skip to main content
10.1145/3544999.3552324acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Work in Progress

Can EEG Measurements be Used to Estimate the Performance of Taking over Control from an Autonomous Vehicle for Different Levels of Distracted Driving? An Explorative Study

Authors Info & Claims
Published:17 September 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Driver distraction is a concern for traffic safety. Most research has been focused on validating or quantifying the relationship between eyes-off-road metrics and driving performance without specifically addressing cognitive aspects of distracted driving. The current study explores to what extent electroencephalogram data is a good predictor of how successful a distracted driver will be able to take over control from an autonomous vehicle. Participants were driving a simulated car while being exposed to varying levels of distraction. During the ride at several moments the participants were warned to take over control, after which the control was transferred. Sometimes after taking over the control an immediate break action of the drivers was expected. It turned out that electroencephalogram based data is able to indicate to what extent participants are distracted. However, electroencephalogram based data is not able to estimate driving performance during take over control.

References

  1. ERSO 2018. Driver Distraction. European Road Safety Observatory, https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-07/ersosynthesis2018-driverdistraction.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Basacik, D., Reed, N. and Robbins, R. 2012. Smartphone use while driving: a simulator study.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Collet, C., Guillot, A. and Petit, C. 2010. Phoning while driving II: a review of driving conditions influence. Ergonomics. 53, 5 (2010), 602–616.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Collet, C., Guillot, A. and Petit, C. 2010. Phoning while driving I: a review of epidemiological, psychological, behavioural and physiological studies. Ergonomics. 53, 5 (2010), 589–601.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Dingus, T.A., Guo, F., Lee, S., Antin, J.F., Perez, M., Buchanan-King, M. and Hankey, J. 2016. Driver crash risk factors and prevalence evaluation using naturalistic driving data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 113, 10 (2016), 2636–2641.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Stelling, A. and Hagenzieker, M.P. 2012. Afleiding in het verkeer: een overzicht van de literatuur. (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Regan, M.A., Lee, J.D. and Young, K. 2008. Driver distraction: Theory, effects, and mitigation. CRC press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Ranney, T.A., Garrott, W.R. and Goodman, M.J. 2001. NHTSA driver distraction research: Past, present, and future. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Gabaude, C., Baracat, B., Jallais, C., Bonniaud, M. and Fort, A. 2012. Cognitive load measurement while driving. In: Human Factors: a view from an integrative perspective. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Wickens, C.D. 2008. Multiple resources and mental workload. Human factors. 50, 3 (2008), 449–455.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Cantin, V., Lavallière, M., Simoneau, M. and Teasdale, N. 2009. Mental workload when driving in a simulator: Effects of age and driving complexity. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 41, 4 (2009), 763–771.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. De Waard, D. and Brookhuis, K.A. 1996. The measurement of drivers’ mental workload. (1996).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller, S. 2001. Workload Measures. National Advanced Driving Simulator. University of Iowa Press: Iowa City, IA, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee, J. and Yang, J.H. 2020. Analysis of Driver's EEG Given Take-Over Alarm in SAE Level 3 Automated Driving in a Simulated Environment. International Journal of Automotive Technology. 21, 3 (Jun. 2020), 719–728. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12239-020-0070-3.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Lew, R. 2014. Assessing cognitive workload from multiple physiological measures using wavelets and machine learning. University of Idaho.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Käthner, I., Wriessnegger, S.C., Müller-Putz, G.R., Kübler, A. and Halder, S. 2014. Effects of mental workload and fatigue on the P300, alpha and theta band power during operation of an ERP (P300) brain–computer interface. Biological Psychology. 102, (Oct. 2014), 118–129. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.07.014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Klimesch, W. 2012. Alpha-band oscillations, attention, and controlled access to stored information. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 16, 12 (Dec. 2012), 606–617. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.10.007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Freeman, F.G., Mikulka, P.J., Prinzel, L.J. and Scerbo, M.W. 1999. Evaluation of an adaptive automation system using three EEG indices with a visual tracking task. Biological Psychology. 50, 1 (May 1999), 61–76. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0511(99)00002-2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Smith, A., Nutt, D., Wilson, S., Rich, N., Hayward, S. and Heatherley, S. 2002. Noise and Insomnia: A Study of Community Noise Exposure, Sleep Disturbance, Noise Sensitivity and Subjective Reports of Health: (556942009-001). American Psychological Association.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhang, B., de Winter, J., Varotto, S., Happee, R. and Martens, M. 2019. Determinants of take-over time from automated driving: A meta-analysis of 129 studies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 64, (Jul. 2019), 285–307. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.04.020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Fournier, L.R., Wilson, G.F. and Swain, C.R. 1999. Electrophysiological, behavioral, and subjective indexes of workload when performing multiple tasks: manipulations of task difficulty and training. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 31, 2 (Jan. 1999), 129–145. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(98)00049-X.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Gevins, A. and Smith, M.E. 2003. Neurophysiological measures of cognitive workload during human-computer interaction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 4, 1–2 (Jan. 2003), 113–131. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220210159717.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Can EEG Measurements be Used to Estimate the Performance of Taking over Control from an Autonomous Vehicle for Different Levels of Distracted Driving? An Explorative Study

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      AutomotiveUI '22: Adjunct Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications
      September 2022
      225 pages
      ISBN:9781450394284
      DOI:10.1145/3544999

      Copyright © 2022 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 17 September 2022

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Work in Progress
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate248of566submissions,44%

      Upcoming Conference

    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)60
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format