Abstract
(1) Background: Primary driving tasks are increasingly being handled by vehicle automation so that support for non-driving related tasks (NDRTs) is becoming more and more important. In SAE L3 automation, vehicles can require the driver-passenger to take over driving controls, though. Interfaces for NDRTs must therefore guarantee safe operation and should also support productive work. (2) Method: We conducted a within-subjects driving simulator study (N=53) comparing Heads-Up Displays (HUDs) and Auditory Speech Displays (ASDs) for productive NDRT engagement. In this article, we assess the NDRT displays’ effectiveness by evaluating eye-tracking measures and setting them into relation to workload measures, self-ratings, and NDRT/take-over performance. (3) Results: Our data highlights substantially higher gaze dispersion but more extensive glances on the road center in the auditory condition than the HUD condition during automated driving. We further observed potentially safety-critical glance deviations from the road during take-overs after a HUD was used. These differences are reflected in self-ratings, workload indicators and take-over reaction times, but not in driving performance. (4) Conclusion: NDRT interfaces can influence visual attention even beyond their usage during automated driving. In particular, the HUD has resulted in safety-critical glances during manual driving after take-overs. We found this impacted workload and productivity but not driving performance.
Highlights
After typical driver assistance systems (SAE L1, e.g., adaptive cruise control; cf., [1])and combinations thereof (SAE L2, partial automation), the upcoming level of driving automation is called conditional automation (SAE L3) and will no longer require drivers to monitor the driving system at all times
We investigate how two different display variants, namely HeadsUp Displays (HUDs) and Auditory Speech Displays (ASDs), affect visual attention and behavior in automated driving followed by critical Take-Over Requests (TORs) situations
We found that the Heads-Up Displays (HUDs) provided more productivity than the ASD, whereas the ASD was subjectively favored, possibly because gaze was less restricted with the ASD during automated driving
Summary
After typical driver assistance systems (SAE L1, e.g., adaptive cruise control; cf., [1])and combinations thereof (SAE L2, partial automation), the upcoming level of driving automation is called conditional automation (SAE L3) and will no longer require drivers to monitor the driving system at all times. Research reports a detrimental effect of NDRT engagement on the driver’s performance regarding, for example, reaction times or steering behavior (cf., [2,3,4]). This impact is especially detrimental with visual distraction [5]. In contrast to lower levels of automation (SAE L0-L2), reports are not so clear-cut. They suggest that NDRTs could even be required to prevent cognitive underload, drowsiness, mind-wandering, or effects of boredom (cf., [6,7,8,9]). Recent research further shows the desirability of NDRTs in automated
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call