This paper describes a methodology to design computational models to evaluate the workload for driving tasks. A computational model was configured for a driving scenario used in a pilot study that included a secondary task at varying levels of difficulty to increase the driver’s workload. The computational model results provided a workload analysis of the concurrent driving tasks. This analysis can be used to explain the experimental findings from subject experiments and to evaluate the workload trade-offs between primary and secondary driving tasks.
AngellL.PerezM. (2013). Explanatory Material About the Definition of a Task Used in NHTSA’s Driver Distraction Guidelines. DOT HS 811 858, NHTSA, Washington, DC.
3.
BierbaumC. R.SzaboS. M.AldrichT. B. (1989). Task analysis of the UH-60 mission and decision rules for developing a UH-60 workload prediction model. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Fort Rucker U.S.
4.
BierbaumC.HamiltonD. (1990). Task Analysis and Workload Prediction Model of the MH-60K Mission, Volume I: Summary Report. Anacapa Sciences, Inc.
5.
BirrellS. A.YoungM. S. (2011). The impact of smart driving aids on driving performance and driver distraction. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 14(6), 484–493.
6.
CooperJ.IngebretsenH.StrayerD. (2014). Mental Workload of Common Voice-Based Interactions across Six Different Vehicle Systems, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, Washington, DC.
7.
de WaardD. (1996). The measurement of drivers’ mental workload (Doctoral dissertation). University of Groningen, Traffic Research Center, Haren, Netherlands.
8.
DrewsF. A.PasupathiM.StrayerD. L. (2008). Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(4), 392.
9.
Federal Register (2013). Guidelines for Reducing Visual-Manual Driver Distraction during Interactions with Integrated, In-Vehicle, Electronic Devices (Vol. 78).
10.
FlickU. (2008). Triangulation in Data Collection. In the SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (pp. 527–544).
11.
FokA. W.FrischmannT. B.SawyerB.RobinM.MoulouaM. (2011, September). The impact of GPS interface design on driving and distraction. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 1755–1759). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
12.
HandleyH.A.H. (2020, August). Development of an Architecture Framework for Data Analytics for Driving Simulator Studies –Detection Response Task Subject Experiment and Workload Model Data Triangulation, Volvo Group Trucks Technology Phase II Final Technical Report (500423-010). Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University, pp. 39.
13.
HandleyH.A.H.KandemirC. (2014). Human System Engineering Applications from Distracted Driving Simulations. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Engineering Management, Virginia Beach, VA.
14.
HueyB. M.WickensC. D. (1993). Workload transition: Implications for individual and team performance. In National Academy Press.
15.
JeongC.KimB.YuS.SuhD.KimM.SuhM. (2013). In-vehicle display HMI safety evaluation using a driving simulator. International journal of automotive technology, 14(6), 987–992.
16.
KandemirC.HandleyH. A. H.ThompsonD. (2018). A workload model to evaluate distracters and driver’s aids. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 63, 18–36.
17.
KandemirC.HandleyH. (2019). Work process improvement through simulation optimization of task assignment and mental workload, Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 25(4): 389–427.
18.
LeeJ. D.YoungK. L.ReganM. A. (2008). Defining driver distraction. Driver distraction: Theory, effects, and mitigation, 13(4), 31–40.
19.
McCrackenJ. H.AldrichT. B. (1984). Analysis of selected LHX mission functions implications for operator workload and system automation goals. Anacapa Sciences, INC.Military Programs, Alabama.
20.
MehlerB.ReimerB.DusekJ. A. (2011). MIT AgeLab delayed digit recall task (n-back). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 17.
21.
MitchellD. (2005). “Enhancing system design by modeling IMPRINT task workload analysis, Human System Integration Symposium”, June. Arlington Virginia: Human System Integration Symposium.
22.
MitchellD. (2009). Workload Analysis of the Crew of the Abrams V2 SEP: Phase I Baseline IMPRINT Model. ARL-TR-5028. Army Research Laboratory.
23.
MitchellD. K.SammsC.HenthornMAJ T.WojciechowskiJ. Q.Trade Study: Two-Versus Three-Soldier Crew for the Mounted Combat System (MCS) and Other Future Combat System Platforms; ARL-TR-3026; U.S. Army Research Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 2003.
24.
RobinJ. L.AvenueV.KniplingR. R.TidwellS. A.McfannJ. (2005). FMCSA Commercial Truck Simulation Validation Study Phase I Pilot Test: Driving Scenario Definition and Development. DSC-NA, 175–183. Orlando, FL.
25.
RothbauerP. (2008). “Triangulation.” In the SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods (pp. 893–894).
26.
StrayerD.CooperJ.TurrillJ.ColemanJ.Medeiros-WardN.BiondiF. (2013). Measuring Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, Washington, DC.
27.
StrayerD. L.DrewsF. A.JohnstonW. A. (2003). Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of experimental psychology: Applied, 9(1), 23.
28.
ThomsonDBesnerDSmilekD. (2015). A resource-control account of sustained attention: evidence from mind-wandering and vigilance paradigms. Perspect Psychol Sci10:82–96.
29.
ThompsonD.NowakowskiC. (2017). Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control for Truck Platooning Driving Simulator Study, Report for Cooperative Agreement No. DTFH61-13-H-00012, Federal Highway Administration Exploratory Advanced Research Program.
30.
WickensC. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 159–177.
31.
WickensC. D.HollandsJ. G.BanburyS.ParasuramanR. (2015). Engineering psychology and human performance. Psychology Press.
32.
WojciechowskiJ. (2004). Validation of Improved Research Integration Tool (IMPRINT) Driving Model for Workload Analysis. ARL-TR-3145: Army Research Laboratory.
33.
YahoodikS.TahamiH.UnverrichtJ.YamaniY.HandleyH.ThompsonD. (2020). Blink Rate as a Measure of Driver Workload during Simulated Driving, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 2020 Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL.
