Driver workload is an important cognitive factor that can be associated with frustration and unsafe driving behavior. Extensive research has shown the impacts of external factors on driving workload. However, little is known about the influence of individual differences on driver workload.
Objective
The objectives of this simulation based study are to (a) examine the associations between individual differences and perceived driving workload, and (b) identify the variables that significantly contribute to driver workload within construction work zones.
Methods
Thirty college students (23 males and seven females) navigated through two different work zone configurations in two levels of traffic density. Demographic variables such as gender, years of driving experience, previous traffic offense and type A personality along with driving behavior questionnaire (DBQ) and driving anger expression inventory (DAX) were used as fixed factors in this study. Self-reported measures of NASA TLX were used to collect subjective workload measurement.
Results
The results showed that the best predictors of regression analysis were lapses, adaptive behavior, traffic, gender, work zone layout and vehicular aggressiveness.
Conclusions
There are significant associations among individual differences and driver workload suggesting the need to consider these differences when designing for road safety.
OppenheimI, ShinarD.A context-sensitive model of driving behaviour and its implications for in-vehicle safety systems. Cogn Tech Work. 2012; 14(3): 261–81.
2.
OppenheimI, ShinarD, EnjalbertS, DahyotR, PichonM, QuedraogoA.Critical state of the art and unified models of driver behaviour. 2010.
3.
MichonJA. A critical view of driver behavior models: What do we know, what should we do? In: Evans L, Schwing RC, editors. Human behavior & traffic safety. New York: Plenum Press. 1985. p. 485–524.
4.
de WaardD. The Measurement of Drivers’ Mental Workload. The Traffic Research Centre VSC. 1996.
5.
BrookhuisKA, de WaardD.Monitoring drivers’ mental workload in driving simulators using physiological measures. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2010; 42(3): 898–903.
6.
HartSG. Nasa-task load index (nasa-tlx); 20 years later Moffett Field, CA. 2006.
7.
WickensCD, HollandsJG. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, New York: Prentice Hall. 2000.
8.
TehE, JamsonS, CarstenO, JamsonH.Temporal fluctuations in driving demand: The effect of traffic complexity on subjective measures of workload and driving performance. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2014; 22(0): 207–17.
9.
EvansL.Traffic safety. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Science Serving Society. 2004.
10.
ReasonJ, MansteadA, StradlingS, BaxterJ, CampbellK.Errors and violations on the roads: A real distinction?Ergonomics. 1990; 31: 1315–32.
11.
WengJ, MengQ.Effects of environment, vehicle and driver characteristics on risky driving behavior at work zones. Safety Science. 2012; 50(4): 1034–42.
12.
YagilD.Gender and age-related differences in attitudes toward traffic laws and traffic violations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 1998; 1(2): 123–35.
13.
González-IglesiasB, Gómez-FraguelaJA, Luengo-MartínMÁ. Driving anger and traffic violations: Gender differences. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2012; 15(4): 404–12.
14.
ChliaoutakisJE, DemakakosP, TzamaloukaG, BakouV, KoumakiM, DarviriC.Aggressive behavior while driving as predictor of self-reported car crashes. Journal of Safety Research. 2002; 33(4): 431–43.
15.
DeffenbacherJL, DeffenbacherDM, LynchRS, RichardsTL. Anger, aggression, and risky behavior: A comparison of high and low anger drivers. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 2003; 41(6): 701–18.
16.
ConstantinouE, PanayiotouG, KonstantinouN, Loutsiou-LaddA, KapardisA.Risky and aggressive driving in young adults: Personality matters. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2011; 43(4): 1323–31.
17.
BerdoulatE, VavassoriD, SastreMTM. Driving anger, emotional and instrumental aggressiveness, and impulsiveness in the prediction of aggressive and transgressive driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2013; 50: 758–67.
18.
Herrero-FernándezD.Psychometric adaptation of the driving anger expression inventory in a spanish sample: differences by age and gender. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2011; 14(4): 324–9.
19.
ZhaoN, MehlerB, ReimerB, D'AmbrosioLA, MehlerA, CoughlinJF. An investigation of the relationship between the driving behavior questionnaire and objective measures of highway driving behavior. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2012; 15(6): 676–85.
20.
DeffenbacherJL, LynchRS, OettingER, SwaimRC. The driving anger expression inventory: A measure of how people express their anger on the road. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 2002; 40(6): 717–37.
21.
DeffenbacherJL, WhiteGS, LynchRS. Evaluation of two new scales assessing driving anger: The driving anger expression inventoryand the driver's angry thoughts questionnaire. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 2004; 26(2): 87–99.
22.
YoungKL, SalmonPM. Examining the relationship between driver distraction and driving errors: A discussion of theory, studies and methods. Safety Science. 2012; 50(2): 165–74.
23.
YoungKL, SalmonPM, LennéMG. At the cross-roads: An on-road examination of driving errors at intersections. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2013; 58(0): 226–34.
24.
SalmonPM, LennéMG, StantonNA, JenkinsDP, WalkerGH. Managing error on the open road: The contribution of human error models and methods. Safety Science. 2010; 48(10): 1225–35.
25.
CantinV, LavallièreM, SimoneauM, TeasdaleN.Mental workload when driving in a simulator: Effects of age and driving complexity. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2009; 41(4): 763–71.
26.
UllmanGL. Characteristics of today's work zone. Washington D.C: Transportation Research Board. 2004.
27.
U.S. Department of Transportation. National strategy to reduce congestion on america's transportation network 2006 [Available from: http://isddc.dot.gov/OLPFiles/OST/012988.pdf.
28.
ChinSM, FranzeseSM, GreeneDL, HwangHL. Temporary losses of highway capacity and impacts on performance. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, 2002 DE-AC05-00OR22725.
U.S. Department of Transportation. Manual on uniform traffic control devices for streets and highways. Washington, D.C: Federal Highway Adminstration. 2009.
33.
IdewuWIA, WolshonB.Joint Merge and Its Impact on Merging Speeds in Lane Reduction Areas of Construction Zone. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2010; 2169: 31–9.
34.
HartSG, StavelandLE. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N, editors. Advances in Psychology. Volume 52: North-Holland. 1988. p. 139–83.
35.
BortnerRW. A short rating scale as a potential measure of pattern A behaviour. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 1969; 22: 87–91.
36.
BassC.Type A behaviour in patients with chest pain: Test-retest reliability and psychometric correlates of Bortner scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 1984; 28(4): 289–300.
37.
Minitab Inc. Minitab 16 Statistical Software. State College, PA: Minitab Inc. 2010.
38.
YeoI, JohnsonRA. A new family of power transformations to improve normality or symmetry. Biometrika. 2000; 87(4): 954–9.
39.
IBM Corp. IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, 21.0 ed. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. 2012.
40.
KlineP.The handbook of psychological testing. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. 1999.
41.
HancockPA. The effect of gender and time of day upon the subjective estimate of mental workload during the performance of a simple task. In: Peter AH, Najmedin M, editors. Advances in Psychology. Volume 52: North-Holland. 1988. p. 239–50.
42.
Di MiliaL, SmolenskyMH, CostaG, HowarthHD, OhayonMM, PhilipP.Demographic factors, fatigue, and driving accidents: An examination of the published literature. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2011; 43(3): 516–32.
43.
WickensCD. Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2002; 3(2): 159–77.
44.
BeckKH, DaughtersSB, AliB.Hurried driving: Relationship to distress tolerance, driver anger, aggressive and risky driving in college students. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2013; 51(0): 51–5.
45.
LeyroTM, ZvolenskyMJ, BernsteinA.Distress tolerance and psychological symptoms and disorders: A review of the empirical literature among adults. Psychological Bulletin. 2010; 136: 576–600.
46.
GorkaSM, AliB, DaughtersSB. Relationship between a behavioral measure of distress tolerance and specific patterns of alcohol use. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 2012; 26(3): 621–6.
47.
MeisterD.Behavioral foundations of system development. New York: Wiley. 1976.
