skip to main content
10.1145/3122986.3122991acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Visual Attention During Simulated Autonomous Driving in the US and Japan

Published: 24 September 2017 Publication History

Abstract

To explore cultural differences in driver behavior for the purposes of vehicle automation, we used eye tracking to measure fixation patterns of Japanese and US participants (N = 98) viewing video simulations of automated driving through San Francisco and Osaka. After each drive, we asked participants questions about objects and events from the video.
Japanese participants showed higher fixation counts and durations than US participants for salient foreground objects in the traffic scene, and answered questions about those objects more correctly. US participants showed higher fixation counts than Japanese participants on visually prominent background features, and gave more correct answers about those. Consistency between fixation count and fixation duration on an object or feature, and recall of that object or feature, suggests that situation awareness during simulated automated driving proceeds from patterns of visual fixation on elements of the traffic scene.

References

[1]
R.A. Armstrong. 2014. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 34(5), 502--508.
[2]
Yoav Benjamini and Yosef Hochberg. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 57, 289--300.
[3]
Hannah F. Chua, Julie E. Boland, Richard E. Nisbett. 2005. Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. PNAS, 102(35), 12629--12633.
[4]
Mica R. Endsley. 1995a. Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37, 1 (1995), 65--84.
[5]
Mica R. Endsley. 1995b. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32--64.
[6]
M.R. Endsley, & E.O. Kiris. 1995. The Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem and Level of Control in Automation. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37(2), 381--394.
[7]
Karen Gasper and Gerald L. Clore. 2002. Attending to the big picture: mood and global versus local processing of visual information", Psychological Science, Vol.13, No.1.
[8]
Joshua O. Goh, Jiat Chow Tan, Denise C. Park. 2009. Culture modulates eye-movements to Visual Novelty. PLoS ONE 4: e8238.
[9]
J.L. Harbluk, Y.I. Noy, & M. Eizenman. 2002. The impact of cognitive distraction on driver visual behaviour and vehicle control (No. TP# 13889 E).
[10]
Shinobu Kitayama, Sean Duffy, Tadashi Kawamura and Jeff T. Larson. 2003. Perceiving an object and context in different cultures: A cultural look at new look. Psychological Science, 14, 3.
[11]
Kwan Min Lee. 2004. Presence, explicated. Communication Theory 14, 1 (2004), 27--50.
[12]
A. Lindgren, F. Chen, P.W. Jordan, & H. Zhang (2008). Requirements for the design of advanced driver assistance systems-The differences between Swedish and Chinese drivers. International Journal of Design, 2(2).
[13]
Andrew Mackinnon, Anthony F. Jorn, Helen Christensen et al. 1998. A Short form of the positive and negative affect schedule: evaluation of factorial validity and invariance across demographic variables in a community sample. Personality and Individual Differences 27 (1999) 405--416.
[14]
Takahiko Masuda, Richard E. Nisbett. 2006. Culture and change blindness. Cognitive Science, 30, 381--399.
[15]
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2008. National motor vehicle crash causation survey: Report to congress. <https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/811059>
[16]
Richard E. Nisbett, Yuri Miyamoto. 2005. The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 467--473.
[17]
Pontus Ollson. 2007. Real-time and Offline Filters for Eye Tracking: Master's degree Project. KTH Electrical Engineering.
[18]
T. Özkan, T. Lajunen, J.E. Chliaoutakis, D. Parker, & H. Summala. 2006. Cross-cultural differences in driving behaviours: A comparison of six countries. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 9(3), 227--242.
[19]
Robert Paeglis, Kristaps Bluss, Aigars Atvars. 2011. Driving experience and special skills reflected in eye movements. Proc. Of SPIIE, Vol.8155.
[20]
O. Palinko, A.L. Kun, A. Shyrokov, & P. Heeman. 2010. Estimating cognitive load using remote eye tracking in a driving simulator. In Proceedings of the 2010 symposium on eye-tracking research & applications(pp. 141--144). ACM.
[21]
Keith Rayner, Xingshan Li, Carrick C. Williams, et al. 2007. Eye movements during information processing tasks: Individual differences and cultural effects. Vision Research, 47, 2714--2726.
[22]
M.A. Recarte & L.M. Nunes. 2000. Effects of verbal and spatial-imagery tasks on eye fixations while driving. Journal of experimental psychology: Applied, 6(1), 31.
[23]
SAE On-Road Automated Vehicle Standards Committee. 2014. Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to on-road motor vehicle automated driving systems. Technical Report J3016_201401.
[24]
Paul Salmon, Michael Regan, Ian Johnston. 2005. Human error and road transport: phase one -- A framework for an error tolerant road transport system. Center Report Series, 256.
[25]
Atsushi Sato and Asako Yasuda. 2001. Development of the Japanese of positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS) scales. Japan Society of Personality Psychology, 9-2, pp. 138--139.
[26]
D. Sirkin, N. Martelaro, M. Johns, & W. Ju. 2017. Toward Measurement of Situation Awareness in Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 405--415). ACM.
[27]
T.W. Victor, J.L. Harbluk, & J.A. Engström. 2005. Sensitivity of eye-movement measures to in-vehicle task difficulty. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 8(2), 167--190.
[28]
H.W. Warner, T. Özkan, T. Lajunen, & G. Tzamalouka. 2011. Cross-cultural comparison of drivers' tendency to commit different aberrant driving behaviours. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 14(5), 390--399.
[29]
David Watson, Lee Anna Clark and Auke Tellegen. 1988. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.54, No.6, pp. 1063--1070.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Driven to Distraction: Exploring Mind Wandering During a Virtual Reality City DriveProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3640792.3677723(227-238)Online publication date: 22-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Pistol: Pupil Invisible Supportive Tool in the WildSN Computer Science10.1007/s42979-024-02606-w5:3Online publication date: 21-Feb-2024
  • (2023)Neural Correlates of Human-Machine Trust in Autonomous Vehicles ContextChaos, Fractals and Complexity10.1007/978-3-031-37404-3_17(245-262)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Visual Attention During Simulated Autonomous Driving in the US and Japan

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    AutomotiveUI '17: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications
    September 2017
    317 pages
    ISBN:9781450351508
    DOI:10.1145/3122986
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 24 September 2017

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Eye movements
    2. automated driving
    3. cross-culture
    4. eye tracking
    5. gaze
    6. situation awareness
    7. visual perception

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    AutomotiveUI '17
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    AutomotiveUI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate 29 of 85 submissions, 34%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 248 of 566 submissions, 44%

    Upcoming Conference

    AutomotiveUI '25

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)32
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
    Reflects downloads up to 15 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Driven to Distraction: Exploring Mind Wandering During a Virtual Reality City DriveProceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3640792.3677723(227-238)Online publication date: 22-Sep-2024
    • (2024)Pistol: Pupil Invisible Supportive Tool in the WildSN Computer Science10.1007/s42979-024-02606-w5:3Online publication date: 21-Feb-2024
    • (2023)Neural Correlates of Human-Machine Trust in Autonomous Vehicles ContextChaos, Fractals and Complexity10.1007/978-3-031-37404-3_17(245-262)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2023
    • (2022)HPCGen: Hierarchical K-Means Clustering and Level Based Principal Components for Scan Path Genaration2022 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications10.1145/3517031.3529625(1-7)Online publication date: 8-Jun-2022
    • (2022)Teleoperation of Semi-autonomous Robots Through Uncertain Environments2022 Opportunity Research Scholars Symposium (ORSS)10.1109/ORSS55359.2022.9806028(31-37)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2022
    • (2021)Little Road Driving HUD: Heads-Up Display Complexity Influences Drivers’ Perceptions of Automated VehiclesProceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3411764.3445575(1-15)Online publication date: 6-May-2021
    • (2020)Effects of an Unexpected and Expected Event on Older Adults’ Autonomic Arousal and Eye Fixations During Autonomous DrivingFrontiers in Psychology10.3389/fpsyg.2020.57196111Online publication date: 18-Sep-2020
    • (2019)運転行動に関与する心理・認知機能特性の個人差Journal of the Society of Biomechanisms10.3951/sobim.43.4_22943:4(229-234)Online publication date: 2019
    • (2019)Don't you see them?Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings10.1145/3349263.3351338(232-237)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2019
    • (2019)From Manual Driving to Automated DrivingProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3342197.3344529(70-90)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2019
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media