Human Factors Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, UK.
Human Factors Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, UK.
Appl Ergon. 2019 Jul;78:184-196. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.03.005. Epub 2019 Mar 22.
Touchscreen Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs) are a well-established and popular choice to provide the primary control interface between driver and vehicle, yet inherently demand some visual attention. Employing a secondary device with the touchscreen may reduce the demand but there is some debate about which device is most suitable, with current manufacturers favouring different solutions and applying these internationally. We present an empirical driving simulator study, conducted in the UK and China, in which 48 participants undertook typical in-vehicle tasks utilising either a touchscreen, rotary-controller, steering-wheel-controls or touchpad. In both the UK and China, the touchscreen was the most preferred/least demanding to use, and the touchpad least preferred/most demanding, whereas the rotary-controller was generally favoured by UK drivers and steering-wheel-controls were more popular in China. Chinese drivers were more excited by the novelty of the technology, and spent more time attending to the devices while driving, leading to an increase in off-road glance time and a corresponding detriment to vehicle control. Even so, Chinese drivers rated devices as easier-to-use while driving, and felt that they interfered less with their driving performance, compared to their UK counterparts. Results suggest that the most effective solution (to maximise performance/acceptance, while minimising visual demand) is to maintain the touchscreen as the primary control interface (e.g. for top-level tasks), and supplement this with a secondary device that is only enabled for certain actions; moreover, different devices may be employed in different cultural markets. Further work is required to explore these recommendations in greater depth (e.g. during extended or real-world testing), and to validate the findings and approach in other cultural contexts.
触屏人机界面（HMIs）是在驾驶员与车辆之间提供主要控制接口的成熟且流行的选择，但它们需要驾驶员投入一定的视觉注意力。使用触屏以外的辅助设备可能会降低这方面的需求，但对于哪种设备最合适存在一些争议，目前制造商倾向于不同的解决方案，并在国际上应用这些解决方案。我们呈现了一项在英国和中国进行的实证驾驶模拟器研究，其中 48 名参与者使用触屏、旋转控制器、方向盘控制或触摸板执行了典型的车内任务。在英国和中国，触屏的使用体验都是最受欢迎/需求最低的，触摸板则是最不受欢迎/需求最高的，而旋转控制器通常受到英国驾驶员的青睐，方向盘控制在中国则更受欢迎。中国驾驶员对新技术的新奇感更感兴趣，在驾驶时花更多的时间关注设备，导致偏离道路的视线时间增加，从而对车辆控制产生相应的影响。即便如此，中国驾驶员在驾驶时认为设备更易于使用，并且感觉它们对驾驶性能的干扰较小，与英国驾驶员相比。研究结果表明，最有效的解决方案（在最大限度地提高性能/接受度的同时，最小化视觉需求）是将触屏作为主要控制接口（例如用于高级任务），并通过仅在某些操作中启用的辅助设备来补充，此外，不同的设备可能在不同的文化市场中使用。需要进一步的工作来更深入地探讨这些建议（例如，在扩展或现实世界的测试中），并在其他文化背景下验证研究结果和方法。
