Integrating Different Kinds of Driver Distraction in Controllability Validations
Executing secondary tasks while driving can affect situation awareness, reaction times and response selection by the driver. This may result in a decreased performance of the driver’s control in case of sudden system interventions, e.g. of an intervening
- PDF / 746,698 Bytes
- 25 Pages / 476.22 x 680.315 pts Page_size
- 4 Downloads / 191 Views
29
Rico Auerswald, Alexander Frey, and Norbert Schneider
29.1
Introduction
The RESPONSE 3 Code of Practice [1] defined driver distraction as “the process of diverting the attention of the driver from the driving-task to something else” (p. 5). Regan and Strayer [2] have assigned driver distraction into a taxonomy categorizing different causes for driver inattention. This taxonomy is not limited to driver distraction only, but covering also inattention-causes such as driver neglected or cursory attention. However, as another category Regan and Strayer define driver diverted attention equivalently to driver distraction. Moreover they subdivide this category into driving-related and non-driving-related tasks. In this chapter we refer to diverted attention through non-driving-related tasks when focusing on driver distraction due to secondary tasks. Due to the increased usage of mobile or handheld devices while driving, driver distraction is still responsible for a huge amount of accidents with serious injuries. NHTSA [3] reported that about 10% of all serious crashes were related to distracted drivers with a total of 3331 killed road users in 2011. Additionally, naturalistic driving studies (NDS) revealed an increased risk to get into safety critical situations. Olson et al. (e. g. [4]) found, that 71% of all crashes and 60% of all safety critical events in their data set were related to distracted drivers. Due to the fact that driver distraction decreases the driving performance [5] it may also affect the controllability of intervening driving functions. For example, driving distraction can cause increased reaction times or decreased lane keeping performance. In addition, Huemer & Vollrath [6] pointed out that drivers turn their attention to R. Auerswald () A. Frey Automated Driving, Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) Bergisch Gladbach, Germany N. Schneider Center for Traffic Sciences (IZVW), University of Wuerzburg Wuerzburg, Germany © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2018 K. Bengler et al. (eds.), UR:BAN Human Factors in Traffic, ATZ/MTZ-Fachbuch, DOI 10.1007/978-3-658-15418-9_29
495
496
R. Auerswald et al.
secondary tasks for a significant amount of the travelling time. In their study, 80% of the participants reported to have done at least one secondary task within the last 30 min of driving. Therefore, it can be assumed that drivers are often engaged with secondary tasks while driving and are more likely to get into safety critical situations. This increases the likelihood for distracted drivers to be confronted with an emergency assistant like emergency braking or emergency steering. Although it is the aim of these systems to assist the driver in these critical situations, it shows that it is important to consider driver distraction when analysing the driver behaviour, especially when interacting with emergency assistants. To date research has neglected the effect of driver distraction on controllability of intervening driving functions. Therefore, we try to answer the question whether driver
Data Loading...
