Effects of Task and Presentation Modality in Detection Response Tasks
To assess driver distraction adequately, cognitive workload measurement techniques are necessary that can be used as part of standard in-vehicle testing procedures. Detection response tasks (DRTs) are a simple and effective way of assessing workload. However, as DRTs require cognitive resources themselves, interferences between task modality and DRT modality are possible. In this study, DRT stimuli (auditory, visual, tactile) are varied systematically with secondary task presentation modality (auditory, visual, or purely cognitive tasks). The aim is to infer if different DRT variants remain sensitive to changes in workload even if primary and secondary task convey information using the same presentation modality, thus making resource conflicts likely. Results show that all DRTs successfully discriminate between high and low workload levels in terms of reaction time independent of DRT presentation modality. Differences in discriminability can be found in hit rate measurement.
KeywordsDRT PDT workload driver distraction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHTSA), Department of Transportation: Visual-Manual NHTSA Driver Distraction Guidelines for In-Vehicle Electronic Devices. Report No. NHTSA-2010-0053, NHTSA (2012)Google Scholar
- 2.Zijlstra, F.R.: Efficiency in Work Behaviour. A Design Approach for Modern Tools. Delft University of Technology, Delft (1993)Google Scholar
- 4.Wickens, C.D., Hollands, J.: Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2000)Google Scholar
- 5.Schwalm, M., Keinath, A., Zimmer, H.D.: Pupillometry as a Method for Measuring Mental Workload within a Simulated Driving Task. In: de Waard, D., Flemisch, F.O., Lorenz, B., Oberheid, H., Brookhuis, K.A. (eds.) Human Factors for Assistance and Automation, pp. 1–13. Shaker Publishing, Maastricht (2008)Google Scholar
- 6.Marshall, S.P., Davis, C., Knust, S.: The Index of Cognitive Activity: Estimating Cognitive Effort from Pupil Dilation. Technical Report ETI-0401. Eyetracking Inc., San Diego (2004)Google Scholar
- 7.Platten, F.: Analysis of Mental Workload and Operating Behavior in Secondary Tasks while Driving. Dissertation. Chemnitz University of Technology, Chemnitz (2012)Google Scholar
- 8.Conti, A., Dlugosch, C., Vilimek, R., Keinath, A., Bengler, K.: An Assessment of Cognitive Workload Using Detection Response Tasks. In: Stanton, N.A. (ed.) Advances in Human Aspects of Road and Rail Transport, pp. 735–743. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton (2012)Google Scholar
- 11.van Winsum, W., Martens, M.H., Herland, L.: The Effects of Speech Versus Tactile Driver Support Messages on Workload, Driver Behaviour and User Acceptance. Report No. TM-99-C043, TNO Human Factors, Soesterberg (1999)Google Scholar
- 12.Martens, M.H., van Winsum, W.: Measuring Distraction: the Peripheral Detection Task. TNO Human Factors, Soesterberg (2000)Google Scholar
- 14.Olsson, S., Burns, P.C.: Measuring Driver Visual Distraction with a Peripheral Detection Task. Linköping University, Linköping (2000)Google Scholar