Multitasking While Driving: How Drivers Self-Regulate Their Interaction with In-Vehicle Touchscreens in Automated Driving

References

• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carsten, O., Hibberd, D., Bärgman, J., Kovaceva, J., Pereira Cocron, M. S., Dotzauer, M., Utesch, F., Zhang, M., Stemmler, E., Guyonvarch, L., Sagberg, F., & Forcolin, F. (2017). UDRIVE deliverable 43.1, Driver distraction and inattention, of the EU FP7 project UDRIVE (1st ed.). UDRIVE Consortium.
   Google Scholar
• Choudhary, P., & Velaga, N. R. (2017). Mobile phone use during driving: Effects on speed and effectiveness of driver compensatory behaviour. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 106, 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.06.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christoph, M., Wesseling, S., & van Nes, N. (2019).Self-regulation of drivers’ mobile phone use: The influence of driving context. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 66, 262–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeGuzman, C. A., & Donmez, B. (2021). Knowledge of and trust in advanced driver assistance systems. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 156, 106121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dingus, T. A., Guo, F., Lee, S., Antin, J. F., Perez, M., Buchanan-King, M., & Hankey, J. (2016). Driver crash risk factors and prevalence evaluation using naturalistic driving data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(10), 2636–2641. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1513271113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn, N., Dingus, T., & Soccolich, S. (2020). What’s in a name? Drivers’ perceptions of the use of five SAE Level 2 driving automation systems. Journal of Safety Research, 72, 145–151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebel, P., Lingenfelder, C., & Vogelsang, A. (2023). On the forces of driver distraction: Explainable predictions for the visual demand of in-vehicle touchscreen interactions. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 183, 106956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2023.106956
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebel, P., Orlovska, J., Hünemeyer, S., Wickman, C., Vogelsang, A., & Söderberg, R. (2021). Automotive UX design and data-driven development: Narrowing the gap to support practitioners. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 11, 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100455
   Google Scholar
• Ebel, P., Berger, M., Lingenfelder, C., & Vogelsang, A. (2022)., How do drivers self-regulate their secondary task engagements? The effect of driving automation on touchscreen interactions and glance behavior [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 263–273). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543174.3545173
   Google Scholar
• Ebel, P., Lingenfelder, C., & Vogelsang, A. (2021). Visualizing event sequence data for user behavior evaluation of in-vehicle information systems [Paper presentation]. 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 219–229). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3409118.3475140
   Google Scholar
• Ervin, R., Sayer, J., LeBlanc, D., Bogard, S., Mefford, M., Hagan, Z., Bareket, Z., & Winkler, C. (2005). Automotive collision avoidance system field operational test report: Methodology and results (Tech. Rep. No. HS-809 900). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Faber, F., Jonkers, E., van Noort, M., Benmimoun, M., Andreas, P., Metz, B., Saint Pierr, G., Gustafson, D., & Malta, L. (2012). EuroFOT deliverable 6.4–Final results: Impacts on traffic safety (Project Report). ERTICO - ITS Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Gaspar, J., & Carney, C. (2019). The effect of partial automation on driver attention: A naturalistic driving study. Human Factors, 61(8), 1261–1276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819836310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hancox, G., Richardson, J., & Morris, A. (2013). Drivers’ willingness to engage with their mobile phone: The influence of phone function and road demand. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 7(2), 215–222. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2012.0133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hlavac, M. (2022). Stargazer: Well-formatted Regression And Summary Statistics Tables [Manual]. Slovakia.
   Google Scholar
• Horrey, W. J., & Lesch, M. F. (2009). Driver-initiated distractions: Examining strategic adaptation for in-vehicle task initiation. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 41(1), 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2008.10.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hox, J. (1998). Multilevel modeling: When and why. In H. H. Bock, O. Opitz, M. Schader, I. Balderjahn, R. Mathar, & M. Schader (Eds.), Classification, data analysis, and data highways (pp. 147–154). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchinson, T., White, K., Martin, W., Reichert, K., & Frey, L. (1989). Human-computer interaction using eye-gaze input. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 19(6), 1527–1534. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.44068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ismaeel, R., Hibberd, D., Carsten, O., & Jamson, S. (2020). Do drivers self-regulate their engagement in secondary tasks at intersections? An examination based on naturalistic driving data. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 137, 105464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105464
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO/TC 22/SC 39 Ergonomics. (2020). Road vehicles—Measurement and analysis of driver visual behaviour with respect to transport information and control systems (Tech. Rep.). International Organization for Standardization.
   Google Scholar
• Klauer, S., Dingus, T., Neale, T., Sudweeks, J., & Ramsey, D. (2006). The impact of driver inattention on near-crash/crash risk: an analysis using the 100-car naturalistic driving study data (Vol. 594; Tech. Rep.). 3500 Transportation Research Plaza (0536) Blacksburg, Virginia 24061: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/Virginia Tech Transportation Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, J. D. (2014). Dynamics of Driver Distraction: The process of engaging and disengaging. Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference, 58, 24–32.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee, J., Young, K., & Regan, M. (2008). Defining driver distraction. In M. Regan, J. Lee, & K. Young (Eds.), Driver distraction (pp. 31–40). CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lenth, R. V. (2022). Emmeans: Estimated marginal means. Aka least-squares means. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/emmeans/index.html.
   Google Scholar
• Liang, Y., Horrey, W. J., & Hoffman, J. D. (2015). Reading text while driving: understanding drivers’ strategic and tactical adaptation to distraction. Human Factors, 57(2), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814542974
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, R., Liu, N., Ma, L., Zhang, T., & Zhang, W. (2019). Exploring the self-regulation of secondary task engagement in the context of partially automated driving: A pilot study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 64, 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2019.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luke, S. G. (2017). Evaluating significance in linear mixed-effects models in R. Behavior Research Methods, 49(4), 1494–1502. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0809-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magezi, D. A. (2015). Linear mixed-effects models for within-participant psychology experiments: An introductory tutorial and free, graphical user interface (LMMgui). Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercedes-Benz Group AG. (2023). Mercedes-Benz reveals new charging network and tech updates at CES 2023. https://media.mercedes-benz.com/article/81dc6cca-71a8-4199-bfa9-8484e4e80678
   Google Scholar
• Merchant, J. (1967). The Oculometer (Tech. Rep. No. NASA-CR-805). National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Michon, J. A. (1985). A critical view of driver behavior models: What do we know, what should we do? In L. Evans & R. C. Schwing (Eds.), Human behavior and traffic safety (pp. 485–524). Springer US.
   Google Scholar
• Morando, A., Gershon, P., Mehler, B., & Reimer, B. (2021). A model for naturalistic glance behavior around Tesla Autopilot disengagements. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 161, 106348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106348
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morando, A., Victor, T., & Dozza, M. (2019). A reference model for driver attention in automation: Glance behavior changes during lateral and longitudinal assistance. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 20(8), 2999–3009. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2018.2870909
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgenstern, T., Schott, L., & Krems, J. F. (2020). Do drivers reduce their speed when texting on highways? A replication study using European naturalistic driving data. Safety Science, 128, 104740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4(2), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2014). Visual-manual NHTSA driver distraction guidelines for in-vehicle electronic devices (Notice No. NHTSA-2014-0088). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
   Google Scholar
• National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2021). Distracted driving 2019 (Tech. Rep. No. Report No. DOT HS 811 299). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Naujoks, F., Purucker, C., & Neukum, A. (2016). Secondary task engagement and vehicle automation–Comparing the effects of different automation levels in an on-road experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 38, 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.01.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble, A. M., Miles, M., Perez, M. A., Guo, F., & Klauer, S. G. (2021). Evaluating driver eye glance behavior and secondary task engagement while using driving automation systems. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 151, 105959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105959
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onate-Vega, D., Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., & King, M. J. (2020). How drivers adapt their behaviour to changes in task complexity: The role of secondary task demands and road environment factors. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 71, 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.03.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• On-Road Automated Driving (ORAD) Committee. (2021). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles (Tech. Rep.). SAE International.
   Google Scholar
• Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Demmel, S. (2018). Driving behaviour while self-regulating mobile phone interactions: A human-machine system approach. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 118, 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Washington, S. (2018). Should I text or call here? A situation-based analysis of drivers’ perceived likelihood of engaging in mobile phone multitasking: Mobile phone multitasking engagement. Risk Analysis, 38(10), 2144–2160. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13119
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Washington, S. (2019). “Mate! I’m running 10 min late”: An investigation into the self-regulation of mobile phone tasks while driving. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 122, 134–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.09.020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Manual]. R Core Team.
   Google Scholar
• Regan, M. A., & Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2022). Driver distraction: Mechanisms, evidence, prevention, and mitigation. In K. Edvardsson Björnberg, M.-Å. Belin, S. O. Hansson, & C. Tingvall (Eds.), The vision zero handbook (pp. 1–62). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Regan, M. A., Lee, J. D., & Young, K. L. (Eds.). (2009). Driver distraction: Theory, effects, and mitigation. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Risteska, M., Kanaan, D., Donmez, B., & Winnie Chen, H.-Y. (2021). The effect of driving demands on distraction engagement and glance behaviors: Results from naturalistic data. Safety Science, 136, 105123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105123
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudin-Brown, C. (Ed.). (2013). Behavioural adaptation and road safety: Theory, evidence, and action. CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schneidereit, T., Petzoldt, T., Keinath, A., & Krems, J. F. (2017). Using SHRP 2 naturalistic driving data to assess drivers’ speed choice while being engaged in different secondary tasks. Journal of Safety Research, 62, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2017.04.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schömig, N., & Metz, B. (2013). Three levels of situation awareness in driving with secondary tasks. Safety Science, 56, 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2012.05.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starkey, N. J., & Charlton, S. G. (2020). Drivers use of in-vehicle information systems and perceptions of their effects on driving. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 2, 39. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2020.00039
   Google Scholar
• Tivesten, E., & Dozza, M. (2014). Driving context and visual-manual phone tasks influence glance behavior in naturalistic driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 26, 258–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.08.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tivesten, E., & Dozza, M. (2015). Driving context influences drivers’ decision to engage in visual–manual phone tasks: Evidence from a naturalistic driving study. Journal of Safety Research, 53, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2015.03.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukey, J. W. (1949). Comparing individual means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics, 5(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001913
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wikman, A.-S., Nieminen, T., & Summala, H. (1998). Driving experience and time-sharing during in-car tasks on roads of different width. Ergonomics, 41(3), 358–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401398187080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, S., Kuo, J., & Lenné, M. G. (2021). Effects of distraction in on-road level 2 automated driving: impacts on glance behavior and takeover performance. Human Factors, 63(8), 1485–1497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820936793
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, K. L., & Lenné, M. G. (2010). Driver engagement in distracting activities and the strategies used to minimise risk. Safety Science, 48(3), 326–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2009.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar