In a field study, we examined turn signal use characteristics during highway-lane changes across three age groups (20-29, 40-49, and 60-69) and under varying levels of secondary cognitive demand. Secondary cognitive demand decreased the likelihood of turn signal use, and delayed the onset and turnoff of the turn signals. These results suggest that added cognitive load can lead to a neglect of operational tasks in face of competition over limited resources. No major effects of age or relative level of secondary cognitive demand were observed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoyceT. E.GellerE. S. (2002). An instrumented vehicle assessment of problem behavior and driving style: Do younger males really take more risks?Accident Analysis and Prevention, 34(1), 51-64.
2.
CooperJ. M.VladisavljevicI.Medeiros-WardN.MartinP. T.StrayerD. L. (2009). An investigation of driver distraction near the tipping point of traffic flow stability. Human Factors, 51(2), 261-268.
3.
FitchG. M.LeeS. E.KlauerS.HankeyJ.SudweeksJ.DingusT. (2009). Analysis of lane-change crashes and near crashes. (DOT HS 811 147). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
4.
HetrickS. (1997). Examination of driver lane change behavior and the potential effectiveness of warning onset rules for lane change or "side" crash avoidance systems. Unpublished master’s thesis, Virginia Polythecnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.
5.
KieferR. J.HankeyJ. M. (2008). Lane change behavior with a side blind zone alert system. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40, 683-690.
6.
LavalliereM.DonmezB.ReimerB.MehlerB.CoughlinJ. F.KlauberK.. (2011). A field study assessing lane changing and lane choice across age and multiple levels of cognitive demand. Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC.
7.
LeeS. E.OlsenE. C. B.WierwilleW. W. (2004). A comprehensive examination of naturalistic lane changes. (DOT HS 809 702). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
8.
MehlerB.ReimerB.CoughlinJ. F. (2010). Physiological reactivity to graded levels of cognitive workload across three age groups: an on-road evaluation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting. San Francisco, CA.
9.
MehlerB.ReimerB.CoughlinJ. F.DusekJ. A. (2009). The impact of incremental increases in cognitive workload on physiological arousal and performance in young adult drivers. Transportation Research Record, 2138, 6-12.
10.
MehlerB.ReimerB.DusekJ. (2011). MIT AgeLab delayed digit recall task (n-back), MIT AgeLab White Paper Number 2011-3A. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
11.
OlsenE. C. B.LeeS. E.WierwilleW. W. (2002). Analysis of distribution, frequency, and duration of naturalistic lane changes. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting. Baltimore, MD.
12.
PandeA.Abdel-AtyM. (2006). Assessment of freeway traffic parameters leading to lane-change related collisions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38(5), 936-948.
13.
ReimerB. (2009). Cognitive task complexity and the impact on drivers’ visual tunneling. Transportation Research Record, 2138, 13-19.
14.
ReimerB.MehlerB.WangY.CoughlinJ. F. (2010). The impact of systematic variation of cognitive demand on drivers’ visual attention across multiple age groups. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting. San Francisco, CA.
15.
WickensC. D. (1984). Processing resources and attention. In ParasuramanR.DaviesR. (Eds.), Varieties of Attention. New York: Academic Press.
16.
WickensC. D.McCarleyJ. S. (2008). Applied Attention Theory. New York, NY: Academic Press.
17.
ZeitlinL. R. (1993). Subsidiary task measures of driver mental workload: a long-term field study. Transportation Research Record, 1403, 23-27.
