Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31227955›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2019

Assessing the visual and cognitive demands of in-vehicle information systems.

David L Strayer, Joel M Cooper, Rachel M Goethe, Madeleine M McCarty, Douglas J Getty, Francesco Biondi

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David L StrayerDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, 380 S. 1530 E. RM 502, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. david.strayer@utah.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1653-730X
Joel M CooperDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, 380 S. 1530 E. RM 502, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Rachel M GoetheAmerican Automobile Association, Inc, Heathrow, Florida, USA.
Madeleine M McCartyDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, 380 S. 1530 E. RM 502, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Douglas J GettyDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, 380 S. 1530 E. RM 502, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Francesco BiondiDepartment of Kinesiology, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, Canada.

Funding

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew automobiles provide a variety of features that allow motorists to perform a plethora of secondary tasks unrelated to the primary task of driving. Despite their ubiquity, surprisingly little is known about how these complex multimodal in-vehicle information systems (IVIS) interactions impact a driver's workload.

resultsThe current research sought to address three interrelated questions concerning this knowledge gap: (1) Are some task types more impairing than others? (2) Are some modes of interaction more distracting than others? (3) Are IVIS interactions easier to perform in some vehicles than others? Depending on the availability of the IVIS features in each vehicle, our testing involved an assessment of up to four task types (audio entertainment, calling and dialing, text messaging, and navigation) and up to three modes of interaction (e.g., center stack, auditory vocal, and the center console). The data collected from each participant provided a measure of cognitive demand, a measure of visual/manual demand, a subjective workload measure, and a measure of the time it took to complete the different tasks. The research provides empirical evidence that the workload experienced by drivers systematically varied as a function of the different tasks, modes of interaction, and vehicles that we evaluated.

conclusionsThis objective assessment suggests that many of these IVIS features are too distracting to be enabled while the vehicle is in motion. Greater consideration should be given to what interactions should be available to the driver when the vehicle is in motion rather than to what IVIS features and functions could be available to motorists.

Indexed as

Cognitive demandDriver workloadIn-vehicle information systemIVISVisual demand

Identifiers

PMID31227955
PMCPMC6588669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.