In the eye of the beholder: A simulator study of the impact of Google Glass on driving performance

Leveraging Wearable Sensors in Virtual Reality Driving Simulators: A Review of Techniques and Applications

Virtual reality (VR) driving simulators are very promising tools for driver assessment since they provide a controlled and adaptable setting for behavior analysis. At the same time, wearable sensor technology provides a well-suited and valuable approach to evaluating the behavior of drivers and their physiological or psychological state. This review paper investigates the potential of wearable sensors in VR driving simulators. Methods: A literature search was performed on four databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, and IEEE Xplore) using appropriate search terms to retrieve scientific articles from a period of eleven years, from 2013 to 2023. Results: After removing duplicates and irrelevant papers, 44 studies were selected for analysis. Some important aspects were extracted and presented: the number of publications per year, countries of publication, the source of publications, study aims, characteristics of the participants, and types of wearable sensors. Moreover, an analysis and discussion of different aspects are provided. To improve car simulators that use virtual reality technologies and boost the effectiveness of particular driver training programs, data from the studies included in this systematic review and those scheduled for the upcoming years may be of interest.

Texting While Driving: A Literature Review on Driving Simulator Studies

Road safety is increasingly threatened by distracted driving. Studies have shown that there is a significantly increased risk for a driver of being involved in a car crash due to visual distractions (not watching the road), manual distractions (hands are off the wheel for other non-driving activities), and cognitive and acoustic distractions (the driver is not focused on the driving task). Driving simulators (DSs) are powerful tools for identifying drivers' responses to different distracting factors in a safe manner. This paper aims to systematically review simulator-based studies to investigate what types of distractions are introduced when using the phone for texting while driving (TWD), what hardware and measures are used to analyze distraction, and what the impact of using mobile devices to read and write messages while driving is on driving performance. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A total of 7151 studies were identified in the database search, of which 67 were included in the review, and they were analyzed in order to respond to four research questions. The main findings revealed that TWD distraction has negative effects on driving performance, affecting drivers' divided attention and concentration, which can lead to potentially life-threatening traffic events. We also provide several recommendations for driving simulators that can ensure high reliability and validity for experiments. This review can serve as a basis for regulators and interested parties to propose restrictions related to using mobile phones in a vehicle and improve road safety.

Dual-task interference while receiving information on a head mounted display and manual tracking with and without auditory warnings

BACKGROUND

Dual-task interference is a concern when users attempt to use head mounted displays (HMD) while performing seated manual control tasks. Auditory warnings of information displayed on the HMD may or may not assist users while multi-tasking.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we investigated the dual-task interference of words, to be remembered later, presented on a HMD and motor control in a manual tracking task. The word presentations were warned or not warned with auditory signals and the impact of audio warnings were examined.

METHODS

Participants were required to perform five tasks: (1) a compensatory tracking task performed alone, (2) a word memory task performed alone, (3) a tracking and word memory task, (4) a word memory task with words preceded by audial signals, and (5) a tracking and word memory task with words preceded by audial signals. In addition, in the dual-tasks, half of the word presentations were paired with directions changes in the tracking task to test for immediate perceptual interference.

RESULTS

There were significant dual task costs for both mean tracking error and later word recall. Additionally, participants took significantly longer to respond to motion changes paired with word presentations than motion changes not paired with word presentations. However, the impact of auditory warnings on tracking performance was nuanced.

CONCLUSION

Even with an in field of view transparent HMD momentary and sustained cognitive dual-task interference remains. Reaction times are affected most in the worst case scenario, when task critical events occur at the same time as a text message.

APPLICATION

The use of HMDs in time critical manual control tasks (such as operating machinery) should be limited. The use of audial warnings to alert operators to information displayed on an HMD requires further research; it may disrupt appropriate or natural task ordering.

Factors affecting behavior of mobile phone use while driving and effect of mobile phone use on driving performance

This study analyzed factors affecting behavior of mobile phone use while driving and its effects on driving performance, in terms of speed, lateral position, steer deviation, steer speed, following distance, perception-reaction time, and occurrence of a near miss situation. To investigate the factors affecting behavior of mobile phone use while driving, 1106 respondents from four different regions in Thailand participated in the questionnaire survey study. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) was used to explain these factors including two additional extended factors which are risk perception and law enforcement knowledge. The outcome of this part shows that attitude, norm, and law enforcement knowledge significantly affect the intention and behavior of the drivers. Even though approximately 90 percent of drivers realized that using a mobile phone while driving was dangerous and against the law, they have reported that they still use mobile phone while driving. To determine the effect of mobile phone use on driving performance, a 2-lane, straight rural highway, with a leading vehicle and an unexpected "STOP" sign, were simulated in order to examine the driving performance of drivers "without a phone", "talking on a phone call", and "texting a message" conditions. The results found that using mobile phone while driving can reduce speed and following distance, but increase lateral deviation, steer deviation, steer speed, perception-reaction time, and number of near misses leading to higher risks for road crashes.

Does wearable device bring distraction closer to drivers? Comparing smartphones and Google Glass

BACKGROUND

Head-up and wearable displays, such as Google Glass™, are sometimes marketed as safe in-vehicle alternatives to phone-based displays, as they allow drivers to receive messages without eye-off-the-road glances. However, head-up displays can still compromise driver performance (e.g., He et al., 2015b), as the distracting effect of interacting with any device will depend on the user's multitasking strategies. The present experiment examined drivers' interaction with a head-down smartphone display and a wearable head-up display.

METHOD

Participants performed a simulated driving task while receiving and responding to text messages via smartphone or the head-mounted display (HMD) on the Google Glass™. Incoming messages were signaled by an auditory alert, and responses were made vocally.

RESULTS

When using Google Glass, participants' responses were quicker than that of smartphone, and the time to engage in a task did not vary according to lane-keeping difficulty. Results suggest that a willingness to engage more readily in distracting tasks may offset the potential safety benefits of wearable devices.

Feasibility and safety of augmented reality-assisted urological surgery using smartglass

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility, safety and usefulness of augmented reality-assisted urological surgery using smartglass (SG).

METHODS

Seven urological surgeons (3 board urologists and 4 urology residents) performed augmented reality-assisted urological surgery using SG for 10 different types of operations and a total of 31 urological operations. Feasibility was assessed using technical metadata (number of photographs taken/number of videos recorded/video time recorded) and structured interviews with the urologists on their use of SG. Safety was evaluated by recording complications and grading according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Usefulness of SG for urological surgery was queried in structured interviews and in a survey.

RESULTS

The implementation of SG use during urological surgery was feasible with no intrinsic (technical defect) or extrinsic (inability to control the SG function) obstacles being observed. SG use was safe as no grade 3-5 complications occurred for the series of 31 urological surgeries of different complexities. Technical applications of SG included taking photographs/recording videos for teaching and documentation, hands-free teleconsultation, reviewing patients' medical records and images and searching the internet for health information. Overall usefulness of SG for urological surgery was rated as very high by 43 % and high by 29 % of surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Augmented reality-assisted urological surgery using SG is both feasible and safe and also provides several useful functions for urological surgeons. Further developments and investigations are required in the near future to harvest the great potential of this exciting technology for urological surgery.