Semi-autonomous driving has been found to require less cognitive resources from drivers. It is not immediately clear if engaging in secondary tasks such as audio learning is safe in a semi-autonomous driving situation, especially considering the finding that semi-autonomous drivers tend to be less engaged. The current study investigated the effects of audio learning during a simulated semi-autonomous driving situation. Our results indicated that audio learning could delay warning message reaction time, and drivers had worse audio learning performance in a simulated semi-autonomous driving situation. Implications of current findings on driver safety, audio learning, and forensic practices are described in the discussion section.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanksV. A.StantonN. A.HarveyC. (2014). Sub- systems on the road to vehicle automation: Hands and feet free but not ‘mind’ free driving. Safety Science, 62, 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.10.014
2.
BeersS. F.NagyW. E. (2009). Syntactic complexity as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre?Reading and Writing, 22(2), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9107-5
3.
BiondiF. N.LohaniM.HopmanR.MillsS.CooperJ. M.StrayerD. L. (2018). 80 MPH and out-of-the-loop: Effects of real-world semi-automated driving on driver workload and arousal. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 62(1), 1878–1882. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931218621427
4.
ChenH.-T.LorchR. F. (2018). Effects of audio headings on learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000143
5.
HartS. G. (2006, October). NASA-task load index (NASA- TLX); 20 years later. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting50(9), 904-908. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F154193120605000909
6.
KyriakidisM.de WinterJ. C. F.StantonN.BelletT.van AremB.BrookhuisK.MartensM. H.BenglerK.AnderssonJ.MeratN.ReedN.FlamentM.HagenziekerM.HappeeR. (2019). A human factors perspective on automated driving. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 20(3), 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2017.1293187
7.
LemariéJ.LorchR. F.EyrolleH.VirbelJ. (2008). SARA: A Text-Based and Reader-Based Theory of Signaling. Educational Psychologist, 43(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701756321
8.
LitmanT. (2017). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions: Implications for transport planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. https://www.vtpi.org/avip.pdf
9.
RubinsteinJ. S.MeyerD. E.EvansJ. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(4), 763–797. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.4.763
10.
SAE On-Road Automated Vehicle Standards Committee. (2018). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. SAE International. https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201806
11.
SalvucciD. D.TaatgenN. A. (2008). Threaded cognition: An integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. Psychological Review, 115(1), 101–130. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.1.101
12.
SchumacherE. H.SeymourT. L.GlassJ. M.FencsikD. E.LauberE. J.KierasD. E.MeyerD. E. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12(2), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00318
13.
StrayerD. L.JohnstonW. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-Task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telephone. Psychological Science, 12(6), 462–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00386
14.
StrayerD. L.TurrillJ.CooperJ. M.ColemanJ. R.Medeiros-WardN.BiondiF. (2015). Assessing cognitive distraction in the automobile. Human Factors, 57(8), 1300–1324. https://doi-org/10.1177/0018720815575149
