Effects of secondary tasks and display position on glance behavior during partially automated driving. (January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hensch, Ann-Christin; Rauh, Nadine; Schmidt, Cornelia; Hergeth, Sebastian; Naujoks, Frederik; Krems, Josef F.; Keinath, Andreas
• Is Part Of: Transportation research. Volume 68(2020)
• Page Start: 23
• Page End: 32
• Publication Date: 2020-01
• Subjects: Partially automated driving -- Secondary task -- Eye tracking -- Head-up display -- Head-down display; Automobile drivers -- Psychology -- Periodicals; Automobile driving -- Psychological aspects -- Periodicals; Transportation -- Psychological aspects -- Periodicals; 629.283019
• DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2019.11.014
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1369-8478

Abstract

Highlights: Longer glance durations on the HUD compared to the HDD in partially automated driving. Text reading, that required scrolling, showed longer glance durations vs. the SuRT. Drivers prefer a HUD vs. a HDD for secondary tasks in partially automated driving. Abstract: The driving task is becoming increasingly automated, thus changing the driver's role. Moreover, in-vehicle information systems using different display positions and information processing channels might encourage secondary task engagement. During manual driving scenarios, varying secondary tasks and display positions could influence driver's glance behavior. However, their impact on the driver's capability to monitor the partially automated driving system has not yet been determined. The current study assessed both the effects of different secondary tasks (Surrogate Reference Task (SuRT) vs. text reading) and display positions (head-up display (HUD) vs. center console) on driver's glance behavior during partially automated driving in a simulated car following task. Different automation system failures regarding the lateral and longitudinal control occurred while driving. Furthermore, participants' reported advantages, disadvantages and preferences regarding the investigated display positions as well as regarding the secondary task engagement during partially automated driving in general. Mixed design ANOVAs revealed that the HUD yielded considerably longer eyes-on display time (total and mean glance durations) than the center console. Moreover, the text reading task resulted in longer total and mean glance durations than the SuRT. Similar to manual driving scenarios, the results showed a consistent effect of display position and secondary task on the driver's glance behavior. Despite the longer eyes-on display time for the HUD, its proximity to the driving environment might enable a faster identification of and reaction to critical situations (e.g., due to system failures). Participants would prefer the HUD as display position compared to the center console. Regarding secondary task engagement during partially automated driving participants seemed to be aware of the benefits but also of the risks.