Event Detection: The Second Dimension of Driver Performance for Visual-Manual Tasks

Young, Richard A.

doi:10.4271/2012-01-0964

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Does TEORT predict relative crash risk or not? A deeper issue is that NHTSA has not established whether the task scores on its TEORT metric predict relative crash risk that may arise from secondary task physical and cognitive demand (Young, 2012). In fact, Liang et al (2012) The results of the present analysis indicate the need for NHTSA to revise its glance criteria.…”

Section: Unaddressed Potential Limitations Of Track Studymentioning

confidence: 75%

Need for Revised Total Eyes-Off-Road Criterion in the NHTSA Distraction Guidelines: Track Radio-Tuning Data

Young

2015

Proceedings of the 8th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design: Dri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary: This study re-analyzes participant-level glance data from a NHTSAsponsored test track study of nine radio-tuning tasks in five radios. NHTSA stated that in its judgment, all nine tasks met the definition of traditional manual radio tuning, and so collapsed the data across all participants to estimate an 85 th percentile. NHTSA further stated that it combined that track percentile with the 85 th percentile from a radio-tuning task in a separate simulator study, to set its total-eyes-off-road time (TEORT) acceptance criterion. Given NHTSA's statements, individual radio-tuning tasks should, in general, meet the criteria created from them. This study performed such an analysis, and found that this expectation was not met. Four out of nine radio-tuning tasks did not meet the criterion. One problem is that NHTSA did not allow for variability in its 85 th percentile estimate. Additionally, TEORT values were higher in the simulator than track for the same task with age-matched data, meaning that if the track tasks had been run in the simulator then the 85 th percentile TEORT may have been higher. These issues illustrate the need for revising the criteria based on an improved analysis of the data that NHTSA used to set those criteria. Without doing so, many commonly-accepted secondary tasks (including manual radio tuning in many vehicles) would not meet the current NHTSA Guidelines glance criteria. Revised criteria should be derived in a way that would provide the needed consistency with age-balance requirements of task-acceptability testing, as well as allowing robustness for variability in the percentile estimates.

show abstract

Section: Unaddressed Potential Limitations Of Track Studymentioning

confidence: 75%

Need for Revised Total Eyes-Off-Road Criterion in the NHTSA Distraction Guidelines: Track Radio-Tuning Data

Young

2015

Proceedings of the 8th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design: Dri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…17,18 Hence, the null result for SuRT was not because of low sensitivity. 4. No difference in visual-motor load.…”

Section: Competing Alternative Explanatory Hypotheses For the Tdrt Spmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 For visualmanual tasks requiring eye movements, the PDT is also sensitive to effects on attention networks from visual-perceptual load and manual-motor response conflicts. 3,4 However, the PDT is not specific to these attentional effects, because event detection also fails when the eyes move such that the PDT lights do not fall on the retina (a non-attentional effect).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This classic dichotomy between visual-manual and auditory-vocal-cognitive tasks obscures the fact that visual-manual tasks, even highly-practiced ones, 2 also cause cognitive load, sometimes substantial. 3,4 Cognitive load likely increases crash risk by its effects on attentional networks in the brain that increase event response times (RTs), miss rates, and the duration of single glances off the road. 3,4,5 The "Peripheral Detection Task" (PDT) has been proposed as one measure of the attentional effects of cognitive load.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3,4 Cognitive load likely increases crash risk by its effects on attentional networks in the brain that increase event response times (RTs), miss rates, and the duration of single glances off the road. 3,4,5 The "Peripheral Detection Task" (PDT) has been proposed as one measure of the attentional effects of cognitive load. 1,3,6,7,8 The PDT measures RTs to, and misses of, peripheral light stimuli during secondary task performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Tactile Detection Response Task: Preliminary Validation for Measuring the Attentional Effects of Cognitive Load

Young

Hsieh

Seaman

2013

Proceedings of the 7th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design : Dr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary: Improved measures of the attentional effects of cognitive load are needed to reduce potential crashes caused by secondary tasks performed while driving. The Tactile Detection Response Task (TDRT) in the proposed ISO Draft Standard WD17488 was tested in laboratory and on-road venues with 16 and 15 subjects, respectively. A sensitivity test used a purely cognitive load increase from an easy (0-back) to hard (1-back) auditory-vocal task. The TDRT response time increased by 90±21 msec in the laboratory, and by 135±34 msec on the road, while the miss rate increased by 4% in the laboratory and 5% on the road, thus validating TDRT sensitivity to an increase in purely cognitive load. A specificity test used a visual load increase with little cognitive load difference from an easy to hard visual-manual "Surrogate Reference Task" (SuRT), to which the TDRT should not respond. The TDRT response time and miss rate to the SuRT did not increase in the laboratory or road as a result of the increased visual load, providing preliminary validation that the TDRT may be both specific and sensitive to the attentional effects of cognitive load.

show abstract

Motor Vehicle Driver Interfaces

Green

2017

The Wiley Handbook of Human Computer Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Event Detection: The Second Dimension of Driver Performance for Visual-Manual Tasks

Cited by 17 publications

References 23 publications

Need for Revised Total Eyes-Off-Road Criterion in the NHTSA Distraction Guidelines: Track Radio-Tuning Data

Need for Revised Total Eyes-Off-Road Criterion in the NHTSA Distraction Guidelines: Track Radio-Tuning Data

The Tactile Detection Response Task: Preliminary Validation for Measuring the Attentional Effects of Cognitive Load

Motor Vehicle Driver Interfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About