The validity of driving simulators for behavioral research is discussed. The concept of validity is introduced and explained, and a survey of validation studies follows, in the TNO driving simulator and others, comparing field and simulator study results. Results for mid-level driving simulators show that generally absolute validity of route choice behavior is obtained and relative validity of speed and lateral control behavior is obtained. There is evidence suggesting that for a number of applications the presence of a moving base and possibly a higher image resolution might increase the validity of a driving simulator.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WeirD. H., and ClarkeA. J.. A Survey of Mid-Level Driving Simulators. SAE Technical Paper 950172. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, Pa., 1995.
2.
Estimating Demand for the National Advanced Driving Simulator.TRB, National Research Council, Washington D.C., 1995.
3.
AllenR. W., KleinR. H., and ZiedmanK.. Automobile Research Simulators: A Review and New Approaches. In Transportation Research Record 706, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1979, pp. 9–15.
4.
NolanS. A., and LindenN. A.. Design: Validation via Simulation. Automotive Engineering, Vol. 96, No. 6, 1980, pp. 55–59.
5.
KäpplerW. D., and MotzF.. Development of an Integrated Education System with Vehicles and Simulators for Military Drivers (in German). Bericht 107, Forschungsinstitut für Anthropotechnik, Wachtberg, Germany, 1995.
6.
TriggsT. J., and StanwayJ.. Simulation in Driver Training: A Report of an Australian Research Program. Proc., Conference Road Safety In Europe and Strategic Highway Research Program, No. 2A, Part 4, VTI Konferens, Lille, France, 1995, pp. 1–18.
7.
RoscoeS. N.Incremental Training Effectiveness. Human Factors, Vol. 13, 1971, pp. 561–567.
8.
HoldingD. H.Transfer of Training. Training for Persistance. Principles of Applied Human Learning, (MorrisonJ. E., ed.), John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1991, pp. 93–126.
9.
KapteinN. A., TheeuwesJ., Van der HorstA. R. A., and Van VelzeR.. Behavioral Evaluation of Tunnel Design Characteristics. Proc., Driving Simulator Conference, Sophia Antipolis, France, 1995, pp. 409–420.
10.
JanssenW. H., and NilssonL.. An Experimental Evaluation of In-Vehicle Collision Avoidance Systems. Deliverable GIDS/MAN2. DRIVE Project Generic Intelligent Driver Support Systems, Traffic Research Centre, University of Groningen, the Netherlands, 1990.
11.
FriedelB., and RekerK.. Test Drives in the Daimler-Benz Driving Simulator under Influence of Alprazolam and Alcohol (in German). Zeitschrift für Verkehrssicherheit, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1995, pp. 98–109.
12.
AllenR. W., MitchellD. G., SteinA. C., and HogueJ. R.. Validation of Real-Time Man-in-the-Loop Simulation. Proc., Conference Strategic Highway Research Program And Traffic Safety On Two Continents, Swedish Road and Traffic Research Institute, Linköping, Sweden, 1991, pp. 18–31.
13.
FlexmanR. E., and StarkE. A.. Training Simulators. Handbook of Human Factors, (SalvendyG. ed.), Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y., 1987, pp. 1012–1038.
14.
HaugE. J.Feasability Study and Conceptual Design of a National Advanced Driving Simulator.University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1990.
15.
AlmH.Driving Simulators as Research Tools—A Validation Study Based on the VTI Driving Simulator. GEM Validation Studies, Appendix, DRIVE Project GEM, 1995.
16.
GodthelpJ., BlaauwG. J., and Van der HorstA. R. A.. Instrumented Car and Driving Simulation: Measurement of Field Dynamics. Report IZF 1982-37, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1982.
17.
HogemaJ. H.Effects of Compensation for Delay in the Visual Display of a Driving Simulator. Report IZF 1992 A-40. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1992.
18.
HogemaJ. H.Compensation for Delay in the Visual Display of a Driving Simulator: Effects on Lane Keeping. Report 1993 C-21. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1993.
19.
BlaauwG. J.Driving Experiments and Task Demands in Simulator and Instrumented Car: A Validation Study. Human Factors, Vol. 24, 1982, pp. 473–486.
20.
KappéB., and KortelingJ. E.. Straight Road Steering: Visual Information in Driving Simulators (in Dutch). TNO Human Factors Research Institute, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1995.
21.
RiemersmaJ. B. J.Perception and Control of Deviations from a Straight Course. Report TNO-IZF 1982-C20. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1982.
22.
RiemersmaJ. B. J.The Effects of Stroboscopic Occlusion on Maintaining Course on a Straight Road. Report TNO-IZF 1983-C20. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1983.
23.
TenkinkE.The Effect of Road Width and Obstacles on Speed and Course Behaviour (in Dutch). Report 1989 C-4. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1989.
24.
TenkinkE.The Effect of Lead Vehicles on Speed Choice under Restricted Sight Distances. Report IZF 1989 C-25. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1989.
25.
TenkinkE.Effects of Road Width and a Secondary Task on Speed and Lateral Control in Car Driving (in Dutch). Report IZF 1990 C-27. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1990.
26.
BlaauwG. J.Car Driving as a Supervisory Control Task. Thesis. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1984.
27.
TenkinkE., and van der HorstA. R. A.. Effects of Road Width and Curve Characteristics on Driving Speed (in Dutch). Report IZF 1991 C-26. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1991.
28.
van der HorstA. R. A., and HoekstraW.. The Perception of Chevrons in Fog: A Simulator Study (in Dutch). Report IZF 1993 C-10. TNO Institute for Perception. Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1993.
29.
HogemaJ. H., van der HorstA. R. A., and BakkerP. J.. Chevron Markings on the A59 and Driving Behaviour in Fog (in Dutch). Report IZF 1993 C-9. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1993.
30.
JanssenW. H., van der HorstA. R. A., and HoekstraW.. A Simulator Study into the Effects of Variable Message Signing on Route Choice and Driving Behavior (in Dutch). Report 1991 C-5. TNO Institute for Perception. Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1991.
31.
JanssenW. H., van der HorstA. R. A., and HoekstraW.. Descriptive Information Presentation on Variable Message Signs (in Dutch). Report IZF 1992 C-7. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1992.
32.
JanssenW. H., van der HorstA. R. A., and HoekstraW.. Effects of Variable Message Signs on Route Choice and Driving Behavior: The Influence of Time Loss and the Presence of Other Traffic (in Dutch). Report IZF 1992 C-32. TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1992.
33.
van der MedeP. H. J., and van BerkumE. C.. The Impact of Traffic Information: Dynamics in Route and Departure Time Choice. Thesis. Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, 1993.
34.
KapteinN. A., van der HorstA. R. A., and HoekstraW.. Visual Information in a Driving Simulator: A Study on Braking Behavior and Time-to-Collision (In preparation). TNO Human Factors Research Institute.Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1996.
35.
van der HorstA. R. A.A Time-Based Analysis of Road User Behaviour in Normal and Critical Encounters.TNO Institute for Perception, Soesterberg, the Netherlands, 1990.
36.
WierwilleW. W., and FungP. P.. Comparison of Computer-Generated and Simulated Motion Picture Displays in a Driving Simulation. Human Factors, Vol. 17, No. 6, 1975, pp. 577–590.
37.
StaplefordR. L.Multi-Modality Pilot Models for Visual and Motion Cues. Proc., 4th Annual NASA-University Conference on Manual Control, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1968, pp. 47–57.
38.
CasaliJ. G., and WierwilleW. W.. The Effects of Various Design Alternatives on Moving-Base Driving Simulator Discomfort. Human Factors, Vol. 22, No. 6, 1980, pp. 741–756.
39.
McLaneR. C., and WierwilleW. W.. The Influence of Motion and Audio Cues on Driver Performance in an Automobile Simulator. Human Factors, Vol. 17, 1975, pp. 488–501.
40.
BrownJ. L.Visual Elements in Flight Simulation. Report of Working Group 34, Committee on Vision, Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Washington D.C., 1975.
41.
WojcikC. K., and WeirD. H.. Studies of the Driver as a Control Element—Phase 2. Report 70–73. Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, 1970.
42.
AllenR. W., and O'HanlonJ. F.. Effects of Roadway Delineation and Visibility Conditions on Driver Steering Performance. In Transportation Research Record 739, TRB, National Research Council, Washington D.C., 1979, pp. 5–8.
43.
RiemersmaJ. B. J., van der HorstA. R. A., HoekstraW., AlinkG. M. M., and OttenN.. The Validity of a Driving Simulator in Evaluating Speed-Reducing Measures. Traffic Engineering and Control, 1990, pp. 416–420.
44.
StaplinL.Simulator and Field Measures of Driver Age Differences in Left-Turn Gap Judgments. In Transportation Research Record 1485, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 49–55.
45.
HarmsL.Driving Performance on a Real Road and in a Driving Simulator: Results of a Validation Study. Presented at 5th Conference on Vision in Vehicles, Glasgow, Scotland, 1993.
