A driving simulator study was conducted to comparatively evaluate the effects of three camera monitor system (CMS) display layouts and the traditional side-view mirror arrangement on the physical demands of driving.
Background
Despite the possible benefits of CMS displays in reducing the physical demands of driving, little empirical evidence is available to substantiate these benefits. The effects of CMS display layout designs are not well understood.
Method
The three CMS display layouts varied in the locations of the side-view displays: (A) inside the car near the conventional side-view mirrors, (B) on the dashboard at each side of the steering wheel, and (C) on the center fascia with the displays joined side by side. Twenty-two participants performed a safety-critical lane changing task with each design alternative. The dependent measures were the following: spread of eye movement, spread of head movement, and perceived physical demand.
Results
Compared with the traditional mirror system, all three CMS display layouts showed a reduction in physical demands, albeit differing in the types/magnitudes of physical demand reduction.
Conclusion
Well-designed CMS display layouts could significantly reduce the physical demands of driving. The physical demands were reduced by placing the CMS displays close to the position of the driver’s normal line-of-sight when looking at the road ahead and locating each CMS display on each side of the driver, that is, at locations compatible with the driver’s expectation.
Application
Physical demand reductions by CMS displays would especially benefit drivers frequently checking the side-view mirrors with large eye/head movements and physically weak/impaired drivers.
AhlstromV.KudrickB. (2007). Human factors criteria for displays: A human factors design standard update of chapter 5 (Report No. DOT/FAA/TC-07/11). Atlantic City, NJ: William J. Hughes Technical Centre, Federal Aviation Administration.
2.
AntinJ. F.WotringB.PerezM.GlaserD. (2017, October). Investigating lane change behaviors and difficulties for senior drivers using the SHRP 2 naturalistic database (Report No. 17-UM-055). Blacksburg, VA: National Surface Transportation Safety Center for Excellence.
3.
BallK. K.BeardB. L.RoenkerD. L.MillerR. L.GriggsD. S. (1988). Age and visual search: Expanding the useful field of view. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 5, 2210–2219.
4.
BarbourK. E.HelmickC. G.BoringM.BradyT. J. (2017). Vital signs: Prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation—United States, 2013–2015. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 66(9), 246–253.
5.
BeckD.LeeM.ParkW. (2017). A comparative evaluation of in-vehicle side view displays layouts in critical lane changing situation. Ergonomics, 60, 1682–1691.
6.
BernardB. P. (1997, July). Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors: A critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back (DHHS [NIOSH] Publication No. 97-141). Cincinnati, OH: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
7.
BhiseV. D. (2011). Ergonomics in the automotive design process. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
8.
BlomdahlP. (2016). Vision in commercial vehicles with respect to camera monitor systems. In TerzisA. (Ed.), Handbook of camera monitor systems (pp. 133–172). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
9.
ChanK. W. L.ChanA. H. S. (2009). Spatial stimulus–response (S-R) compatibility for foot controls with visual displays. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39, 396–402.
10.
CicchinoJ. B. (2018). Effects of blind spot monitoring systems on police-reported lane-change crashes. Traffic Injury Prevention, 19, 615–622.
11.
CorneilB. D. (2011). Eye-head gaze shifts. In LiversedgeS.GilchristI.EverlingS. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of eye movements (pp. 303–322). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
12.
CrundallD.ChapmanP.PhelpsN.UnderwoodG. (2003). Eye movements and hazard perception in police pursuit and emergency response driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 163–174.
13.
Di StefanoM.MacdonaldW. (2003). Assessment of older drivers: Relationships among on-road errors, medical conditions and test outcome. Journal of Safety Research, 34, 415–429.
14.
EsserM. (2016). Standardization and vehicle regulation aspects of camera monitor systems. In TerzisA. (Ed.), Handbook of camera monitor systems (pp. 51–100). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
FieldA. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
17.
FletcherJ. M.SindelarJ. L.YamaguchiS. (2011). Cumulative effects of job characteristics on health. Health Economics, 20, 553–570.
18.
Fornell FagerströmK.GårdlundA. (2012). Mirror replacement in trucks (Master’s thesis). Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden.
19.
GirdenE. R. (1992). ANOVA: Repeated measures. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
20.
GreenP.LevisonW.PaelkeG.SerafinC. (1994, August). Suggested human factors design guidelines for driver information systems (Report No. FHWA-RD-94-087). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.
21.
GroomM. J.Van LoonE.DaleyD.ChapmanP.HollisC. (2015). Driving behaviour in adults with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. BMC Psychiatry, 15(1), Article 175.
22.
HuB.NingX. (2016). Cervical spine biomechanics and task performance during touchscreen computer operations. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 56, 41–50.
23.
International Organization for Standardization. (1999). ISO 9355-1, Ergonomic requirements for the design of displays and control actuators—Part 1: Human interactions with displays and control actuators. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
24.
International Organization for Standardization. (2014). ISO 15007-1, Road vehicles—Measurement of driver visual behaviour with respect to transport information and control systems—Part 1: Definitions and parameters. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
25.
International Organization for Standardization. (2015). ISO 16505, Road vehicles—Ergonomic and performance aspects of camera monitor systems—Requirements and test procedures. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
26.
IorizzoD. B.RileyM. E.HayhoeM.HuxlinK. R. (2011). Differential impact of partial cortical blindness on gaze strategies when sitting and walking—An immersive virtual reality study. Vision Research, 51, 1173–1184.
27.
KarwowskiW.EbertsR.SalvendyG.NolandS. (1994). The effects of computer interface design on human postural dynamics. Ergonomics, 37, 703–724.
28.
KasneciE.SippelK.AehlingK.HeisterM.RosenstielW.SchieferU.PapageorgiouE. (2014). Driving with binocular visual field loss? A study on a supervised on-road parcours with simultaneous eye and head tracking. PLoS ONE, 9(2), e87470.
29.
KimK. H.ReedM. P.MartinB. J. (2010). A model of head movement contribution for gaze transitions. Ergonomics, 53, 447–457.
30.
KitoT.HaraguchiM.FunatsuT.SatoM.KondoM. (1989). Measurements of gaze movements while driving. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68, 19–25.
31.
LargeD. R.CrundallE.BurnettG.HarveyC.KonstantopoulosP. (2016). Driving without wings: The effect of different digital mirror locations on the visual behaviour, performance and opinions of drivers. Applied Ergonomics, 55, 138–148.
32.
LavallièreM.LaurendeauD.SimoneauM.TeasdaleN. (2011). Changing lanes in a simulator: Effects of aging on the control of the vehicle and visual inspection of mirrors and blind spot. Traffic Injury Prevention, 12, 191–200.
33.
LeeD. L.FleisherJ.McLooneH. E.KotaniK.DennerleinJ. T. (2007). Alternative computer mouse design and testing to reduce finger extensor muscle activity during mouse use. Human Factors, 49, 573–584.
34.
LehmanK. R.MarrasW. S. (1994, October). The effects of human interface design on wrist biomechanics during scanning. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 38, No. 10, pp. 616–620). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
35.
LoftusG. R.MassonM. E. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476–490.
36.
MackenzieA. K.HarrisJ. M. (2015). Eye movements and hazard perception in active and passive driving. Visual Cognition, 23, 736–757.
37.
Mohamed AliJ. S.Fatin BazilahF. (2014). Mirrorless car: A feasibility study. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 663, 649–654.
38.
MurataA.KohnoY. (2018). Effectiveness of replacement of automotive side mirrors by in-vehicle LCD–Effect of location and size of LCD on safety and efficiency. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 66, 177–186.
NormanR.WellsR.NeumannP.FrankJ.ShannonH.KerrM. & The Ontario Universities Back Pain Study (OUBPS) Group. (1998). A comparison of peak vs cumulative physical work exposure risk factors for the reporting of low back pain in the automotive industry. Clinical Biomechanics, 13, 561–573.
41.
NormarkC. J.GärlingA. (2011). Assessment of automotive visual display guidelines and principles: A literature review. The Design Journal, 14, 446–474.
42.
OthmerC. (2014). Adjoint methods for car aerodynamics. Journal of Mathematics in Industry, 4(6), 1–23.
43.
ProctorR. W.VuK. P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
44.
ProudlockF. A.GottlobI. (2007). Physiology and pathology of eye–head coordination. Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, 26, 486–515.
45.
SamuelS.YamaniY.FisherD. L. (2016). Large reductions are possible in older driver crashes at intersections. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 99, 419–424.
46.
SandersM. S.McCormickE. J. (1993). Human factors in engineering and design (7th ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
47.
SavageS. W.PotterD. D.TatlerB. W. (2013). Does preoccupation impair hazard perception? A simultaneous EEG and eye tracking study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 17, 52–62.
48.
SchmidtE. A.HoffmannH.KrautscheidR.BierbachM.FreyA.GailJ.Lotz-KeensC. (2016). Camera-monitor systems as a replacement for exterior mirrors in cars and trucks. In TerzisA. (Ed.), Handbook of camera monitor systems (pp. 369–435). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
49.
SeidlerA.Bolm-AudorffU.HeiskelH.HenkelN.Roth-KüverB.KaiserU.. . . ElsnerG. (2001). The role of cumulative physical work load in lumbar spine disease: Risk factors for lumbar osteochondrosis and spondylosis associated with chronic complaints. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 58, 735–746.
50.
SekulerA. B.BennettP. J.MamelakM. (2000). Effects of aging on the useful field of view. Experimental Aging Research, 26, 103–120.
51.
SmithM.KaneV.GabbardJ. L.BurnettG.LargeD. R. (2016, September). Augmented mirrors: Depth judgments when augmenting video displays to replace automotive mirrors. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 1590–1594). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
52.
TerzisA. (2016). Automotive mirror-replacement by camera monitor systems. In TerzisA. (Ed.), Handbook of camera monitor systems (pp. 3–50). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
53.
UmiltàC.LiottiM. (1987). Egocentric and relative spatial codes in SR compatibility. Psychological Research, 49, 81–90.
54.
WickensC. D.HollandsJ. G.BanburyS.ParasuramanR. (2013). Engineering psychology & human performance (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
55.
WickensC. D.LeeJ. D.LiuY.Gordon BeckerS. E. (2004). An introduction to human factors engineering (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
