Citation

Harbluk JL, Mitroi JS, Burns PC. Proc. Int. Driv. Symp. Hum. Factors Driv. Assess. Train. Veh. Des. 2009; 5: 24-30.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, University of Iowa Public Policy Center)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The Lane Change Test (ISO, 2008; Mattes, 2003) was used to assess distraction demand when drivers completed three typical navigation tasks (an easy navigation task, a point of interest task and a difficult navigation task) using three different navigation systems. In order for the LCT to be a useful procedure, it must distinguish good from poor navigation systems and acceptable from unacceptable tasks performed using those systems. The results provide some general support for the LCT as a sensitive measure of distraction. Some aspects of the results, however, called into question the adequacy of the LCT as a sufficient measure of distraction. In particular, the LCT was found to be insensitive to task demands arising from excessive task duration. Since risk exposure is a function of secondary task duration (as well as other factors such as intensity, frequency and timing), it is recommended that a measure of task duration be incorporated in the LCT procedure. When the MDEV was modified to incorporate task duration, the resulting measure (mean deviation per average task) reflected more adequately the interaction demands of the various navigation tasks.


Keywords: Driver distraction;