使用车载信息装置对驾驶行为的影响研究

为研究使用车载信息装置对驾驶行为的影响,基于虚拟驾驶仿真平台,开展正常驾驶、操作按键式和触摸屏式收音机驾驶分心试验;应用外周视觉检测任务法(PDT)测量驾驶人反应时间、PDT目标命中率以及车速和跟驰距离等参数,以评估分心行为的心理资源需求及其对驾驶绩效的影响。试验结果表明:使用车载信息装置会降低驾驶人反应能力和驾驶绩效,操作触摸屏分心与操作按键分心相比,驾驶人反应时间延长了167 ms,PDT目标命中率降低了10%,速度保持和车距保持能力下降,使用触摸屏式车载信息装置需要更多的心理资源,对两侧视野内的信息刺激反应明显迟钝,对行车安全有较大影响。     

城市道路下分心行为对驾驶员驾驶绩效的影响

为探究城市道路条件下常见驾驶分心行为对驾驶绩效的影响,以16名青年志愿者为被试,开展实车驾驶试验,测量车辆纵向和横向行驶参数,对比分析正常驾驶和分心驾驶状态下的驾驶绩效,并探讨驾驶经验的影响。结果表明：3种分心行为均使横向加速度标准差和纵向加速度标准差增加,而使速度均值降低,说明驾驶员通过速度和转向控制补偿分心状态下的驾驶绩效;交谈对速度均值和纵向加速度均值、阅读广告对速度标准差和横向加速度均值具有显著性影响(p<0.05);接听电话时,经验驾驶员速度标准差明显高于新手(p=0.021);接听电话和阅读广告次任务下,经验驾驶员的横向加速度均值均明显较高(p=0.003,p=0.004),说明经验丰富的驾驶员受分心行为的影响程度更低。     

基于驾驶模拟的自动驾驶接管行为研究*

为探索有条件自动驾驶对非驾驶相关任务的允准边界,基于实车驾驶模拟器,设计自动驾驶接管试验典型场景,招募30名被试者开展驾驶模拟试验;要求驾驶人执行3种分心形式的驾驶次任务,系统发出接管请求提示后,驾驶人接管车辆控制权以避免险情发生,并分析驾驶人接管反应时间、驾驶负荷以及驾驶绩效等相关数据。结果表明:驾驶次任务涉及的分心形式越复杂,接管过程安全性越差,视觉分心任务与操作分心任务对接管行为影响显著;驾驶人更倾向于选择制动操作接管车辆,次任务分心程度越高,制动接管比例越大;与乘客聊天对接管行为影响不显著,看视频和玩手机游戏均会显著延长接管反应时间,增加工作负荷与车辆纵向减速度,玩手机游戏还会显著提升车辆横向加速度。     

手机导航方式对驾驶行为的影响研究

为研究驾驶员驾驶时使用不同手机导航方式对驾驶行为的影响,开展模拟驾驶试验,利用眼动仪获取4个场景下车辆行驶状态和驾驶人视觉参数;通过均值比较,方差和显著性分析,探究不同手机导航方式下驾驶行为存在的差异。结果表明:不同手机导航方式均造成驾驶分心,但分心程度不同;手持手机导航使驾驶人对前方和左侧区域的关注下降最为显著;使用导航时,驾驶人一般通过降低车速来减少分心带来的潜在风险,其中手持手机导航降低幅度最大;使用手机导航时,车辆纵向速度标准差更加集中,说明此时驾驶人对于车辆的控制变强。     

智能手机应用程序使用与操作的驾驶分心风险影响研究

为研究智能手机应用程序操作方式与使用行为对驾驶分心影响的问题,探讨智能手机程序操作方式对驾驶分心影响的优劣关系,基于结构方程模型提出4个因果关系假设,构建涵盖程序使用、驾驶分心、驾驶绩效等潜变量的智能手机使用行为影响的结构方程模型。通过收集线下问卷的方式进行调查,搭建模拟场景,设计6项实验方案,通过驾驶模拟实验方式收集相关数据,建立相对偏差矩阵。研究结果表明：手机通话功能的使用(路径系数0.472)对驾驶分心影响显著,手机导航功能使用(路径系数0.256)、手机音乐功能使用(路径系数0.249)对驾驶分心影响不显著。语音交互方式均优于手动操作方式,其中语音交互启动导航方式(F₃=0.019)的影响最小。研究结果可对道路驾驶情况下智能手机应用使用与操作方式的研究起推动作用。     

驾驶人视觉分心与认知分心研究综述

驾驶分心与交通事故有高度相关性。为探索驾驶分心对驾驶行为的影响及其影响方式,系统梳理国内外相关研究内容。首先介绍视觉分心和认知分心对驾驶行为影响方式的区别,归纳分心时视觉行为与操作行为的相关性;然后对比分析视觉分心、认知分心和结合分心对驾驶安全性的作用强度;最后论述驾驶分心研究目前存在的问题以及今后的研究方向。分析结果表明,驾驶分心严重威胁驾驶安全。视觉和操作行为特性是研究分心的主要对象,而不同类型驾驶分心的视觉和操作行为敏感度指标研究还处于初级阶段。3类驾驶分心的区别可为分心的检测和识别提供理论依据,目前对3类分心任务的评级尚未完善,大多数研究采取的强制分心任务与实际驾驶过程之间是否存在差异,能否得出理想的结论仍有待深入研究。     

行人过街使用手机行为的心理影响因素研究

为深入研究行人过街使用手机行为成因,基于计划行为理论(TPB),引入分心感知变量,从社会心理学角度探讨影响行人过街使用手机行为的心理因素及因素间的作用关系。通过对405份问卷调查数据进行信度和效度检验,构建行人过街使用手机行为结构方程模型(SEM),得到各影响因素间的关系路径。结果表明,用TPB可以有效解释和预测行人过街使用手机行为,行人过街使用手机行为的影响因素中,行为意向和知觉行为控制最重要,其次是态度和分心感知,主观规范影响最弱。     

融合分心维度的驾驶行为可靠性研究

分心驾驶容易影响驾驶行为,进而导致交通事故的问题。用理论建模方法,研究分心对驾驶行为及其可靠性的影响。介绍分心驾驶的定义和维度。基于驾驶行为理论,建立融合分心维度的驾驶行为模型,分析不同分心维度对驾驶行为的影响机理。基于可靠性理论,建立融合分心维度的驾驶行为可靠性模型,分析不同分心维度对驾驶行为可靠性的影响。结果表明:不同维度分心对驾驶行为的影响具有各自特点和交互性;减少影响系数高的分心维度,有助于提高驾驶行为可靠性;多维度分心比单维度分心会更大程度地降低驾驶行为可靠度,应减少或避免复合分心。     

驾驶行为模型的研究进展

驾驶员行为模型的研究对于预测和干预驾驶员的风险行为、设计相关的道路安全设施与车内设备,以及制定交通法律法规等具有重要的意义。为了解和掌握学术界关于驾驶行为模型的研究进展,搜集、筛选和归纳了1960—2010年被SCI数据库索引的相关文章,将驾驶行为模型分类为描述性模型、信息处理模型、动机模型、计划行为理论(TPB)和躯体标识假设,并对每种模型进行评述和总结,理清这些模型间的内在联系。研究发现,现有各模型只是从某个角度研究驾驶员行为的部分特征,而不能解释驾驶员的全部行为。今后应不断完善和整合各类模型,并借鉴心理学、生理学和行为科学等相关领域的理论、知识,使驾驶行为模型变得更为实用、有效。     

行车距离为安全

安全行车距离包括反应距离和停车距离。影响汽车安全行驶距离的因素很多，主要有以下几种因素：车辆的行驶速度，驾驶员的反应能力、时间，路面状况，天气变化，载重量的多少及车辆制动系统的结构形式等等。如何掌握判断汽车的安全行车距离，对驾驶安全十分重要。由于前后车的行驶速度一般都差不多，同时，制动过程也     

Examining drivers' eye glance patterns during distracted driving: Insights from scanning randomness and glance transition matrix

IntroductionVisual attention to the driving environment is of great importance for road safety. Eye glance behavior has been used as an indicator of distracted driving. This study examined and quantified drivers' glance patterns and features during distracted driving.MethodData from an existing naturalistic driving study were used. Entropy rate was calculated and used to assess the randomness associated with drivers' scanning patterns. A glance-transition proportion matrix was defined to quantity visual search patterns transitioning among four main eye glance locations while driving (i.e., forward on-road, phone, mirrors and others). All measurements were calculated within a 5 s time window under both cell phone and non-cell phone use conditions.ResultsResults of the glance data analyses showed different patterns between distracted and non-distracted driving, featured by a higher entropy rate value and highly biased attention transferring between forward and phone locations during distracted driving. Drivers in general had higher number of glance transitions, and their on-road glance duration was significantly shorter during distracted driving when compared to non-distracted driving.ConclusionsResults suggest that drivers have a higher scanning randomness/disorder level and shift their main attention from surrounding areas towards phone area when engaging in visual-manual tasks.Practical applicationsDrivers' visual search patterns during visual-manual distraction with a high scanning randomness and a high proportion of eye glance transitions towards the location of the phone provide insight into driver distraction detection. This will help to inform the design of in-vehicle human-machine interface/systems.     

Assessing characteristics related to the use of seatbelts and cell phones by drivers: Application of a bivariate probit model

IntroductionThe effects of cell phone use and safety belt use have been an important focus of research related to driver safety. Cell phone use has been shown to be a significant source of driver distraction contributing to substantial degradations in driver performance, while safety belts have been demonstrated to play a vital role in mitigating injuries to crash-involved occupants.MethodThis study examines the prevalence of cell phone use and safety belt non-use among the driving population through direct observation surveys. A bivariate probit model is developed to simultaneously examine the factors that affect cell phone and safety belt use among motor vehicle drivers.ResultsThe results show that several factors may influence drivers' decision to use cell phones and safety belts, and that these decisions are correlated.Practical applicationsUnderstanding the factors that affect both cell phone use and safety belt non-use is essential to targeting policy and programs that reduce such behavior.     

Effects of naturalistic cell phone conversations on driving performance

PROBLEM: The prevalence of automobile drivers talking on cell phones is growing, but the effect of that behavior on driving performance is unclear. Also unclear is the relationship between the difficulty level of a phone conversation and the resulting distraction. METHOD: This study used a driving simulator to determine the effect that easy and difficult cell phone conversations have on driving performance. RESULTS: Cell phone use caused participants to have higher variation in accelerator pedal position, drive more slowly with more variation in speed, and report a higher level of workload regardless of conversation difficulty level. CONCLUSIONS: Drivers may cope with the additional stress of phone conversations by enduring higher workloads or setting reduced performance goals. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: Because an increasing number of people talk on the phone while driving, crashes caused by distracted drivers using cell phones will cause disruptions in business, as well as injury, disability, and permanent loss of personnel.     

Examination of drivers' cell phone use behavior at intersections by using naturalistic driving data

IntroductionMany driving simulator studies have shown that cell phone use while driving greatly degraded driving performance. In terms of safety analysis, many factors including drivers, vehicles, and driving situations need to be considered. Controlled or simulated studies cannot always account for the full effects of these factors, especially situational factors such as road condition, traffic density, and weather and lighting conditions. Naturalistic driving by its nature provides a natural and realistic way to examine drivers' behaviors and associated factors for cell phone use while driving.MethodIn this study, driving speed while using a cell phone (conversation or visual/manual tasks) was compared to two baselines (baseline 1: normal driving condition, which only excludes driving while using a cell phone, baseline 2: driving-only condition, which excludes all types of secondary tasks) when traversing an intersection.ResultsThe outcomes showed that drivers drove slower when using a cell for both conversation and visual/manual (VM) tasks compared to baseline conditions. With regard to cell phone conversations, drivers were more likely to drive faster during the day time compared to night time driving and drive slower under moderate traffic compared to under sparse traffic situations. With regard to VM tasks, there was a significant interaction between traffic and cell phone use conditions. The maximum speed with VM tasks was significantly lower than that with baseline conditions under sparse traffic conditions. In contrast, the maximum speed with VM tasks was slightly higher than that with baseline driving under dense traffic situations.Practical applicationsThis suggests that drivers might self-regulate their behavior based on the driving situations and demand for secondary tasks, which could provide insights on driver distraction guidelines. With the rapid development of in-vehicle technology, the findings in this research could lead the improvement of human-machine interface (HMI) design as well.     

Distracted walking: cell phones increase injury risk for college pedestrians

Introduction

Distraction on cell phones jeopardizes motor-vehicle driver safety, but few studies examine distracted walking. At particular risk are college students, who walk frequently in and near traffic, have increased pedestrian injury rates compared to other age groups, and frequently use cell phones. Method: Using an interactive and immersive virtual environment, two experiments studied the effect of cell phone conversation on distraction of college student pedestrians. In the first, we examined whether pedestrians would display riskier behavior when distracted by a naturalistic cell phone conversation than when undistracted. We also considered whether individual difference factors would moderate the effect of the distraction. In a second experiment, we examined the impact of three forms of distraction on pedestrian safety: (a) engaging in a cell phone conversation, (b) engaging in a cognitively challenging spatial task by phone, and (c) engaging in a cognitively challenging mental arithmetic task by phone. Results: Results revealed that cell phone conversations distracted college pedestrians considerably across all pedestrian safety variables measured, with just one exception. Attention to traffic was not affected by the naturalistic phone conversation in Experiment 1, but was altered by the cognitively-demanding content of some types of conversation in Experiment 2. The content of the conversation did not play a major role in distraction across other variables; both mundane and cognitively complex conversations distracted participants. Moreover, no significant associations between individual difference factors and susceptibility to distraction emerged. Impact on Industry: Results may inform researchers, policy makers, and pedestrians themselves. Educational campaigns might discourage telephone conversations in pedestrian environments.     

Using naturalistic driving study data to investigate the impact of driver distraction on driver's brake reaction time in freeway rear-end events in car-following situation

IntroductionThe rear-end crash is one of the most common freeway crash types, and driver distraction is often cited as a leading cause of rear-end crashes. Previous research indicates that driver distraction could have negative effects on driving performance, but the specific association between driver distraction and crash risk is still not fully revealed. This study sought to understand the mechanism by which driver distraction, defined as secondary task distraction, could influence crash risk, as indicated by a driver's reaction time, in freeway car-following situations.MethodA statistical analysis, exploring the causal model structure regarding drivers’ distraction impacts on reaction times, was conducted. Distraction duration, distraction scenario, and secondary task type were chosen as distraction-related factors. Besides, exogenous factors including weather, visual obstruction, lighting condition, traffic density, and intersection presence and endogenous factors including driver age and gender were considered.ResultsThere was an association between driver distraction and reaction time in the sample freeway rear-end events from SHRP 2 NDS database. Distraction duration, the distracted status when a leader braked, and secondary task type were related to reaction time, while all other factors showed no significant effect on reaction time.ConclusionsThe analysis showed that driver distraction duration is the primary direct cause of the increase in reaction time, with other factors having indirect effects mediated by distraction duration. Longer distraction duration, the distracted status when a leader braked, and engaging in auditory-visual-manual secondary task tended to result in longer reaction times.Practical applicationsGiven drivers will be distracted occasionally, countermeasures which shorten distraction duration or avoid distraction presence while a leader vehicle brakes are worth considering. This study helps better understand the mechanism of freeway rear-end events in car-following situations, and provides a methodology that can be adopted to study the association between driver behavior and driving features.     

Inclusion of phone use while driving data in predicting distraction-affected crashes

Introduction: Given the tremendous number of lives lost or injured, distracted driving is an important safety area to study. With the widespread use of cellphones, phone use while driving has become the most common distracted driving behavior. Although researchers have developed safety performance functions (SPFs) for various crash types, SPFs for distraction-affected crashes are rarely studied in the literature. One possible reason is the lack of critical distracted behavior information in the commonly used safety data (i.e., roadway inventory, traffic, and crash counts). Recently, the frequency of phone use while driving (referred to as phone use data) is recorded by mobile application companies and has become available to safety researchers. The primary objective of this study is to examine if phone use data can potentially predict distracted-affected crashes. Method: The authors first integrated phone use data with roadway inventory, traffic, and crash data in Texas. Then, the Random Forest (RF) algorithm was applied to assess the significance of the feature - phone use while driving - for predicting the number of distraction-affected crashes on a road segment. Further, this study developed two SPFs for distraction-affected crashes with and without the phone use data, separately. Both SPFs were assessed in terms of model fitting and prediction performances. Results: RF results rank the frequency of phone use as an important factor contributing to the number of distraction-affected crashes. Performance evaluations indicated that the inclusion of phone use data in the SPFs consistently improved both fitting and prediction abilities to predict distracted-affected crashes. Practical Applications: The phone use data provide new insights into the safety analyses of distraction-affected crashes, which cannot be achieved by only using the conventional roadway inventory and crash data. Therefore, safety researchers and practitioners are encouraged to incorporate the emerging data sources in reducing distraction-affected crashes.     

Prevalence and trends of distracted driving in Canada

Introduction: This study evaluates prevalence and trends in distracted driving in Canada based on multiple indicators collected from the Road Safety Monitor (RSM) and Canada’s National Fatality Database maintained by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF). Method: Data from the RSM on self-reported distracted driving behaviors were analyzed using multivariate techniques including logistic regression analysis in various years spanning from 2004 to 2019. Data from TIRF’s National Fatality Database from 2000 to 2016 were also analyzed using piecewise regression analysis to evaluate trends and prevalence of driver distraction. Results: Significantly more Canadians reported talking on their phone hands-free or handheld phone while driving in 2019 compared to 2010. There was a 102% increase in the percentage that reported texting while driving in 2019 (9.7%) compared to 2010 (4.8%). For every 10-year increase in age, drivers were 44% less likely to text, 38% less likely to use a handheld phone, and 28% less likely to use a hands-free phone. Males were 62% more likely to use a handheld phone and 50% more likely to use a hands-free phone than females. Findings related to drivers’ perceived danger of distracted driving and attitudes are also presented. Although the number of distraction-related fatalities has not increased substantially from 2000 to 2016, the percentage of all fatalities where distraction was a contributing factor has increased. Unlike drinking drivers, distracted drivers more often kill other road users in crashes than kill themselves. Conclusions: In conclusion, while most Canadians appear to understand that one of the high-risk forms of distracted driving (i.e., texting while driving) is indeed dangerous, there is a minority who are unaware of, or resistant to, this fact. Practical Applications: Enforcement activities and education initiatives to combat distracted driving ought to be tailored to the target audience based on the patterns uncovered.     

Using event-triggered naturalistic data to examine the prevalence of teen driver distractions in rear-end crashes

IntroductionWhile teen driver distraction is cited as a leading cause of crashes, especially rear-end crashes, little information is available regarding its true prevalence. The majority of distraction studies rely on data derived from police reports, which provide limited information regarding driver distraction.MethodThis study examined over 400 teen driver rear-end crashes captured by in-vehicle event recorders. A secondary data analysis was conducted, paying specific attention to driver behaviors, eyes-off-road time, and response times to lead-vehicle braking.ResultsAmong teens in moderate to severe rear-end crashes, over 75% of drivers were observed engaging in a potentially distracting behavior. The most frequently seen driver behaviors were cell phone use, attending to a location outside the vehicle, and attending to passengers. Drivers using a cell phone had a significantly longer response time than drivers not engaged in any behaviors, while those attending to passengers did not. Additionally, in about 50% of the rear-end crashes where the driver was operating/looking at a phone (e.g., texting), the driver showed no driver response (i.e., braking or steering input) before impact, compared to 10% of crashes where the driver was attending to a passenger.ConclusionsThe high frequency of attending to passengers and use of a cell phone leading up to a crash, compounded with the associated risks, underlines the importance of continued investigation in these areas.Practical applicationsParents and teens must be educated regarding the frequency of and the potential effects of distractions. Additional enforcement may be necessary if Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) programs are to be effective. Systems that alert distracted teens could also be especially helpful in reducing rear-end collisions.     

Self-regulation of driving speed among distracted drivers: An application of driver behavioral adaptation theory

Objective: The adaptive behavior of mobile phone–distracted drivers has been a topic of much discussion in the recent literature. Both simulator and naturalistic studies suggest that distracted drivers generally select lower driving speeds; however, speed adaptation is not observed among all drivers, and the mechanisms of speed selection are not well understood. The aim of this research was to apply a driver behavioral adaptation model to investigate the speed adaptation of mobile phone–distracted drivers.

Methods: The speed selection behavior of drivers was observed in 3 phone conditions including baseline (no conversation) and hands-free and handheld phone conversations in a high-fidelity driving simulator. Speed adaptation in each phone condition was modeled as a function of secondary task demand and self-reported personal/psychological characteristics with a system of seemingly unrelated equations (SURE) accounting for potential correlations due to repeated measures experiment design.

Results: Speed adaptation is similar between hands-free and handheld phone conditions, but the predictors of speed adaptation vary across the phone conditions. Though perceived workload of secondary task demand, self-efficacy, attitude toward safety, and driver demographics were significant predictors of speed adaptation in the handheld condition, drivers' familiarity with the hands-free interface, attitude toward safety, and sensation seeking were significant predictors in the hands-free condition. Drivers who reported more positive safety attitudes selected lower driving speeds while using phones.

Conclusion: This research confirmed that behavioral adaptation models are suitable for explaining speed adaptation of mobile phone distracted drivers, and future research could be focused on further theoretical refinement.