Citation

Kramer AF, Cassavaugh N, Horrey WJ, Becic E, Mayhugh JL. Hum. Factors 2007; 49(5): 935-949.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois, 405 N. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801, USA. akramer@cyrus.psych.uiuc.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2007, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

17915608

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a set of experiments to examine the utility of several different uni- and multimodal collision avoidance systems (CASs) on driving performance of young and older adult drivers in a high-fidelity simulator. BACKGROUND: Although previous research has examined the efficacy of different CASs on collision avoidance, there has been a dearth of studies that have examined such devices in different driving situations with different populations of drivers. METHOD: Several different CAS warnings were examined in varying traffic and collision configurations both without (Experiment 1a) and with (Experiment 2) a distracting in-vehicle task. RESULTS: Overall, collision avoidance performance for both potential forward and side object collisions was best for an auditory/visual CAS, which alerted drivers using both modalities. Interestingly, older drivers (60-82 years of age) benefited as much as younger drivers from the CAS, and sometimes they benefited more. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that CASs can be beneficial across a number of different driving scenarios, types of collisions, and driver populations. APPLICATION: These results have important implications for the design and implementation of CASs for different driver populations and driving conditions.

Language: en