Interacting with the Steering Wheel: Potential Reductions in Driver Distraction

  • Sebastian Osswald
  • Alexander Meschtscherjakov
  • David Wilfinger
  • Manfred Tscheligi
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7040)

Abstract

Driving a car has become a challenge for many people despite the fact that evermore technology is built into vehicles in order to support the driver. Above all, the increasing number of in-vehicle information systems (IVIS) is a main source of driver distraction. The fragmentation of IVIS elements in the cockpit increases the attention demand and cognitive load of the driver. In this paper, we present an approach to integrate most in-car interaction possibilities into a steering wheel, by combining a multi-button row with a single touch in an intelligent steering wheel. We performed an online study (N=301) to investigate the pre-prototype user acceptance of the three different steering wheel modalities (single touch, multi button, combi touch) as well as a lab-based driving simulator study (N=10) to assess the practicability of the single touch interaction. The results of the online study showed that especially the single touch was highly accepted by the participants. The driving simulator study revealed that touch-based interaction on a steering wheel is feasible for low demand tasks in terms of driver distraction. Especially, the single touch embedded into the steering wheel is a promising approach for ambient information in the automotive context.

Keywords

automotive user interfaces touch interaction steering wheel driver distraction acceptance user studies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bach, K.M., Jaeger, M.G., Skov, M.B., Thomassen, N.G.: You can touch, but you can’t look: interacting with in-vehicle systems. In: CHI 2008: Proc. SIGCHI on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1139–1148. ACM, NY (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bruyas, M., Brusque, C., Auriault, A., Tattegrain, H., Aillerie, I., Duraz, M.: Impairment of lane change performance due to distraction: effect of experimental contexts. In: Proc. of Humanist 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burnett, G., Summerskill, S.J., Porte, J.: On-the-move destination entry for vehicle navigation systems: unsafe by any means? Behaviour and Information Technology 23, 265–272 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davis, F., Venkatesh, V.: Toward preprototype user acceptance testing of new information systems: implications for software project management. IEEE Engineering Management 51(1), 31–46 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Döring, T., Kern, D., Marshall, P., Pfeiffer, M., Schöning, J., Gruhn, V., Schmidt, A.: Gestural interaction on the steering wheel: reducing the visual demand. In: Proc. of CHI 2011, pp. 483–492. ACM, NY (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ecker, R., Broy, V., Butz, A., De Luca, A.: Pietouch: a direct touch gesture interface for interacting with in-vehicle information systems. In: Proc. of MobileHCI 2009, pp. 1–10. ACM, NY (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feld, M., Schwartz, T., Müller, C.: This Is Me: Using Ambient Voice Patterns For In-Car Positioning. In: de Ruyter, B., Wichert, R., Keyson, D.V., Markopoulos, P., Streitz, N., Divitini, M., Georgantas, N., Mana Gomez, A. (eds.) AmI 2010. LNCS, vol. 6439, pp. 290–294. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harbluk, J., Mitroi, J., Burns, P.: Three navigation systems with three tasks: using the lane-change test (LCT) to assess distraction demand. In: Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kern, D., Schmidt, A., Arnsmann, J., Appelmann, T., Pararasasegaran, N., Piepiera, B.: Writing to your car: handwritten text input while driving. In: Proc Human Factors, CHI EA 2009, pp. 4705–4710. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mattes, S.: The lane change task as a tool for driver distraction evaluation. In: Strasser, H., Rausch, H., Bubb, H. (eds.) Quality of Work and Products in Enterprises of the Future, pp. 57–60. Ergonomia Verlag, Stuttgart (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meschtscherjakov, A., Wilfinger, D., Scherndl, T., Tscheligi, M.: Acceptance of future persuasive in-car interfaces towards a more economic driving behaviour. In: Proc. of AutomotiveUI 2010, pp. 81–88. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Phithakkitnukoon, S., Veloso, M., Bento, C., Biderman, A., Ratti, C.: Taxi-Aware Map: Identifying and Predicting Vacant Taxis in the City. In: de Ruyter, B., Wichert, R., Keyson, D.V., Markopoulos, P., Streitz, N., Divitini, M., Georgantas, N., Mana Gomez, A. (eds.) AmI 2010. LNCS, vol. 6439, pp. 86–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rydström, A., Bengtsson, P., Grane, C., Broström, R., Agardh, J., Nilsson, J.: Multifunctional systems in vehicles: a usability evaluation. In: Proc. of CybErg 2005, pp. 768–775(8). Ergonomics Association Press, Johannesburg (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schmidt, A., Spiessl, W., Kern, D.: Driving automotive user interface research. IEEE Pervasive Computing 9(1), 85–88 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Strayer, D.L., Drews, F.A.: Cell-phone induced driver distraction. Current Directions in Psychological Science 16(3), 128–131 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastian Osswald
    • 1
  • Alexander Meschtscherjakov
    • 1
  • David Wilfinger
    • 1
  • Manfred Tscheligi
    • 1
  1. 1.Christian Doppler Laboratory ”Contextual Interfaces”, ICT&S CenterUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations