Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Design characteristics of a workload manager to aid drivers in safety–critical situations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate a workload manager designed to supervise the presentation of in-vehicle information for two age groups of drivers during safety–critical situations. The benefits of a workload manager were compared in various dual-task conditions involving a preceding or a concurrent in-vehicle alert during critical traffic situations. Objective measures such as drivers’ brake response times and secondary task response times as well as subjective measures of driver workload were used. Although older drivers performed worse in the dual-task scenario with longer response times and poorer performance on the secondary task in comparison to the younger drivers, results indicated that both age groups benefited from the implementation of a workload manager. There was a consistent trend of improved driving and secondary task performance when the workload manager delayed non-critical information during safety–critical situations, indicating benefits for some otherwise distracted drivers. Implications for the design of a workload manager are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Alvarez FJ, Fierro I (2008) Older drivers, medical condition, medical impairment and crash risk. Crash Anal Prev 40(1):55–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anstey KJ, Wood J, Lord S, Walker JG (2005) Cognitive, sensory, and physical factors enabling driving safety in older adults. Clin Psychol Rev 25(1):45–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atchley P, Atwood S, Boulton A (2011) The choice to text and drive in younger drivers: behavior may shape attitude. Accid Anal Prev 43(1):134–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley AD (1972) Selective attention and performance in dangerous environments. Br J Psychol 63:37–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becic E, Dell GS, Bock K, Garnsey SM, Kubose T, Kramer AF (2010) Driving impairs talking. Psychon Bull Rev 17(1):15–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco M, Biever WJ, Gallagher JP, Dingus TA (2006) The impact of secondary task cognitive processing demand on driving performance. Accid Anal Prev 38(5):895–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butter CM, Buchtel HA, Santucci R (1989) Spatial attentional shifts: Further evidence for the role of polysensory mechanisms using visual and tactile stimuli. Neuropsychologia 27:1231–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byers JC, Bittner AC, Hill SG (1989) Traditional and raw task load index (TLX) correlations: are paired comparisons necessary? In: Mital A (ed) Advances in industrial ergonomics and safety. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 481–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Carsten O (2014) Introduction to the special section: can workload take the strain? Cogn Technol Work 16:284–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department for Transport (2012) National travel survey: statistical release 2012. Department for Transport, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dingus T, McGehee D, Manakkal N, Jahns S, Carney C, Hankey J (1997) Human factors field evaluation of automotive headway/collision warning devices. Hum Factors 38(2):16–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Donmez B, Boyle LN, Lee JD (2006) The impact of driver distraction mitigation strategies on driving performance. Hum Factors 48(4):785–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 37(1):32–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR (2006) Situation awareness. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, vol 3. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2006) European statement of principles on the design of human machine interaction. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2007/l_032/l_03220070206en02000241.pdf. Accessed 26 Dec 2017

  • Geden M, Feng J (2015) Simulated driving environment impacts mind wandering. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 59th annual meeting

  • Godthelp H, Milgram P, Blaauw GJ (1984) The development of a time-related measure to describe driving strategy. Hum Factors 26:257–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gwyther H, Holland C (2012) The effect of age, gender and attitudes on self-regulation in driving. Accid Anal Prev 45:19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In Hancock PA, Meshkati N (eds) Human mental workload. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 139–183

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hibberd DL, Jamson SL, Carsten OMJ (2013) Mitigating the effects of in-vehicle distractions through use of the psychological refractory period paradigm. Accid Anal Prev 50:1096–1103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho C, Reed N, Spence C (2006) Assessing the effectiveness of intuitive vibrotactile warning signals in preventing front-to-rear-end collision in a driving simulator. Accid Anal Prev 38(5):988–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu PS, Reuscher TR (2004) Summary of travel trends: 2001 national household travel survey. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurwitz JB, Wheatley DJ (2001) Driver choice of headway with auditory warnings. In: Paper presented at the 2001 meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Minneapolis, MN

  • Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (2004) Guideline for In-vehicle display systems, version 3.0, Tokyo, Japan. Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (JAMA). http://www.jama-english.jp/release/release/2005/In-vehicle_Display_GuidelineVer3.pdf

  • Jensen M, Wagner J, Alexander K, Pidgeon P (2007) A customizable human/vehicle interface for enhanced operator performance, In: Proceedings of the ASME, IMECE, Seattle, WA, pp 33–41

  • Lee JD, McGehee DV, Brown TL, Reyes ML (2002) Collision warning timing, driver distraction, and driver response to imminent rear-end collisions in a high-fidelity driving simulator. Hum Factors 44(2):314–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li P, Merat N, Zheng Z, Markkula G, Li Y, Wang Y (2017) Does cognitive distraction improve or degrade lane keeping performance? Analysis of time-to-line crossing safety margins. Transp Res Part F. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.10.002

    Google Scholar 

  • May JF, Baldwin CL, Parasuraman R (2006) Prevention of rear-end crashes in drivers with task-induced fatigue through the use of auditory collision avoidance warnings. In: Proceedings of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th annual meeting, San Francisco, CA, USA

  • McEvoy SP, Stevenson MR, Woodward M (2007) The contribution of passengers versus mobile phone use to motor vehicle crashes resulting in hospital attendance by the driver. Accid Anal Prev 39(6):1170–1176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E, Atchley P, Little TD (2009) The effects of perception of risk and importance of answering and initiating a cellular phone call while driving. Accid Anal Prev 41(3):438–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pashler H (2000) Task switching and multitask performance. In: Monsell S, Driver J (eds) Attention and performance XVIII: control of mental processes. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 277–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauzié A, Alauzet A (1991) Specificity of elderly drivers and road safety, in “designing for everyone”. Taylor and Francis, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Piechulla W, Mayser C, Gehrke H, König W (2003) Reducing drivers’ mental workload by means of an adaptive man–machine interface. Transp Res Part F 6(4):233–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer B (2009) Impact of cognitive task complexity on drivers’ visual tunnelling. Transp Res Rec 2138:13–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rimmö PA, Hakamies-Blomqvist L (2002) Older drivers’ aberrant driving behaviour, impaired activity and health as reasons for self-imposed driving limitation. Transp Res Part F 5:345–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockwell T (1988) Spare visual capacity I driving revisited, new empirical results for an old idea. Vis Vehicles II:317–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvucci DD, Beltowska J (2008) Effects of memory rehearsal on driver performance: experiment and theoretical account. Hum Factors 50(5):834–844

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Society of Automotive Engineers (2004) Navigation and route guidance function accessibility while driving, (SAE recommended practice J2364). Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence C, Driver J (eds) (2004) Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki K, Jansson H (2003) An analysis of driver’s steering behaviour during auditory or haptic warnings for the designing of lane departure warning systems. JSAE Rev 24(4):65–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teh E, Jamson S, Carsten O, Jamson H (2014) Temporal fluctuations in driving demand: the effect of traffic complexity on subjective measures of workload and driving performance. Transp Res Part F 22:207–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teh E, Jamson S, Carsten O (2018) Mind the gap: drivers underestimate the impact of the behaviour of other traffic on their workload. Appl Ergon 67:125–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tijerina L, Blommer M, Curry R, Greenberg J, Kochhar D, Simonds C, Watson D (2011) Simulator study on effects of alternative distraction mitigation strategies in driver workload manager. Transp Res Rec 2248:81–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tractinsky N, Ram ES, Shinar D (2013) To call or not to call—that is the question (while driving). Accid Anal Prev 56:59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uchiyama Y, Kojima S, Hongo T, Terashima R, Toshihiro W (2004) Voice information system that adapts to driver’s mental workload. RandD Rev Toyota CRDL 39(1):16–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Verwey WB (2000) On-line driver workload estimation: effects of road situation and age on secondary task measures. Ergonomics 43(2):187–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor TW, Harbluk J. Engström JA (2005) Sensitivity of eye-movement measures to in-vehicle task difficulty. Transp Res Part F 8:167–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollrath M, Totzke I (2005) Secondary tasks while driving effects and countermeasures. Adv Transp Stud Int J B 7:67–80

    Google Scholar 

  • White MP, Eiser JR, Harris P (2004) Risk perceptions of mobile phone use while driving. Risk Anal 24:323–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White MP, Eiser JR, Harris P, Pahl S (2007) Who reaps the benefits, who bears the risks? Comparative optimism, comparative utility, and regulatory preferences for mobile phone technology. Risk Anal 27:741–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD (2002) Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 3(2):159–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiese E, Lee J (2004) Auditory alerts for in-vehicle information systems: the effects of temporal conflict and sound parameters on driver attitudes and performance. Ergonomics 47(9):965–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu C, Tsimhoni O, Liu Y (2008) Development of an adaptive workload management system using the queuing network-model human processor (QN-MHP). IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 9(3):463–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yanko MR, Spalek TM (2014) Driving with the wandering mind: the effect that mind-wandering has on driving performance. Hum Factors 6(2):60–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Zijlstra FRH (1993) Efficiency in work behavior. A design approach for modern tools. Ph.D Thesis, Delft University of Technology. Delft University Press, Delft, The Netherlands

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the kind assistance of all participants in this study as well as the members of staff at the University of Leeds Driving Simulator (Tony Horrobin, Michael Daly). This research was conducted in collaboration with the Jaguar Land Rover Human Machine Interface Research Department team.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Special Vehicle Operation, Jaguar Land Rover, Kenilworth, CV8 1NQ, UK

    Evona Teh

  2. Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    Samantha Jamson & Oliver Carsten

Authors
  1. Evona Teh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samantha Jamson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oliver Carsten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evona Teh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Teh, E., Jamson, S. & Carsten, O. Design characteristics of a workload manager to aid drivers in safety–critical situations. Cogn Tech Work 20, 401–412 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0490-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0490-2

Keywords