Abstract
The technical advances in navigation systems should enhance the driving experience, supporting drivers’ spatial decision making and learning in less familiar or unfamiliar environments. Furthermore, autonomous driving systems are expected to take over navigation and driving in the near future. Yet, previous studies pointed at a still unresolved gap between environmental exploration using topographical maps and technical navigation means. Less is known about the impact of the autonomous system on the driver’s spatial learning. The present study investigates the development of spatial knowledge and cognitive workload by comparing printed maps, navigation systems, and autopilot in an unfamiliar virtual environment. Learning of a new route with printed maps was associated with a higher cognitive demand compared to the navigation system and autopilot. In contrast, driving a route by memory resulted in an increased level of cognitive workload if the route had been previously learned with the navigation system or autopilot. Way-finding performance was found to be less prone to errors when learning a route from a printed map. The exploration of the environment with the autopilot was not found to provide any compelling advantages for landmark knowledge. Our findings suggest long-term disadvantages of self-driving vehicles for spatial memory representations.
Highlights
Technical advances in information technologies have allowed a rapid spread of navigation systems in vehicles
While the previous research assumed the differences in a driver’s cognitive workload depended on the state of spatial knowledge, we extend the body of research by investigating cognitive workload in the learning and active driving phases using printed maps, autopilot, and navigation systems
We explored the differences in spatial knowledge and cognitive workload by drivers assisted by an autopilot, a navigation system, and a printed map
Summary
Technical advances in information technologies have allowed a rapid spread of navigation systems in vehicles. Among various alternative frameworks and models attempting to elaborate the developmental steps of spatial knowledge (for the review see [22]), the alternative framework proposed by Montello found wide support [31]. This framework postulates that the configurational knowledge is developed continuously starting from the very first exposure to a new location, and after the landmark and route knowledge had been acquired. Even though the Siegel and White framework has not found strong empirical support, landmark, route, and survey knowledge have still been widely used in research to evaluate spatial knowledge and remain under investigation [8,15,20]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
