1 Introduction
2 Related work
2.1 Causes and effects of fatigue
2.2 Intervention against fatigue
3 Method
3.1 Apparatus
3.2 Driving scenario and boredom induction
Author | Track layout | Track type | Connections | Markings & Buildings | Type of landscape | Topography | Meteorology | Traffic density | Traffic participants |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Åkerstedt, Peters, Anund, & Kecklund, 2005 [2] | x | x | x | ||||||
Arnedt, Wilde, Munt, & MacLean, 2001 [5] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Atchley, Chan, & Gregersen, 2014 [6] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Boyle, Tippin, Paul, & Rizzo, 2008 [12] | x | x | x | ||||||
Eoh, Chung, & Kim, 2005 [22] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Fletcher, Petersson, & Zelinsky, 2005 [25] | x | x | x | ||||||
Forsman, Vila, Short, Mott, & van Dongen, 2013 [26] | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
Gastaldi, Rossi, & Gecchele, 2014 [28] | x | x | x | ||||||
Gershon, Shinar, & Ronen, 2009 [29] | x | x | x | ||||||
Greschner, 2011 [32] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Hayami, Matsunaga, Shidoji, & Matsuki, 2002 [37] | x | x | x | ||||||
Horne & Baulk, 2004 [40] | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
x | x | x | x | ||||||
Ingre, Akerstedt, Peters, Anund, & Kecklund, 2006 [43] | x | x | x | ||||||
Katja Karrer-Gauß, 2011 [46] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||
Körber, Cingel, Zimmermann, & Bengler, 2015 [48] | x | x | |||||||
Larue et al., 2011 [52] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |
Lenné, Triggs, & Redman, 1997 [53] | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
Liu, 2015 [55] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||
Merat & Jamson, 2013 [62] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Mets et al., 2011 [63] | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
Moller, Kayumov, Bulmash, Nhan, & Shapiro, 2006 [64] | x | x | x | ||||||
Neubauer, Matthews, & Saxby, 2014 [66] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Otmani, Pebayle, Roge, & Muzet, 2005 [67] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||
Paul, Boyle, Tippin, & Rizzo, 2005 [71] | x | x | x | ||||||
Rimini-Doering, Manstetten, Altmueller, Ladstaetter, & Mahler, 2001 [79] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Rossi, Gastaldi, & Gecchele, 2011 [80] | x | x | x | x | x | ||||
Saxby, Matthews, Hitchcock, & Warm, 2007 [82] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||
Thiffault & Bergeron, 2003 [93] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | ||
Ting, Hwang, Doong, & Jeng, 2008 [94] | x | x | x | x | x | x | |||
Valck & Cluydts, 2001 [96] | x | x | x | x | |||||
Verwey & Zaidel, 1999 [98] | x | x | x | x | x | x | x |
Category | Characteristic | Researched limit | |
---|---|---|---|
TRACK | Track layout | Length of straight sections | 4 km - ∞ |
Number of curves | 0–20 pro 100 km | ||
Length of curves | 1 km - ∞, but always smaller than the curve radius | ||
Radius of curves | 1 km - ∞, but always at least as large as the curve length | ||
Vertical track routing | Perfectly flat | ||
Track type | Track type | Country road, similar to a motorway or motorway | |
Number of lanes in own driving direction | (1 -) 2 | ||
Connections | Junctions | Spacing 25–50 km | |
Parking spaces | Not allowed | ||
Bridges | In combination with each junction and another after every second junction | ||
Markings & Buildings | Frequency of sign appearances | 6 km - ∞ | |
Type of signs | No sign gantry; Typical motorway signs on the roadside | ||
Road marking | Standard marking with dashed and solid white lines | ||
Emergency lane | Continuous right, 2.5 m wide | ||
Median crash barrier | Continuous with guard rail, reflector post, bushes | ||
Reflector post | Continuous on both sides, standard distance 50 m | ||
Crash barriers | Left continuous; Right optionally with constant length of 4 km - ∞ | ||
LANDSCAPE | Topography | / | Plain landscape with horizon limitation |
Meteorology | Weather | No rainfall; Sky blue – cloudy | |
Daytime | Dawn or dusk | ||
Visibility | 2000 m | ||
Season | Summer or summer-like | ||
Type of landscape | Tree density | Low to moderate; Accurate or randomly placed. | |
Urban landscape | Not exclusively; Distance between distant houses or villages in rural area: 6 km - ∞ | ||
Rural fields | Allowed | ||
Water bodies | Not allowed | ||
Change frequency of landscape types (per street side) | Rural: 25 km - ∞; Forest: 10 km - ∞; Noise control: 10 km | ||
TRAFFIC | Traffic participants | Cars | Allowed |
Trucks | Use on half the slower vehicles | ||
Pedestrians | Not allowed | ||
Traffic density | Faster vehicles: density | 0–10 vehicles per hour; In combination with slower vehicles: 0–6 vehicles per hour | |
Faster vehicles: relative velocity & behaviour | Unobtrusive behaviour; Up to 20 km/h above the permitted speed limit, but strictly different from 0 km/h | ||
Slower vehicles: density | 0–10 vehicles per hour; In combination with slower vehicles: 0–6 vehicles per hour | ||
Slower vehicles: relative velocity & behaviour | Unobtrusive behaviour; Up to 20 km/h slower than the test person’s vehicle, but different from 0 km/h | ||
Oncoming traffic | 0–20 vehicles per hour |
3.3 Monotony intervention
The question is presented to the driver via voice output, giving him a new auditory stimulus. He answers the question verbally to avoid turning his attention off the road on the one hand and to become mentally and physically active on the other. The dialogue between the driver and the interaction system ends the previously monotonous driving situation for the driver. The driver receives the feedback via the HUD, so that he does not have to turn his gaze away from the road. The points are given via voice output. The driver will quickly notice that the quiz questions are repeated and will therefore be motivated to pay more attention to the details in the vehicle environment that are all relevant for fulfilling the driving task. With this approach, the concept of Steinberger et al. [89], which only referred to speed and did not generate any verbal activity by the driver, was extended."Please guess the distance to the car ahead of you".
3.4 Study design
3.5 Participants
3.6 Procedure
3.7 Research questions
-
RQ1: How does the use of gamification in vehicle driving influence the development of subjective and objective psycho-physiological data and measurements compared to driving alone?
-
RQ2: How does the use of gamification in vehicle driving influence driving performance and safety compared to driving alone?
-
RQ3: Is the interaction system suitable for avoiding fatigue in the same way as a passenger during monotonous journeys?
3.8 Measures
3.8.1 Subjective psycho-physiological measurements
3.8.2 Objective psycho-physiological measurements
3.8.3 Driving performance data
-
Stage 1: Traffic sign known from national road traffic, but not to be found on motorways,
-
Stage 2: Traffic sign shape/colouring known, but warning content not (e.g. moose danger in Germany),
-
Stage 3: Traffic sign shape/colour unknown, content unknown (e.g. yellow warning sign for koalas in Germany).
3.9 Data analysis
4 Results
4.1 Sample details
4.2 Subjective psycho-physiological data
Measure | Section | Solo Ride (S) | Co-Driver Ride (C) | Interaction Ride (I) | Stat. Test S - I | Effect S - I | Stat. Test C – I | Effect C - I | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | ||||||
KSS Difference | Pre- to Post-Trial | 2.23 | 2.01 | −0.35 | 1.98 | 1.35 | 1.58 | t = 2.41** | d = 0.43 | t = −3.84**** | d = 0.69 |
NASA TLX | Overall | 36.83 | 15.28 | 32.34 | 15.28 | 38.25 | 12.99 | t = −0.50 | – | t = − 2.08** | d = 0.37 |
Mental Demand | 29.68 | 21.93 | 48.71 | 25.36 | 49.68 | 22.40 | t = −4.62**** | d = 0.83 | t = − 0.18 | – | |
Physical Demand | 27.10 | 20.73 | 28.71 | 22.21 | 27.74 | 16.37 | t = −0.16 | – | Z = − 0.46 | – | |
Temporal Demand | 20.81 | 14.77 | 25.00 | 16.42 | 29.52 | 14.85 | t = − 2.95*** | d = 0.53 | t = − 0.21 | – | |
Performance | 40.81 | 25.43 | 29.84 | 20.51 | 38.71 | 16.02 | t = 212.5 | – | t = − 2.36** | d = 42 | |
Effort | 59.19 | 24.63 | 39.84 | 22.15 | 46.45 | 20.66 | Z = − 3.02*** | d = 0.53 | t = − 1.54 | – | |
Frustration | 43.39 | 26.47 | 23.87 | 20.68 | 37.42 | 20.97 | Z = − 1.50 | – | t = − 2.90*** | d = 0.52 |
4.3 Objective psycho-physiological measurements
Measure | Section | Solo Ride (S) | Co-Driver Ride (C) | Interaction Ride (I) | Stat. Test S - I | Effect S - I | Stat. Test C - I | Effect C - I | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | ||||||
ECG (SDNN) [ms] | Overall | 66.36 | 20.29 | 72.02 | 24.37 | 65.42 | 23.78 | Z = −0.79 | – | Z = − 0.96 | – |
Intervall 3 | 61.14 | 22.70 | 65.10 | 20.21 | 61.31 | 27.45 | t = 0.04 | – | Z = −1.59 | – | |
Intervall 7 | 69.78 | 21.25 | 70.21 | 26.60 | 64.11 | 27.79 | Z = −2.40** | d = 0.23 | Z = − 0.83 | – | |
Intervall 11 | 67.40 | 26.64 | 72.53 | 29.66 | 71.07 | 27.45 | Z = −0.24 | – | t = − 0.34 | – | |
Intervall 15 | 74.37 | 31.06 | 77.54 | 26.77 | 72.99 | 25.48 | t = − 0.32 | – | Z = − 0.90 | – | |
Increase Blinks [%] | Overall | 20.35 | 32.24 | 12.49 | 27.22 | 1.98 | 26.51 | t = − 2.95*** | d = 0.57 | t = − 1.83* | d = 0.36 |
Intervall 3 | 7.53 | 25.04 | 5.80 | 17.22 | −9.19 | 17.85 | Z = − 2.81*** | d = 0.58 | t = − 4.00**** | d = 0.78 | |
Intervall 7 | 32.76 | 44.18 | 14.37 | 31.35 | 10.32 | 30.13 | t = − 2.60** | d = 0.50 | Z = − 1.41 | – | |
Intervall 11 | 24.26 | 32.23 | 12.75 | 32.96 | −0.89 | 26.17 | t = − 4.37**** | d = 0.84 | t = − 1.28 | – | |
Intervall 15 | 17,22 | 46,72 | 23,16 | 44.84 | 4.76 | 21.54 | t = −1.22 | – | t = 0.67 | – | |
EDA (SCL) [μS] | Overall | 0.31 | 0.11 | 0.31 | 0.09 | 0.32 | 0.11 | t = 0.39 | – | t = 0.23 | – |
Intervall 3 | 0.25 | 0.14 | 0.34 | 0.16 | 0.35 | 0.16 | t = 2.77*** | d = 0.50 | t = 0.25 | – | |
Intervall 7 | 0.32 | 0.17 | 0.29 | 0.13 | 0.35 | 0.16 | t = 0.75 | – | t = 2.07** | d = 0.37 | |
Intervall 11 | 0.34 | 0.17 | 0.28 | 0.14 | 0.33 | 0.15 | t = −0.05 | – | t = 1.64 | – | |
Intervall 15 | 0.29 | 0.17 | 0.29 | 0.20 | 0.33 | 0.20 | t = 0.73 | – | t = 0.66 | – |
4.4 Driving performance data
4.4.1 Vehicle data
Measure | Section | Solo Ride (S) | Co-Driver Ride (C) | Interaction Ride (I) | Stat. Test S - I | Effect S - I | Stat. Test C - I | Effect C - I | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | ||||||
SDLP | Overall | 0.32 | 0.05 | 0.28 | 0.04 | 0.29 | 0.05 | Z = −4.154**** | d = 0.94 | t = 1.275 | – |
[m] | Intervall 3 | 0.29 | 0.08 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.06 | t = −5.197**** | d = 0.93 | t = − 1.293 | – |
Intervall 7 | 0.32 | 0.08 | 0.26 | 0.07 | 0.28 | 0.06 | Z = −2.665*** | d = 0.53 | t = 1.462 | – | |
Intervall 11 | 0.31 | 0.07 | 0.27 | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.09 | Z = −3.841**** | d = 0.82 | Z = − 2.861*** | d = 0.05 | |
Intervall 15 | 0.34 | 0.07 | 0.29 | 0.06 | 0.31 | 0.08 | t = − 1.981* | d = 0.36 | t = 1.540 | – | |
MS | Overall | 103.61 | 4.45 | 104.30 | 3.79 | 101.76 | 3.05 | Z = −4.498**** | d = 0.99 | Z = − 4.505**** | d = 1.07 |
[km/h] | Intervall 3 | 103.01 | 4.31 | 103.71 | 3.65 | 102.51 | 4.17 | t = − 1.208 | – | Z = − 2.822*** | d = 0.44 |
Intervall 7 | 103.52 | 4.96 | 102.83 | 3.89 | 101.67 | 2.37 | t = −2.781*** | d = 0.50 | t = − 2.424** | d = 0.44 | |
Intervall 11 | 104.89 | 5.92 | 106.76 | 7.43 | 102.71 | 4.20 | Z = −2.332** | d = 0.47 | Z = − 2.979*** | d = 0.60 | |
Intervall 15 | 103.96 | 5.98 | 104.18 | 5.86 | 102.25 | 2.93 | Z = −2.047** | d = 0.45 | Z = − 1.646* | d = 0.40 | |
Incidents [n] | Overall | 54.84 | 32.57 | 38.74 | 33.04 | 42.84 | 31.79 | t = 3.205*** | d = 0.58 | - t = 1.126 | – |
Accidents [n] | Overall | 0.58 | 1.61 | 0.13 | 0.56 | 0.13 | 0.72 | t = −1.813* | d = 0.33 | t = 0.000 | – |
4.4.2 Vigilance
Measure | Section | Solo Ride (S) | Co-Driver Ride (C) | Interaction Ride (I) | Stat. Test S - I | Effect S - I | Stat. Test C - I | Effect C - I | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | SD | M | SD | M | SD | ||||||
Reaction Time [ms] | Overall | 1945 | 642 | 1822 | 669 | 2035 | 567 | t = 0.68 | – | t = 1.46 | – |
Collisions | Overall | 0.30 | 0.47 | 0.30 | 0.53 | 0.37 | 0.49 | t = 0.57 | – | t = 0.63 | – |
Sign Recognition | Overall | 2.42 | 0.76 | 2.03 | 0.98 | 2.84 | 0.37 | Z = −2.50** | d = 0.49 | Z = − 3.62**** | d = 0.80 |