ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2019
Assessing the visual and cognitive demands of in-vehicle information systems.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal In-Vehicle Hypoglycemia Warning for Drivers With Type 1 Diabetes: Design and Evaluation in Simulated and Real-World Driving.JMIR human factors · 2024Trial
- Inferring Hidden Attentional States in Driving: A Bayesian Approach to Modeling Distraction and Secondary Task Engagement.Human factors · 2026Article
- Vigilance Decrement During On-Road Partially Automated Driving Across Four Systems.Human factors · 2024Article
- This Is Your Brain on Autopilot 2.0: The Influence of Practice on Driver Workload and Engagement During On-Road, Partially Automated Driving.Human factors · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and User Perception of an In-Vehicle Voice Warning for Hypoglycemia: Development and Feasibility Trial.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Older Drivers' Attitudes and Preferences about Instrument Cluster Designs in Vehicles Revealed by the Dashboard Questionnaire.Cognition, technology & work (Online) · 2023Article
- How I Met Your V2X Sensor Data: Analysis of Projection-Based Light Field Visualization for Vehicle-to-Everything Communication Protocols and Use Cases.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Associations of visual functions with attitudes about motor vehicle dashboards among older drivers.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2022Article
- Eye-head coordination and dynamic visual scanning as indicators of visuo-cognitive demands in driving simulator.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.