Suppr超能文献

模拟轻度视力损失对行人穿越情境中注视、驾驶和交互行为的影响。

Effects of simulated mild vision loss on gaze, driving and interaction behaviors in pedestrian crossing situations.

机构信息

Chair of Ergonomics, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Apr;125:138-151. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.026. Epub 2019 Feb 10.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Interaction is the process of behavior adaption between two or more participants primarily based on what they visually perceive. It is an important aspect of traffic participation and supports a safe and efficient flow of traffic. However, prior driving simulator studies investigating the effects of vision impairment have typically used pre-programmed pedestrians that did not interact with the human driver. In the current study we used a linked pedestrian and driving simulator setting to increase the ecological validity of the experimental paradigm. We evaluated the effects of mild vision loss on interactions between drivers and human-controlled, interactive pedestrians compared to preprogrammed, non-interactive pedestrians.

METHOD

Young subjects (mean age 31 years) wore safety goggles with diffusing filters that reduced visual acuity to 20/50 Snellen and contrast sensitivity to 1.49 log units. Two types of crossings (zebra vs. free lane) and two types of pedestrians (non-interactive vs. interactive) were presented to the driver using a multiple simulator setting. Gaze, safety and time series measures were analyzed to quantify the behavior of the participants during the different crossing situations.

RESULTS

Simulated vision impairment significantly increased the time taken to first fixate on the pedestrian, but only had mild adverse effects on safety measures and subsequent interactions. By comparison, pedestrian type and crossing type were found to significantly affect interaction measures. In crossings with the interactive pedestrians the behavior adaption between the driver and the pedestrian took longer and was less correlated in contrast to the situations with the non-interactive pedestrian.

CONCLUSION

Mild vision impairment (slightly worse than the common 20/40 requirement for driving) had little effect on interactions with pedestrians once they were detected and only had mild adverse consequences on driving safety. Time series measures were sensitive to differences in behavior adaption between road users depending on the level of interaction and type of crossing situation.

摘要

目的

交互是两个或多个参与者之间基于他们视觉感知的行为适应过程。它是交通参与的一个重要方面,支持交通的安全和高效流动。然而,之前研究视力损伤对驾驶的影响的驾驶模拟器研究通常使用预先编程的行人,这些行人不会与人类驾驶员进行交互。在当前的研究中,我们使用了一个连接的行人-驾驶模拟器设置来提高实验范式的生态有效性。我们评估了轻度视力损失对驾驶员与人类控制的互动行人之间交互的影响,与预先编程的非互动行人进行了比较。

方法

年轻受试者(平均年龄 31 岁)佩戴安全眼镜,眼镜上带有扩散滤镜,可将视力降低至 20/50 斯涅伦(Snellen)和对比度敏感度降低至 1.49 对数单位。使用多模拟器设置向驾驶员呈现两种类型的交叉(斑马线与自由车道)和两种类型的行人(非互动与互动)。分析注视、安全和时间序列测量结果,以量化参与者在不同交叉情况下的行为。

结果

模拟视力损伤显著增加了首次注视行人的时间,但仅对安全措施和后续交互产生轻微的不利影响。相比之下,行人类型和交叉类型显著影响交互测量结果。在与互动行人的交叉情况下,驾驶员和行人之间的行为适应需要更长的时间,并且与非互动行人的情况相比相关性较低。

结论

轻度视力损伤(略低于驾驶的常见 20/40 要求)在检测到行人后对与行人的交互几乎没有影响,仅对驾驶安全产生轻微的不利后果。时间序列测量结果对不同道路使用者之间的行为适应差异敏感,具体取决于交互水平和交叉情况的类型。

相似文献

1
Effects of simulated mild vision loss on gaze, driving and interaction behaviors in pedestrian crossing situations.
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Apr;125:138-151. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.026. Epub 2019 Feb 10.
2
Kinematic cues in driver-pedestrian communication to support safe road crossing.
Accid Anal Prev. 2023 Nov;192:107236. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2023.107236. Epub 2023 Jul 31.
3
Effects of safety measures on driver's speed behavior at pedestrian crossings.
Accid Anal Prev. 2015 Oct;83:111-24. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.07.016. Epub 2015 Aug 4.
4
How do drivers overtake pedestrians? Evidence from field test and naturalistic driving data.
Accid Anal Prev. 2020 May;139:105494. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2020.105494. Epub 2020 Mar 20.
5
Impact of Oncoming Headlight Glare With Cataracts: A Pilot Study.
Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 6;9:164. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00164. eCollection 2018.
7
Analyzing driver-pedestrian interaction in a mixed-street environment using a driving simulator.
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Nov;108:56-65. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.08.005. Epub 2017 Sep 6.
8
Effect of exposure to aggressive stimuli on aggressive driving behavior at pedestrian crossings at unmarked roadways.
Accid Anal Prev. 2016 Mar;88:159-68. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.12.026. Epub 2016 Jan 8.
9
Who goes first? A distributed simulator study of vehicle-pedestrian interaction.
Accid Anal Prev. 2023 Jun;186:107050. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2023.107050. Epub 2023 Apr 4.
10

引用本文的文献

1
Directional vibro-tactile hazard warnings for drivers with vision impairments.
Assist Technol. 2025 Jul 2:1-9. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2025.2520781.
2
Knowing me, knowing you-A study on top-down requirements for compensatory scanning in drivers with homonymous visual field loss.
PLoS One. 2024 Mar 1;19(3):e0299129. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299129. eCollection 2024.
3
Opportunities and Limitations of a Gaze-Contingent Display to Simulate Visual Field Loss in Driving Simulator Studies.
Front Neuroergon. 2022 Jun 10;3:916169. doi: 10.3389/fnrgo.2022.916169. eCollection 2022.
4
Virtual reality as a means to explore assistive technologies for the visually impaired.
PLOS Digit Health. 2023 Jun 20;2(6):e0000275. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000275. eCollection 2023 Jun.
5
Change blindness in simulated driving in individuals with homonymous visual field loss.
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2022 May 15;7(1):44. doi: 10.1186/s41235-022-00394-6.
7
Estimating time-to-contact when vision is impaired.
Sci Rep. 2021 Oct 27;11(1):21213. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-00331-5.
8
Simulating Macular Degeneration to Investigate Activities of Daily Living: A Systematic Review.
Front Neurosci. 2021 Aug 13;15:663062. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.663062. eCollection 2021.
10
The effects of simulated acuity and contrast sensitivity impairments on detection of pedestrian hazards in a driving simulator.
Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2019 Jul;64:213-226. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2019.05.003.

本文引用的文献

1
The effects of simulated acuity and contrast sensitivity impairments on detection of pedestrian hazards in a driving simulator.
Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2019 Jul;64:213-226. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2019.05.003.
2
Pedestrian-driver communication and decision strategies at marked crossings.
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 May;102:41-50. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.02.018.
3
Eye Movements and Road Hazard Detection: Effects of Blur and Distractors.
Optom Vis Sci. 2016 Sep;93(9):1137-46. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000903.
5
A roadmap for interpreting the literature on vision and driving.
Surv Ophthalmol. 2015 May-Jun;60(3):250-62. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2015.01.005. Epub 2015 Feb 7.
6
Visual attention measures predict pedestrian detection in central field loss: a pilot study.
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 18;9(2):e89381. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089381. eCollection 2014.
7
Driving with hemianopia: IV. Head scanning and detection at intersections in a simulator.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014 Mar 13;55(3):1540-8. doi: 10.1167/iovs.13-12748.
8
Driving with hemianopia: III. Detection of stationary and approaching pedestrians in a simulator.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014 Jan 20;55(1):368-74. doi: 10.1167/iovs.13-12737.
9
Driving with central field loss I: effect of central scotomas on responses to hazards.
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013 Mar;131(3):303-9. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.1443.
10
Peripheral vision benefits spatial learning by guiding eye movements.
Mem Cognit. 2013 Jan;41(1):109-21. doi: 10.3758/s13421-012-0240-2.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验