Garrott, Mazzae, Ranney 2002 presentation, SAE Govt/industry meeting


SLIDE 1:
DISTRACTION EFFECTS OF MANUAL AND VOICE INTERFACES USED FOR


SLIDE 2:
BACKGROUND
- NHTSA is interested in assessing how in-vehicle technologies impact driver behavior and driving safety

- recent state initiatives limiting wireless phone use have been based on the assumption that hands-free is safer than hand-held

- manufacturers hope that voice-based in-vehicle systems will prove to be safer than manual counterparts

- with hands-free interfaces, drivers may keep their eyes on the road, and hands on the wheel


SLIDE 3:
RESEARCH PROGRAM
- NHTSA has three ongoing studies addressing issues relating to voice versus manual interfaces
  * wireless phone on-road study
  * voice interface test track study
  * NADS wireless phone research (upcoming)

- Presentation covers preliminary results of a series of analyses that are underway for the above on-road and test track studies


SLIDE 4:
WIRELESS PHONE ON-ROAD STUDY: OBJECTIVES
- Compare phone use patterns for different interfact designs

- compcare distraction effects for different interface designs
  * assess effect of phone use on measures of driving behavior
  * assess effect of phone use on eye glance behavior


SLIDE 5:
WIRELESS PHONE ON-ROAD STUDY
- naturalistic study
  * instrumented vehicles driven by 10 members of the general public for 6 weeks during their normal daily driving
  * phone interface was changed every 2 weeks
  * data collected 10/00 - 03/01

- drivers selected who used wireless phone regularly while driving

- ages 25-55


SLIDE 6:
WIRELESS PHONE STUDY - INTERFACE CONDITIONS
commercially available AutoPC systems, purchased in 200, were present in the vehicle under all phone interface conditions. AutoPC instructions were intended to mask study objective


SLIDE 7:
WIRELESS PHONE STUDY - INTERFACE CONDITIONS

INTERFACE 	DIALING		CONVERSATION
hand-held	manual		hand-held

conventional
hands-free	manual		hands-free

enhanced
hands-free	voice*		hands-free

* digit & tag, via AutoPC
** may include some cases of manual input

order of interface condition presentation was counterbalanced

SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :


SLIDE :