of How the Use Of That Device Interferes With Driving And Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers’ willingness to engage with their mobile phone: the influence of phone function and road demand

Hancox

Richardson

Morris

2013

IET Intelligent Transport Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A German study classified and evaluated the types of driving and secondary tasks. e results showed that secondary tasks had negative effects on driving behavior [10]. Moreover, the workload generated by the driving task also varies when the driver operates the navigation system [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Research on the Influence of Smartphone Navigation on Driving Behavior Based on Real Vehicle Driving

Dong

Rong-guo

Zhang

et al. 2019

Mobile Information Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses a study of the influence of different positions and modes of smartphone navigation devices on driving behavior based on real vehicle driving. Twenty professional drivers participated in the experiment in free-flowing traffic and good weather conditions. The eye movement and vehicle control data obtained in the experiment were used as indicators for evaluation. Comparison of the mean, variance, and significance analysis shows that a smartphone navigation device placed on the right side of the car dashboard (position 1) has less impact on driving behavior than when placed above the air conditioning vent (position 2). A smaller angle of view can increase the fixation frequency and the length of time that the driver spends looking out the windshield and reduce the range and time spent in glancing at the navigation device. Using only sound navigation (the audio group in this paper) has the least influence on driving behavior because the driver’s visual attention is not transferred inside the vehicle rather than on the road ahead, and the vehicle is operated in the most stable state. These findings have practical significance for reducing the negative influence of smartphone navigation.

show abstract

“…Two tasks-conversation and rear-vehicle observation-were selected as cognitive and visual tasks, respectively. Drivers considered each task to be of low perceived risk; these tasks represented the most common distractions on real roads [19,20,22]. All trials were performed on the same highway by using an instrumented vehicle.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gentzler et al [20] similarly reported that conversation with passengers and looking at vehicles on the roadside were rated as low-risk distraction tasks by drivers. However, scenarios such as conversations and observing driving behaviors were common behaviors on actual roads [21,22], classified as cognitive and visual distractions, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the difference between perceived and actual risk of distracted driving? A field study on a real highway

Wang

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distracted driving is a leading cause of traffic accidents. It is influenced by driver attitude toward secondary tasks; however, field-based studies on the effects of low-perceived-risk tasks on lateral driving have rarely been reported. A total of 17 experienced non-professional drivers were recruited to participate in two secondary tasks: a cognitive experiment (conversation) and a visual distraction experiment (observation of following vehicles), each representing low-perceived-risk secondary tasks. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate the effects of low-perceived-risk tasks on lateral driving performance. ANOVA results indicated that compared with baseline (no task) lateral performance, lane-keeping ability was enhanced during cognitive distractions. In the visual distraction experiment, more than 50% of the distractions required 1-2 s. Lane deviation and its growth rate increased with the duration of distraction. Compared with cognitive distraction, lane deviation increased significantly with visual distraction, and lane-keeping performance was seriously impaired. For low-perceived-risk tasks, visual distractions impaired driving safety more seriously, compared with cognitive distractions, suggesting that drivers misjudge the risks associated with visual tasks. These results can contribute to the design of advanced driving-assistance systems and improve professional driver programs, potentially reducing the frequency of traffic accidents caused by distracted driving.

show abstract

Driver secondary tasks in Germany: Using interviews to estimate prevalence

Cited by 22 publications

References 14 publications

Drivers’ willingness to engage with their mobile phone: the influence of phone function and road demand

Drivers’ willingness to engage with their mobile phone: the influence of phone function and road demand

Research on the Influence of Smartphone Navigation on Driving Behavior Based on Real Vehicle Driving

What is the difference between perceived and actual risk of distracted driving? A field study on a real highway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About