ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Multimodal Physiological Assessment of Attentional States and Driving Styles in Simulated Driving.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mind wandering during driving is one of the major sources of road safety risk, but its expression across drivers of different styles remains unclear. Few studies have examined attentional state and driving style concurrently in a 1 h multimodal simulated driving protocol. We collected one hour of driving, five physiological signals, and eye tracking from 48 participants in a simulator. The driving style was obtained from a Multidimensional Driving Style Inventory pre-questionnaire, and attentional state was probed every 120 to 180 s during the experiment. We analyzed feature-level effects with Mann-Whitney U tests, modeled attentional transitions between adjacent attentional states, and compared seven sensor combinations under six classifiers with leave-one-subject-out validation. The study yields three contributions. First, driving style corresponded to distinct multimodal physiological and gaze signatures, and physiology-only features predicted the style label at a balanced accuracy of 0.65, supporting style as a multimodal trait beyond self-report. Second, attention dynamics differed by driving style, with risky drivers drifting from focus to mind wandering twice as often as safe drivers. Third, the optimal sensor configuration depended on the prediction target and driver subgroup: physiology and eye tracking were the most informative sensors for attentional state, while driving style classification depended primarily on physiological features. These results should not be interpreted as evidence for real-time detection. Instead, they provide empirical evidence for sensor selection and suggest that wearable driver-state estimation should be integrated with vehicle- and context-aware monitoring systems.
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.