How to Drive Drivers Nuts: Effect of Auditory, Vibrotactile, and Multimodal Warnings on Perceived Urgency, Annoyance, and Acceptability

Biondi, Francesco; Leo, Marco; Gastaldi, Massimiliano; Rossi, Riccardo; Mulatti, Claudio

doi:10.3141/2663-05

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this current study auditory-only and auditory-tactile warning were also rated more startling compared to the tactile-only warning. Positively, similarly to previous research, our results suggest that the multimodal warning was not perceived as being more annoying compared to the unimodal traditional auditory warning (Biondi et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

The comparison of auditory, tactile, and multimodal warnings for the effective communication of unexpected events during an automated driving scenario

Geitner

Biondi

Skrypchuk

et al. 2019

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviou

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

The comparison of auditory, tactile, and multimodal warnings for the effective communication of unexpected events during an automated driving scenario

Geitner

Biondi

Skrypchuk

et al. 2019

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviou

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Yau et al considered time-varying and evidence-free signals as a sense of urgency, and found that it is possible to determine EEG signals which are relevant to sense of urgency [18]. Another study examined the impacts of warning signals, including auditory, vibrotactile, and, multimodal, in assessing sense of urgency in different cognitive workload conditions [19].…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Effects of Various Physiological Signal Modalities on Predicting Different Human Cognitive States

Aygun,

Nguyen,

Scheutz

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robust estimation of systemic human cognitive states is critical for a variety of applications, from simply detecting inefficiencies in task assignments, to the adaptation of artificial agents’ behaviors to improve team performance in mixed-initiative human-machine teams. This study showed that human eye gaze, in particular, the percentage change in pupil size (PCPS), is the most reliable biomarker for assessing three human cognitive states including workload, sense of urgency, and mind wandering compared to electroencephalogram (EEG), functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), respiration, and skin conductance. We used comprehensive multi-modal driving dataset to examine the accuracy of signals to assess these cognitive states. We performed comprehensive statistical tests to validate the performance of several physiological signals to determine human cognitive states and demonstrated that PCPS shows noticeably superior performance. We also characterized the link between workload and sense of urgency with eye gaze and observed that consecutive occurrences of higher sense of urgency were prone to increase overall workload. Finally, we trained five machine learning (ML) models and showed that four of them had similar accuracy in cognitive state classification (with one, random forest, showing inferior performance). The results provided evidence that the PCPS is a reliable physiological marker for cognitive state estimation.

show abstract

“…It has been suggested that multimodal warnings have several advantages over unimodal warnings in shorter reaction times ( 18 , 38 , 39 ) and higher perceived urgency ( 18 , 39 , 40 ). However, previous studies of multimodal warnings varied in the multimodal combinations investigated (i.e., visual-auditory, visual-tactile, auditory-tactile, or visual-auditory-tactile).…”

Section: Huds In Multimodal Warning Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Warnings Suitable for Presentation in Head-Up Display? A Meta-Analysis for the Effect of Head-Up Display Warning on Driving Performance

Niu,

Gao,

Shi

et al. 2023

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Head-up display (HUD) warnings are gaining increasing attention with the growing importance of advanced warning systems in vehicles for improving driving safety. However, the effectiveness of HUD warnings is still controversial considering the various driving performance indexes, warning modalities, and driving scenarios used in previous studies. This study conducts meta-analyses of the relevant literature to examine whether HUD warnings (both unimodal HUD warnings and multimodal warnings with HUD) have advantages compared with other warnings (head-down display warnings, auditory warnings, tactile warnings, and multimodal warnings without HUD) for driver reaction times and driving quality. Overall, 33 articles were included in four meta-analyses. Additionally, the effects of the related moderator variables of scenario, mapping of warnings, and non-driving-related tasks (NDRTs) on the relationship between using HUD warnings and using non-HUD warnings was analyzed. The results show that using unimodal HUD warnings leads to faster reaction times compared with head-down display warnings but has no significant advantage on driving performance over auditory warnings in general and results in slower reaction times than using tactile warnings. However, results of the moderating effects suggest that using HUD warnings in non-critical scenarios and using high mapping HUD icons (i.e., HUD warnings with specific hazard information) are conducive to improving driving performance in comparison with other warning types. These results highlight the potential advantages of HUD in transmitting warning information. The future application and design of HUD warnings may need to focus on specific situations considering iconic mapping to an event.

show abstract

How to Drive Drivers Nuts: Effect of Auditory, Vibrotactile, and Multimodal Warnings on Perceived Urgency, Annoyance, and Acceptability

Cited by 11 publications

References 19 publications

The comparison of auditory, tactile, and multimodal warnings for the effective communication of unexpected events during an automated driving scenario

The comparison of auditory, tactile, and multimodal warnings for the effective communication of unexpected events during an automated driving scenario

Assessing the Effects of Various Physiological Signal Modalities on Predicting Different Human Cognitive States

Are Warnings Suitable for Presentation in Head-Up Display? A Meta-Analysis for the Effect of Head-Up Display Warning on Driving Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About