Search Results

This study reanalyzes the data from a recent experimental report from the University of Utah investigating the effect on driving performance of auditory-vocal secondary tasks (such as cell phone and passenger conversations, speech-to-text, and a complex artificial cognitive task). The current objective is to estimate the relative risk of crashes associated with such auditory-vocal tasks. Contrary to the Utah study's assumption of an increase in crash risk from the attentional effects of cognitive load, a deeper analysis of the Utah data shows that driver self-regulation provides an effective countermeasure that offsets possible increases in crash risk. For example, drivers self-regulated their following distances to compensate for the slight increases in brake response time while performing auditory-vocal tasks. This new finding is supported by naturalistic driving data showing that cell phone conversation does not increase crash risk above that of normal baseline driving.

The Dimensional Model of Driver Demand is extended to include Auditory-Vocal (i.e., pure “voice” tasks), and Mixed-Mode tasks (i.e., a combination of Auditory-Vocal mode with visual-only, or with Visual-Manual modes). The extended model was validated with data from 24 participants using the 2014 Toyota Corolla infotainment system in a video-based surrogate driving venue. Twenty-two driver performance metrics were collected, including total eyes-off-road time (TEORT), mean single glance duration (MSGD), and proportion of long single glances (LGP). Other key metrics included response time (RT) and miss rate to a Tactile Detection Response Task (TDRT). The 22 metrics were simplified using Principal Component Analysis to two dimensions. The major dimension, explaining 60% of total variance, we interpret as the attentional effects of cognitive demand. The minor dimension, explaining 20% of total variance, we interpret as physical demand.