Participants drove a simulated vehicle while completing an n-back task of high or low cognitive demand. Concurrently, they responded via brake press to signals presented in either a single modality (auditory, visual or tactile) or a bimodal combination. Participants were asked to indicate the perceived urgency of each signal by adjusting the force applied in their brake response. Signals were designed to be of “high” or “low” urgency based on previous research for both unimodal and bimodal combinations. Participants were capable of subjectively judging perceived urgency independent of response time and responded to bimodal (relative to unimodal) and high (relative to low) urgency stimuli with significantly greater brake force. However, both factors interacted with cognitive demand indicating that the magnitude of these differential responses was reduced under high demand. Implications for warning evaluation in an in-vehicle driving context are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnnettJ. (2002). Subjective rating scales in ergonomics: a reply. Ergonomics, 45(14), 1042–1046.
2.
BaldwinC.L.MayJ. F. (2010). Loudness interacts with semantics in auditory warnings to impact rear-end collisions. Transportation Research Part F, 14, 36–42.
3.
Baldwin CarrylL.EisertJ. L.GarciaA.LewisB.PrattS. M.GonzalezC. (2012). Multimodal urgency coding: auditory, visual, and tactile parameters and their impact on perceived urgency. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation, 41(0), 3586–3591.
4.
BottaF.SantangeloV.RaffoneA.SanabriaD.LupiáñezJ.BelardinelliM. O. (2011). Multisensory integration affects visuo-spatial working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(4), 1099–1109.
5.
BurtJ. L.BartolomeD. S.BurdetteD. W.ComstockJ. R. (1995). A psychophysiological evaluation of the perceived urgency of auditory warning signals. Ergonomics, 38(11), 2327–2340.
6.
ChanA. H. S.ChanK. W. L. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous presentations of auditory and visual signals: Implications for control console design. Applied Ergonomics, 37(2), 131–140.
7.
ChanA.MacLeanK.McGrenereJ. (2008). Designing haptic icons to support collaborative turn-taking. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 66(5), 333–355.
8.
FagerlönnJ. (2010). Distracting effects of auditory warnings on experienced drivers. In Proceedings of 16 th International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 2010), Washington DC, USA.
9.
FitchG. M.BlancoM.MorganJ. F.WhartonA. E. (2010). Driver Braking Performance to Surprise and Expected Events. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 54(24), 2075–2080.
10.
GevinsA. S.CutilloB. C. (1993). Neuroelectric evidence for distributed processing in human working memory. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 87, 128–143.
11.
GrayR. (2011). Looming Auditory Collision Warnings for Driving. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53(1), 63–74.
12.
GuillaumeA.PellieuxL.ChastresV.DrakeC. (2003). Judging the urgency of nonvocal auditory warning signals: Perceptual and cognitive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9(3), 196–212.
13.
HaasE. C.CasaliJ. G. (1995). Perceived urgency of and response time to multi-tone and frequency-modulated warning signals in broadband noise. Ergonomics, 38(11), 2313–2326.
14.
HellierE.EdworthyJ. (1999). On using psychophysical techniques to achieve urgency mapping in auditory warnings. Applied Ergonomics, 30(2), 167–171.
15.
HellierE. J.EdworthyJ.DennisI. (1993). Improving auditory warning design: Quantifying and predicting the effects of different warning parameters on perceived urgency. Human Factors, 35(4), 693–706.
16.
HoC.ReedN.SpenceC. (2007). Multisensory in-car warning signals for collision avoidance. Human Factors, 49(6), 1107–1114.
HollanderT. D.WogalterM. S. (2000). Connoted hazard of voiced warning signal words: An examination of auditory components. Proceedings of the IEA/HFES 2000 Congress, 3, 702–705.
19.
KohfeldD. L. (1971). Simple reaction time as a function of stimulus intensity in decibels of light and sound. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88(2), 251–257.
20.
KramerA. F.CassavaughN.HorreyW. J.BecicE.MayhughJ. L. (2007). Influence of Age and Proximity Warning Devices on Collision Avoidance in Simulated Driving. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(5), 935–949.
21.
LeeJ. D.McGeheeD. V.BrownT. L.ReyesM. L. (2002). Collision warning timing, driver distraction, and driver response to imminent rear-end collisions in a high-fidelity driving simulator. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 44(2), 314–334.
22.
LewisB.A.PenarandaB.N.RobertsD.M.BaldwinC.L. (2013). Effectiveness of bimodal versus unimodal alerts for distracted drivers. In Proceedings of the 7th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design. Bolton Landing, NY, June 18-20.
23.
LjungbergJ. K.ParmentierF. B. R.HughesR. W.MackenW. J.JonesD. M. (2012). Listen Out! Behavioural and Subjective Responses to Verbal Warnings. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(3), 451–461.
24.
MarshallD. C.LeeJ. D.AustriaP. A. (2007). Alerts for In-Vehicle Information Systems: Annoyance, Urgency, and Appropriateness. Human Factors, 49(1), 145–157.
25.
McKeownD.IsherwoodS. (2007). Mapping candidate within-vehicle auditory displays to their referents. Human Factors, 49(3), 417–428.
26.
MohebbiR.GrayR.TanH. Z. (2009). Driver Reaction Time to Tactile and Auditory Rear-End Collision Warnings While Talking on a Cell Phone. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 51(1), 102–110.
27.
SantangeloV.SpenceC. (2007). Multisensory cues capture spatial attention regardless of perceptual load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(6), 1311–1321.
28.
ScottJ. J.GrayR. (2008). A Comparison of Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Warnings for Rear-End Collision Prevention in Simulated Driving. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(2), 264–275.
29.
SuiedC.SusiniP.McAdamsS. (2008). Evaluating warning sound urgency with reaction times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(3), 201–212.
30.
TeichnerW. H. (1954). Recent studies of simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin, 51(2), 128–149.
31.
WalshT. C.BeattyP. C. W. (2005). Establishing scales of perceived severity for clinical situations during anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 95(3), 339–343.
32.
WhiteT. L., & U.S. Army Research Lab. (2011). The perceived urgency of tactile patterns. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: Army Research Laboratory.
33.
WilliamsS.BeattyP. C. W. (2005). Measuring the performance of audible alarms for anaesthesia. Physiological Measurement, 26(4), 571.
