MIT Engineering Systems Division, United States.
Harvard University - School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, United States.
Appl Ergon. 2019 Feb;75:8-16. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.09.001. Epub 2018 Sep 18.
The impact of using a smartwatch to initiate phone calls on driver workload, attention, and performance was compared to smartphone visual-manual (VM) and auditory-vocal (AV) interfaces. In a driving simulator, 36 participants placed calls using each method. While task time and number of glances were greater for AV calling on the smartwatch vs. smartphone, remote detection task (R-DRT) responsiveness, mean single glance duration, percentage of long duration off-road glances, total off-road glance time, and percent time looking off-road were similar; the later metrics were all significantly higher for the VM interface vs. AV methods. Heart rate and skin conductance were higher during phone calling tasks than "just driving", but did not consistently differentiate calling method. Participants exhibited more erratic driving behavior (lane position and major steering wheel reversals) for smartphone VM calling compared to both AV methods. Workload ratings were lower for AV calling on both devices vs. VM calling.
使用智能手表发起电话呼叫对驾驶员工作量、注意力和性能的影响与智能手机的视觉-手动 (VM) 和听觉-语音 (AV) 接口进行了比较。在驾驶模拟器中,36 名参与者使用每种方法进行了呼叫。虽然使用智能手表进行 AV 呼叫的任务时间和注视次数比使用智能手机更多,但远程检测任务 (R-DRT) 的响应能力、平均单次注视持续时间、长距离偏离道路注视的百分比、总偏离道路注视时间和偏离道路注视时间百分比相似;后几个指标均明显高于 VM 接口与 AV 方法相比。与“仅驾驶”相比,打电话任务期间的心率和皮肤电导率更高,但不始终区分呼叫方法。与两种 AV 方法相比,智能手机 VM 呼叫时参与者表现出更不稳定的驾驶行为(车道位置和主要方向盘反转)。两种设备上的 AV 呼叫的工作负荷评级均低于 VM 呼叫。