SAVE-IT SAfety VEhicles using adaptive Interface Technology Phase 1 Research Program Quarterly Program Review Task 6: Telematics Task Leaders: Paul Green (6a) Barry Kantowitz (6b)

SAVE-IT Task 6: Telematics u Objective: Determine distraction potential for commonly- used telematics functions. u Staffing: –6a: Green (1.0), Shah (3) –6b: Kantowitz, Premakur, Sullivan u Deliverables –Literature review (fall, 2003) –Task 6 report (Jan, 2004) u Schedule –Literature review (Aug, 2003) –Design simulator study (Sept, 2003) –Data collection (Nov-Dec, 2003) –Report (Feb-March, 2003)

SAVE-IT Task 6a: Telematics Demand Lit. Review Issues: u What is the distraction potential of various telematic functions? u Note: The measures of interest are task time, the number of glances required, and the mean time per glance.

SAVE-IT Activities: u Examined papers of which are useful. Summarized about 15 papers on the topic. List of the key measures by task (e.g., destination entry) is being compiled. u Some key documents so far: Kurokawa’s dissertation Green (1999) tech report Blanco’s thesis Gallagher’s dissertation Curry, Greenberg, and Glanco (2002) TRB paper Task 6a: Telematics Demand Lit. Review

SAVE-IT Task 6a: Telematics Demand Lit. Review

SAVE-IT Task 6a: Telematics Demand Lit. Review Information in summaries u study authors and year u objectives u method (road types, time of day, vehicle) u subjects (number, ages, gender) u in-vehicle tasks u independent measures (task type, road, traffic, age, etc.) u dependent measures (mean glance time, steering wheel velocity, number of errors, etc.) u findings

SAVE-IT Task 6a: Telematics Demand Lit. Review u Activities to be done: 1. Explore link between RT and other measures in the literature. 2. Identify measures in current guidelines (SAE J2364, AAM, etc.) 3. Examine IVIS Demand model for task key task characteristics (visual, auditory, cognitive, manual, and auditory demand)

SAVE-IT Task 6b: Telematics u Objective: –Identify the distraction/workload associated with common telematic functions by measuring driver performance and brake RT in a simulator u Activities: –Develop driving world and driving scenarios for UMTRI Simulator, using tiles from Tasks 2 and 5 –Develop telematics secondary tasks, possibilities include: » Generic telematic visual choice-reaction task (Kantowitz, 1995; Harms & Pattern, 2003) »Specific telematic tasks TBD based upon results of Task 6a –Dependent variables include the same measures of driving performance studied in Tasks 2b and 5b such as brake RT and steering behavior –Independent variables include telematic secondary tasks –Pilot study (a few subjects)

SAVE-IT Task 6b: Telematics  Activities: –Experimental study »16 subjects age 35-55; 16 subjects age »Practice driving using “square world” from Task 2b or equivalent from Task 5b »Single-task practice on secondary telematic tasks »Baseline driving data »Test using “zig-zag world” from Task 2b or equivalent from Task 5b with telematic secondary tasks –Issues/Concerns »Task 6b depends upon timely and successful results from Tasks 6a, 2b and 5b. Delays or incomplete solutions for these tasks will delay Task 6b.

SAVE-IT Task 6b: Telematics  Activities: –Expected results »Driver performance should decrease for high loads of secondary task. There may be trade-offs between driving and secondary tasks which makes inclusion of appropriate single-task control conditions imperative. There is no universal secondary task so that potential interactions with driving may vary across different telematic functions (Kantowitz & Simsek, 2000).