There is a large amount of variation between novices and experts in their cognitive workload when performing tasks. A naturalistic pilot study was conducted with nine novice law enforcement officers (nLEOs) to determine how their use of in-vehicle technology affected their cognitive workload during their normal patrols. Physiological data were collected using a novel synchronization process for naturalistic driving studies, allowing heart rate variability and eye tracking measurements to be synchronized together and directly compared to subjective workload levels. It was found that nLEOs have average or higher workload compared to experienced officers and the general population when they are on duty. Future studies can utilize the approaches and findings of this pilot study for conducting naturalistic driving studies and developing cognitive performance models for novice users.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbhishekhH. A.NisargaP.KisanR.MeghanaA.ChandranS.RajuT.SathyaprabhaT. N. (2013). Influence of age and gender on autonomic regulation of heart. Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 27(3), 259-264.
2.
AbusharhaA. A. (2017). Changes in blink rate and ocular symptoms during different reading tasks. Clinical optometry, 9, 133.
3.
ArthurE. (1990). Physiological Metrics of Mental Workload: A Review of Recent Progress.
4.
BorowskyA.ShinarD.ParmetY. (2008). Sign location, sign recognition, and driver expectancies. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 11(6), 459-465.
5.
BraithwaiteJ. J.WatsonD. G.JonesR.RoweM. (2013). A guide for analysing electrodermal activity (EDA) & skin conductance responses (SCRs) for psychological experiments. Psychophysiology, 49(1), 1017-1034.
6.
CarmichaelA.LarsonA.GireE.LoschkyL.RebelloN. S. (2010). How does visual attention differ between experts and novices on physics problems?Paper presented at the AIP Conference Proceedings.
7.
De WaardD.BrookhuisK. (1996). The measurement of drivers’ mental workload.
8.
DrummondA. E. (1989). An overview of novice driver performance issues: A literature review. (No. Report 9). Monash University, Accident Research Centre.
9.
EggemeierF.WilsonG. (1991). Workload assessment in multi-task environments. Multiple task performance. DL Damos. London, GB: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
10.
ElectrophysiologyT. F. o. t. E. S. o. C. t. N. A. S. o. P. (1996). Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation, and clinical use. Circulation, 93(5), 1043-1065.
11.
EstesS. (2015). The workload curve: Subjective mental workload. Human factors, 57(7), 1174-1187.
12.
HartS. G. (1986). NASA Task load Index (TLX). Volume 1.0; Paper and pencil package.
13.
HartS. G. (2006, October). NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting (Vol. 50, No. 9, pp. 904-908). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: Sage publications.
14.
HembroffC. C.ArbuthnottK. D.KrätzigG. P. (2018). Emergency response driver training: Dual-task decrements of dispatch communication. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 59, 222-235.
15.
HickW. E. (1952). On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of experimental psychology, 4(1), 11-26.
16.
HillerbrandE. (1989). Cognitive differences between experts and novices: Implications for group supervision. Journal of Counseling & Development, 67(5), 293-296.
17.
HymanR. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. Journal of experimental psychology, 45(3), 188.
18.
KavakliM.GeroJ. S. (2003). Strategic knowledge differences between an expert and a novice designerHuman behaviour in design (pp. 42-52): Springer.
19.
KundelH. L.NodineC. F. (1975). Interpreting chest radiographs without visual search. Radiology, 116(3), 527-532.
20.
McDonaldA. D.FerrisT. K.WienerT. A. (2020). Classification of driver distraction: A comprehensive analysis of feature generation, machine learning, and input measures. Human factors, 62(6), 1019-1035.
21.
McKennaF. P.CrickJ. (1994). Hazard perception in drivers: A methodology for testing and training. TRL contractor report (313).
22.
MillerW. T.KunA. L. (2013). Using speech, GUIs and buttons in police vehicles: field data on user preferences for the Project54 system. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.
23.
ParasuramanR.SheridanT. B.WickensC. D. (2008). Situation awareness, mental workload, and trust in automation: Viable, empirically supported cognitive engineering constructs. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2(2), 140-160.
24.
PflegingB.FeketyD. K.SchmidtA.KunA. L. (2016). A model relating pupil diameter to mental workload and lighting conditions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems.
25.
ShahiniF.ParkJ.ZahabiM. (2021, September). Effects of unreliable automation and takeover time budget on young drivers’ mental workload. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 1082-1086). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
26.
ShahiniF.ZahabiM.PatranellaB.Mohammed Abdul RazakA. (2020, December). Police Officer Interactions with In-vehicle Technologies: An On-Road Investigation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 64, No. 1, pp. 1976-1980). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
27.
SharifB.FalconeM.MaleticJ. I. (2012). An eye-tracking study on the role of scan time in finding source code defects. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications.
28.
SinghR. R.ConjetiS.BanerjeeR. (2013). A comparative evaluation of neural network classifiers for stress level analysis of automotive drivers using physiological signals. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, 8(6), 740-754.
29.
SmileyA.SmahelT.DonderiD.CairdJ.ChisholmS.LockhartJ.TeterisE. (2007). The effects of cellphone and cd use on Novice and Experienced Driver Performance, Insurance Bureau of Canada
30.
SohnY. W.DoaneS. M. (2003). Roles of working memory capacity and long-term working memory skill in complex task performance. Memory & cognition, 31(3), 458-466.
31.
TjollengA.JungK.HongW.LeeW.LeeB.YouH.SonJ.ParkS. (2017). Classification of a Driver’s cognitive workload levels using artificial neural network on ECG signals. Applied ergonomics, 59, 326-332.
32.
UnderwoodG. (2007). Visual attention and the transition from novice to advanced driver. Ergonomics, 50(8), 1235-1249.
33.
VilaB.KenneyD. J. (2002). Tired cops: The prevalence and potential consequences of police fatigue: National Institute of Justice.
34.
WickensC. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human factors, 50(3), 449-455.
35.
YagerC.DinakarS.SanagaramM.FerrisT. K. (2015). Emergency vehicle operator on-board device distractions. Texas A&M Transportation Institute Technical Report.
36.
ZahabiM.KaberD. (2018a). Effect of police mobile computer terminal interface design on officer driving distraction. Applied ergonomics, 67, 26-38.
37.
ZahabiM.KaberD. (2018b). Identification of task demands and usability issues in police use of mobile computing terminals. Applied ergonomics, 66, 161-171.
38.
ZahabiM.NasrV.Mohammed Abdul RazakA.PatranellaB.McCanlessL.MarediaA. (2021). Effect of secondary tasks on police officer cognitive workload and performance under normal and pursuit driving situations. Human factors, 00187208211010956.
39.
ZahabiM.ShahiniF.YinW.ZhangX. (2022). Physical and cognitive demands associated with police in-vehicle technology use: an on-road case study. Ergonomics, 65(1), 91-104.
40.
ZahabiM.ShupskyT.LymanA. (2019). Analysis of Law Enforcement Mobile Computer Terminal Interface. Paper presented at the IISE Annual Conference, Orlando, FL.
