Browsing the information highway while driving: three in-vehicle touch screen scrolling methods and driver distraction
- 635 Downloads
Distraction effects of three alternative touch screen scrolling methods for searching music tracks on a mobile device were studied in a driving simulation experiment with 24 participants. Page-by-page scrolling methods with Buttons or Swipe that better facilitate resumption of visual search following interruptions were expected to lead to more consistent in-vehicle glance durations and thus on less severe distraction effects than Kinetic scrolling. As predicted, Kinetic scrolling induced decreased visual sampling efficiency and increased visual load compared with Swipe, increased experienced workload compared with both Buttons and Swipe, as well as decreased lane-keeping accuracy compared with baseline. However, Buttons did not significantly excel Kinetic with any metric but on subjective ratings. Based on the results, we do not recommend the use of kinetic scrolling with in-vehicle touch screen displays in the manner used in the experiment. Instead, page-by-page swiping seems to suit significantly better for in-vehicle displays due to its systematic nature and low levels of pointing accuracy required for scrolling the pages.
KeywordsDriver distraction In-vehicle information system Information search Touch screen Scrolling method Visual sampling Visual load Driving performance
The author wants to express gratitude especially to Mikko Nirhamo at Nokia for providing the valuable research topic as well as Juha Hämäläinen, Ilkka Kotilainen, Stefan Mayer, and Konstantin Käfer for their assistance in the experiments. This work was supported by research projects Theseus II and OPTIMUM funded by TEKES (Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation). The driving simulation environment was developed by a grant from the Henry Ford Foundation.
- 1.Chisholm SL, Caird JF, Lockhart J, Fern L, Teteris E (2007) Driving performance while engaged in MP-3 player interaction: effects of practice and task difficulty on PRT and eye movements. In Proceedings of the fourth international driving symposium on human factors in driver assessment, training and vehicle design. University of Iowa Public Policy Center, Iowa City, pp 238–245Google Scholar
- 5.GM Press Release (2011) Cadillac CUE: intuitive and connected driving in 2012—integrates interior design with industry-first control, command technologies. Retrieved from: http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Oct/1012cadillac
- 8.Klauer SG, Dingus TA, Neale VL, Sudweeks JD, Ramsey DJ (2006). The impact of driver inattention on near-crash/crash risk: an analysis using the 100-car naturalistic driving study data (DOT HS Rep. 810 594). U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 13.Ratwani RJ, Andrews AE, McCurry M, Trafton JG, Peterson MS (2007). Using peripheral processing and spatial memory to facilitate task resumption. In: Human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting proceedings, vol 51, pp 244–248Google Scholar
- 14.Salvucci DD (2010). On reconstruction of task context after interruption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems: CHI 2010. ACM Press, New York, pp 89–92Google Scholar
- 15.Society of Automotive Engineers (2000) SAE J2396 Surface vehicle recommended practice, definitions and experimental measures related to the specification of driver visual behavior using video based techniques. Society of Automotive Engineers, WarrendaleGoogle Scholar
- 17.Wierwille WW (1993) An initial model of visual sampling of in-car displays and controls. In: Gale AG, Brown ID, Haslegrave CM, Kruysse HW, Taylor SP (eds) Vision in vehicles IV. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V, Amsterdam, pp 271–279Google Scholar
- 18.Wierwille WW, Tijerina L (1998) Modeling the relationship between driver in-vehicle visual demands and accident occurrence. In: Gale AG (ed) Vision in vehicles VI. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 233–243Google Scholar