• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

感知风险与实际驾驶分神风险之间有何差异?真实高速公路实地研究。

What is the difference between perceived and actual risk of distracted driving? A field study on a real highway.

机构信息

School of Automobile, Chang'an University, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Apr 2;15(4):e0231151. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231151. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0231151
PMID:32240274
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7117726/
Abstract

Distracted driving is a leading cause of traffic accidents. It is influenced by driver attitude toward secondary tasks; however, field-based studies on the effects of low-perceived-risk tasks on lateral driving have rarely been reported. A total of 17 experienced non-professional drivers were recruited to participate in two secondary tasks: a cognitive experiment (conversation) and a visual distraction experiment (observation of following vehicles), each representing low-perceived-risk secondary tasks. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to evaluate the effects of low-perceived-risk tasks on lateral driving performance. ANOVA results indicated that compared with baseline (no task) lateral performance, lane-keeping ability was enhanced during cognitive distractions. In the visual distraction experiment, more than 50% of the distractions required 1-2 s. Lane deviation and its growth rate increased with the duration of distraction. Compared with cognitive distraction, lane deviation increased significantly with visual distraction, and lane-keeping performance was seriously impaired. For low-perceived-risk tasks, visual distractions impaired driving safety more seriously, compared with cognitive distractions, suggesting that drivers misjudge the risks associated with visual tasks. These results can contribute to the design of advanced driving-assistance systems and improve professional driver programs, potentially reducing the frequency of traffic accidents caused by distracted driving.

摘要

分心驾驶是交通事故的主要原因。它受到驾驶员对次要任务的态度的影响;然而,很少有基于现场的研究报告低风险感知任务对侧向驾驶的影响。共招募了 17 名有经验的非专业驾驶员参与两项次要任务:认知实验(对话)和视觉干扰实验(观察跟随车辆),每个任务代表低风险感知的次要任务。采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)来评估低风险感知任务对侧向驾驶性能的影响。ANOVA 结果表明,与基线(无任务)侧向性能相比,认知干扰时的车道保持能力增强。在视觉干扰实验中,超过 50%的干扰需要 1-2 秒。车道偏离和其增长率随干扰持续时间而增加。与认知干扰相比,视觉干扰时车道偏离显著增加,车道保持性能严重受损。对于低风险感知任务,与认知干扰相比,视觉干扰对驾驶安全的影响更严重,这表明驾驶员错误判断了与视觉任务相关的风险。这些结果有助于先进驾驶辅助系统的设计和提高专业驾驶员培训计划,可能会降低分心驾驶引起的交通事故频率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/b26f31039fbe/pone.0231151.g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/81fc45804e55/pone.0231151.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/cb9faf0ad7be/pone.0231151.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/b42994e850bf/pone.0231151.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/a173694d71dd/pone.0231151.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/c182cc601285/pone.0231151.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/265c6cbcfb1a/pone.0231151.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/b26f31039fbe/pone.0231151.g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/81fc45804e55/pone.0231151.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/cb9faf0ad7be/pone.0231151.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/b42994e850bf/pone.0231151.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/a173694d71dd/pone.0231151.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/c182cc601285/pone.0231151.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/265c6cbcfb1a/pone.0231151.g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/84fe/7117726/b26f31039fbe/pone.0231151.g007.jpg

相似文献

1
What is the difference between perceived and actual risk of distracted driving? A field study on a real highway.感知风险与实际驾驶分神风险之间有何差异?真实高速公路实地研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 2;15(4):e0231151. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231151. eCollection 2020.
2
Distracted driving behavior in patients with insomnia.失眠患者的分心驾驶行为。
Accid Anal Prev. 2023 Apr;183:106971. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2023.106971. Epub 2023 Jan 17.
3
Identifying cognitive distraction using steering wheel reversal rates.使用方向盘反转率识别认知分心。
Accid Anal Prev. 2016 Nov;96:39-45. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.07.032. Epub 2016 Aug 4.
4
Characteristics of driver cell phone use and their influence on driving performance: A naturalistic driving study.驾驶时使用手机的特点及其对驾驶性能的影响:一项自然驾驶研究。
Accid Anal Prev. 2020 Dec;148:105845. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2020.105845. Epub 2020 Oct 24.
5
Is improved lane keeping during cognitive load caused by increased physical arousal or gaze concentration toward the road center?认知负荷增加时,车道保持能力提高是由于身体唤醒度增加还是由于注视道路中心?
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Aug;117:65-74. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.034. Epub 2018 Apr 12.
6
What is the difference in driver's lateral control ability during naturalistic distracted driving and normal driving? A case study on a real highway.在自然状态下分心驾驶和正常驾驶时,驾驶员的横向控制能力有何差异?基于真实高速公路的案例研究。
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Apr;125:98-105. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.030. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
7
The long road home from distraction: Investigating the time-course of distraction recovery in driving.从分心状态中恢复的漫漫长路:研究驾驶中分心恢复的时程。
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Mar;124:23-32. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.12.012. Epub 2019 Jan 2.
8
Effects of road infrastructure and traffic complexity in speed adaptation behaviour of distracted drivers.道路基础设施和交通复杂性对分心驾驶者速度适应行为的影响。
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Apr;101:67-77. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.01.018. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
9
Driver distraction by smartphone use (WhatsApp) in different age groups.不同年龄段司机使用智能手机(WhatsApp)导致的分神。
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Aug;117:239-249. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.04.018. Epub 2018 May 1.
10
The effects of age on crash risk associated with driver distraction.年龄对与驾驶员分神相关的碰撞风险的影响。
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Feb 1;46(1):258-265. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw234.

引用本文的文献

1
Understanding the domain of driving distraction with knowledge graphs.利用知识图谱理解驾驶分心领域。
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 9;17(12):e0278822. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278822. eCollection 2022.
2
Effects of Distracting Behaviors on Driving Workload and Driving Performance in a City Scenario.分心行为对城市环境下驾驶工作负荷和驾驶表现的影响。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Nov 17;19(22):15191. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192215191.

本文引用的文献

1
Influence of sexual appeal in roadside advertising on drivers' attention and driving behavior.路边广告的性吸引力对驾驶员注意力和驾驶行为的影响。
PLoS One. 2019 May 16;14(5):e0216919. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216919. eCollection 2019.
2
What is the difference in driver's lateral control ability during naturalistic distracted driving and normal driving? A case study on a real highway.在自然状态下分心驾驶和正常驾驶时,驾驶员的横向控制能力有何差异?基于真实高速公路的案例研究。
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Apr;125:98-105. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.030. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
3
Automatic detection of mind wandering in a simulated driving task with behavioral measures.
基于行为测量的模拟驾驶任务中思维漫游的自动检测。
PLoS One. 2018 Nov 12;13(11):e0207092. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207092. eCollection 2018.
4
Pilot Efficacy of a DriveFocus™ Intervention on the Driving Performance of Young Drivers.DriveFocus™干预对年轻驾驶员驾驶性能的初步疗效
Front Public Health. 2018 May 4;6:125. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00125. eCollection 2018.
5
Driving behaviour while self-regulating mobile phone interactions: A human-machine system approach.自我调节手机互动时的驾驶行为:人机系统方法。
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Sep;118:253-262. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.020. Epub 2018 Apr 10.
6
Does Talking on a Cell Phone, With a Passenger, or Dialing Affect Driving Performance? An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies.在驾驶时使用手机通话、与乘客交谈或拨号是否会影响驾驶表现?一项更新的实验研究系统评价和荟萃分析。
Hum Factors. 2018 Feb;60(1):101-133. doi: 10.1177/0018720817748145.
7
Using SHRP 2 naturalistic driving data to assess drivers' speed choice while being engaged in different secondary tasks.使用SHRP 2自然驾驶数据评估驾驶员在进行不同次要任务时的速度选择。
J Safety Res. 2017 Sep;62:33-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2017.04.004. Epub 2017 May 6.
8
Risk factors of mobile phone use while driving in Queensland: Prevalence, attitudes, crash risk perception, and task-management strategies.昆士兰地区驾车时使用手机的风险因素:流行程度、态度、撞车风险认知及任务管理策略。
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 6;12(9):e0183361. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183361. eCollection 2017.
9
A rear-end collision risk assessment model based on drivers' collision avoidance process under influences of cell phone use and gender-A driving simulator based study.基于手机使用和性别影响下驾驶员避撞过程的追尾碰撞风险评估模型——一项基于驾驶模拟器的研究
Accid Anal Prev. 2016 Dec;97:1-18. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.08.021. Epub 2016 Aug 23.
10
Identifying cognitive distraction using steering wheel reversal rates.使用方向盘反转率识别认知分心。
Accid Anal Prev. 2016 Nov;96:39-45. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.07.032. Epub 2016 Aug 4.