Hearing loss and a supportive tactile signal in a navigation system : effects on driving behavior and eye movements (original) (raw)
Related papers
Novel navigation assistive device for deaf drivers
Assistive Technology, 2020
There are over 466 million people in the world with disabling hearing loss. People with severeto-profound hearing impairment need to lipread or use sign language, even with hearing aids. Assistive Technologies play a vital role in helping these people interact efficiently with their environment. Deaf drivers are not currently able to take full advantage of voice-based navigation applications. In this paper, we describe research that is aimed at developing an assistive device that (1) recognizes voice-stream navigation instructions from GPS-based navigation applications, and (2) maps each voiced navigation instruction to a vibrotactile stimulus that can be perceived and understood by deaf drivers. A 13-element feature vector is extracted from each voice stream, and classified into one of six categories, where each category represents a unique navigation instruction. The classification of the feature vectors is done using a K-Nearest-Neighbor classifier (with an accuracy of 99.05%) which was found to outperform five other classifiers. Each category is then mapped to a unique vibration pattern, which drives vibration motors in real time. A usability study was conducted with ten participants. Three different alternatives were tested, to find the best body locations for mounting the vibration motors. The solution ultimately chosen was two sets of five vibrator motors, where each set was mounted on a bracelet. Ten drivers were asked to rate the proposed device (based on eight different factors) after they used the assistive device on 8 driving routes. The overall mean rating across all eight factors was 4.67 (out of 5) This indicates that the proposed assistive device was seen as useful and effective.
Blind driving by means of auditory feedback
13th IFAC/IFIP/IFORS/IEA Symposium on Analysis, Design, and Evaluation of Human-Machine Systems, 2016
Driving is a safety-critical task that predominantly relies on vision. However, visual information from the environment is sometimes degraded or absent. In other cases, visual information is available, but the driver fails to use it due to distraction or impairment. Providing drivers with real-time auditory feedback about the state of the vehicle in relation to the environment may be an appropriate means of support when visual information is compromised. In this study, we explored whether driving can be performed solely by means of artificial auditory feedback. We focused on lane keeping, a task that is vital for safe driving. Three auditory parameter sets were tested: (1) predictor time, where the volume of a continuous tone was a linear function of the predicted lateral error from the lane centre 0 s, 1 s, 2 s, or 3 s into the future; (2) feedback mode (volume feedback vs. beep-frequency feedback) and mapping (linear vs. exponential relationship between predicted error and volume/beep frequency); and (3) corner support, in which in addition to volume feedback, a beep was offered upon entering/leaving a corner, or alternatively when crossing the lane centre while driving in a corner. A dead-zone was used, whereby the volume/beep-frequency feedback was provided only when the vehicle deviated more than 0.5 m from the centre of the lane. An experiment was conducted in which participants (N = 2) steered along a track with sharp 90-degree corners in a simulator with the visual projection shut down. Results showed that without predictor feedback (i.e., 0 s prediction), participants were more likely to depart the road compared to with predictor feedback. Moreover, volume feedback resulted in fewer road departures than beep-frequency feedback. The results of this study may be used in the design of in-vehicle auditory displays. Specifically, we recommend that feedback be based on anticipated error rather than current error.
Comparing Tactile to Auditory Guidance for Blind Individuals
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
The ability to travel independently is crucial to an individual's quality of life but compromised by visual impairment. Several navigational aids have been developed for blind people to address this limitation. These devices typically employ auditory instructions to guide users to desired waypoints. Unfortunately, auditory instructions may interfere with users' awareness of environmental sounds that signal dangers or provide cues for spatial orientation. Accordingly, there is a need to explore the use of non-auditory modalities to convey information for safe and independent travel. Here, we explored the efficacy of a tactile navigational aid that provides turn signals via vibrations on a hip-worn belt. We compared the performance of 12 blind participants as they navigated a series of paths under the direction of the tactile belt or conventional auditory turn commands; furthermore, we assessed the effect of repeated testing, both in the presence and absence of simulated street sounds. A computer-controlled system triggered each turn command, measured participants' time-to-path-completion, and detected major navigational errors. When participants navigated in a silent environment, they performed somewhat worse with the tactile belt than the auditory device, taking longer to complete each trial and committing more errors. When participants navigated in the presence of simulated street noises, the difference in completion time between auditory and tactile navigation diminished. These results suggest that tactile navigation holds promise as an effective method in everyday environments characterized by ambient noise such as street sounds.
Cognitive workload and driving behavior in persons with hearing loss
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2013
To compare the effect of cognitive workload in individuals with and without hearing loss, respectively, in driving situations with varying degree of complexity. Methods: 24 participants with moderate hearing loss (HL) and 24 with normal hearing (NH) experienced three different driving conditions: Baseline driving; Critical events with a need to act fast; and a Parked car event with the possibility to adapt the workload to the situation. Additionally, a Secondary task (observation and recalling of 4 visually displayed letters) was present during the drive, with two levels of difficulty in terms of load on the phonological loop. A tactile signal, presented by means of a vibration in the seat, was used to announce the Secondary task and thereby simultaneously evaluated in terms of effectiveness when calling for driver attention. Objective driver behavior measures (M and SD of driving speed, M and SD of lateral position, time to line crossing) were accompanied by subjective ratings during and after the test drive. Results: HL had no effect on driving behavior at Baseline driving, where no events occurred. Both during Secondary task and at the Parked car event HL was associated with decreased mean driving speed compared to baseline driving. The effect of HL on the Secondary task performance, both at Baseline driving and at the lower Difficulty Level at Critical events, was more skipped letters and fewer correctly recalled letters. At Critical events, task difficulty affected participants with HL more. Participants were generally positive to use vibrations in the seat as a means for announcing the Secondary task. Conclusions: Differences in terms of driving behavior and task performance related to HL appear when the driving complexity exceeds Baseline driving either in the driving task, Secondary task or a combination of both. This leads to a more cautious driving behavior with a decreased mean driving speed and less focus on the Secondary task, which could be a way of compensating for the increasing driving complexity. Seat vibration was found to be a feasible way to alert drivers with or without HL.
Evaluating Informative Auditory and Tactile Cues for In-Vehicle Information Systems
wwwhome.cs.utwente.nl
As in-vehicle information systems are increasingly able to obtain and deliver information, driver distraction becomes a larger concern. In this paper we propose that informative interruption cues (IIC) can be an effective means to support drivers’ attention management. As a first step, we investigated the design and presentation modality of IIC that conveyed not only the arrival but also the priority level of a message. Both sound and vibration cues were created for four different priority levels and tested in 5 task conditions that simulated possible perceptional and cognitive load in real driving situations. Results showed that the cues were quickly learned, reliably detected, and quickly and accurately identified. Vibration was found to be a promising alternative for sound to deliver IIC, as vibration cues were identified more accurately and interfered less with driving. Sound cues also had advantages in terms of shorter response time and more (reported) physical comfort.
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on …, 2010
Tactile displays are an actively studied means to convey large amount of spatial information in the car. Their advantage compared to conventional car navigation systems is their ability to free the driver's visual and auditory senses. Previously the tactile displays were integrated into the seat of a car to present multiple direction information to the driver. However, in the commercial cars the seat is used to provide the vibro-tactile warning signals, so driver might not differentiate between navigation and warning information. Furthermore, the amount of information presented with tactile displays can cause significant cognitive workload, performance degradation and distraction to the driver. In this paper, we explore different methods of encoding multiple directions information with a tactile belt in the car. We compare the vibro-tactile presentation of spatial turn-by-turn information with a conventional car navigation system to measure cognitive workload, performance and distraction of the driver. We found that drivers showed better orientation performance on the tactile display than with the conventional car navigation system. At the same time there was no difference in cognitive workload, performance, and distraction. Thus, a tactile interface can be useful to present more information than simple left or right directions in high load driving conditions in which drivers are required to observe the traffic situation with their visual and auditory senses.
Right or Left: Tactile Display for Route Guidance of Drivers
A tactile interface is an alternative channel of communication, which can be utilized to display navigational instructions in cars under high visual and auditory load conditions. We investigated the use of a tactile belt for turn-by-turn information presentation in cars, which was originally designed for the route guidance of blind and pedestrian users. Important information artifacts in turn-by-turn route guidance are the distance to an upcoming crossing and the direction to follow. The tactile belt was examined in a pilot study for presenting direction information in a car navigation system. The pilot study was used to explore first ideas of tactile encodings for direction presentation with the tactile belt. The study presented in this article compares these designs systematically for their use in tactile route guidance in the car. For this purpose we conducted an experiment with 10 participants on real urban roads to evaluate three different vibrotactile patterns. The results show that the "two vibrators front design" was significantly different than the "two vibrators side design". The two vibrator front encoding was preferred significantly. The performance of the participants on two vibrators front design was significantly different than the two vibrators side design. The Friedman test showed a significant difference in the usability of all three vibrotactile patterns. A significant difference was found in the ease of use of two vibrators front encoding compared to other encodings. On the basis of quantitative and qualitative results, we conclude that the two vibrators front encoding is comparatively is the better design for presenting the direction information. Our findings will be helpful for the car industry in designing the tactile based car navigation systems. Zusammenfassung Taktile Nutzungsschnittstellen können als alternativer Sinneskanal genutzt werden, um Navigationsinformationen in Fahrzeugen bei Situationen mit hoher visueller und akustischer Last zu vermitteln. Wir haben untersucht, in wie weit Turn-by-Turn Informationen über einen taktilen Gürtel präsentiert werden können, der ursprünglich zur Navigationsunterstützung für Fußgänger und blinde Personen entwickelt wurde. Wichtige darzustellende Informationen bei der Turn-by-Turn Navigation sind die Entfernung zu einem Kreuzungspunkt und die zu verfolgende Richtung. In einer Pilotstudie wurden bereits erste Ideen für Designs der taktilen Richtungsanzeige exploriert. Die in diesem Artikel präsentierte Studie vergleicht die erfolgreichen Designs systematisch. Hierzu wurde eine Evaluation mit zehn Teilnehmern in einer realen städtischen Umgebung durchgeführt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die zwei der untersuchten Designs mit den taktilen Stimuli vorne am Körper ("two vibrators front") signifikant besser abgeschnitten haben als mit den taktilen Stimuli an der Seite ("two vibrators side"). Sowohl die Präferenz als auch die Performance zeigten signifikante Unterschiede. Der Friedman Test zeigte desweiteren signifikante Unterschiede bezüglich der Usability zwischen allen drei getesteten Designs. Auf Basis der quantitativen und qualitativen Ergebnisse können wir schließen, dass die Kodierung von Richtungen mit Vibrationsmotoren vorne am Körper im Vergleich besser für die Richtungsanzeige geeignet ist. Diese Ergebnisse sind für die Autoindustrie wertvoll, die taktile Navigationssysteme entwickeln.
Effectiveness of Tactile Warning and Voice Command for Enhancing Safety of Drivers
IEEE Access, 2022
Safety is impaired when drivers are required to perform main driving task (tracking of own car, distance maintenance between own car and a leading car, and response to target objects) and secondary task simultaneously, for example, responding to target cars on the road while operating in-vehicle equipment. A two-factor (presence or absence of tactile warning by input modality (no secondary task, voice command for a secondary task, and manual input for a secondary task)) within-subject design of ten licensed males was used to investigate how to compensate for safety impairments (decreased performance of a main and a secondary task such as increased tracking error during driving or increased reaction time to target cars on the road). We investigated whether the use of tactile warnings transmitted via left and right thighs for detecting road objects and voice command to operate in-vehicle equipment could compensate for safety impairments such as the increased reaction time to target cars on the road, the increase of detection error of target cars, or increased tracking error in driving. The accuracy and speed of responses to target cars encountered during driving were reduced when a driver was asked to perform the main and the secondary task simultaneously compared to situations performing only the main driving task (tracking, distance maintenance, and response to target cars). The availability of a tactile warning system for road objects compensated for these diminished performance measures, including slower response times and the increased detection error of target cars. Likewise, voice command contributed to enhanced performance of the main driving task such as decrease of tracking error. INDEX TERMS Automotive safety, interference of multiple tasks, tactile warning, voice command. I. INTRODUCTION 19 The need to perform multiple tasks while driving increases a 20 driver's visual and cognitive workload and substantially com-21 plicates the driver-vehicle interaction. Safety will be impaired 22 due to inattentive driving during multi-task performance [1], 23 [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. The need to perform multi-24 ple tasks simultaneously while driving can result in delayed 25 responses to hazardous situations and increased potentials for 26 crashes. 27 The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and approving it for publication was Roberto Sacile. a simulated main driving task. Participants were required 217 to maintain velocity within the speed limit of 80 km/h and 218 to maintain a specific distance between their cars and the 219 leading cars using the accelerator and the brake pedal of 220 the steering controller. We developed the driving simulator 221 using Hot Soup Processor 3.4. Four tactors with a diameter 222 of 45 mm (Acouve Laboratory Inc., Vp216) were used for 223 tactile warning. According to Murata et al. [13], the vibration 224 frequency of tactor was set to 64 Hz with an amplitude 225 of 10 Vp-p. The tactors were installed on the surface of 226 the driver's seat according to Murata et al. [13] so that the 227 vibration could be transmitted via left and right thighs. The 228 SOA (Stimulus Onset Asynchrony) and the duration of tactile 229 stimulation were set to 1 s and 1 s, respectively, according 230 to Murata et al. [13]. The SOA of 1 s meant that a warn-231 ing was presented to the participant 1 s before a target car 232 appeared. 233 The approximate layouts of the in-vehicle displays and the 234 GUI task are shown in Figure 2. As Japanese driver's seats are 235 located on the right, the driver seat was located on the right as 236 shown in Figure 2. Two 7-inch liquid crystal display (LCDs) Hypothesis 2, that is also related to tactile warning and the 659 main driving task, predicts that fast responses to target cars 660 do not improve the efficiency of other driving activity such as 661 tracking and distance maintenance, although rapid responses 662 to targets cars was promoted by tactile warning as verified 663 above. As shown in Figures 5 and 6, tactile warning did not 664 contribute to the mitigation of spatial processing competition 665 among tracking, distance maintenance, and responses to tar-666 get cars during driving, which verified Hypothesis 2. 667 Hypothesis 3 includes the concept of resource competition 668 for central processing and is concerned with both tactile warn-669 ing and voice command. There is no resource competition 670 for central processing between a secondary GUI task (verbal 671 processing) and a reaction task to target cars on the road 672 (spatial processing). As shown in Figure 9, fast responses to 673 target cars by tactile warning led to fast responses in the GUI 674 task, which was in support of Hypothesis 3. 675 Hypothesis 4 is related to voice command and tactile warn-676 ing and avoidance of response modality competition between 677 manual input to a GUI task and manual responses during 678 driving such as manual tracking or distance maintenance, 679