Citation

Beckers N, Schreiner S, Bertrand P, Reimer B, Mehler B, Munger D, Dobres J. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2014; 58(1): 2156-2160.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2014, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/1541931214581453

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A driving simulation study assessed the impact of vocally entering an alpha numeric destination into Google Glass relative to voice and touch-entry methods using a handheld Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. Driving performance (standard deviation of lateral lane position and longitudinal velocity) and reaction to a light detection response task (DRT) were recorded for a gender-balanced sample of 24 young adult drivers. Task completion time and subjective workload ratings were also measured. Using Google Glass for destination entry had a statistically higher miss rate than using the Samsung Galaxy S4 voice interface, the Google Glass method took less time to complete, and the two methods were given comparable workload ratings by participants. In agreement with previous work, both voice interfaces performed significantly better than touch entry; this was seen in workload ratings, task duration, lateral lane control, and DRT metrics. Finally, irrespective of device or modality, destination entry significantly decreased responsiveness to events in the forward scene (as measured by the DRT reaction time) as compared to the baseline driving.


Keywords: Driver distraction;

Language: en