Driver behavior following an automatic steering intervention.

The study investigated driver behavior toward an automatic steering intervention of a collision mitigation system. Forty participants were tested in a driving simulator and confronted with an inevitable collision. They performed a naïve drive and afterwards a repeated exposure in which they were told to hold the steering wheel loosely. In a third drive they experienced a false alarm situation. Data on driving behavior, i.e. steering and braking behavior as well as subjective data was assessed in the scenarios. Results showed that most participants held on to the steering wheel strongly or counter-steered during the system intervention during the first encounter. Moreover, subjective data collected after the first drive showed that the majority of drivers was not aware of the system intervention. Data from the repeated drive in which participants were instructed to hold the steering wheel loosely, led to significantly more participants holding the steering wheel loosely and thus complying with the instruction. This study seems to imply that without knowledge and information of the system about an upcoming intervention, the most prevalent driving behavior is a strong reaction with the steering wheel similar to an automatic steering reflex which decreases the system's effectiveness. Results of the second drive show some potential for countermeasures, such as informing drivers shortly before a system intervention in order to prevent inhibiting reactions.

Translating cognitive neuroscience to the driver's operational environment: a neuroergonomic approach.

Neuroergonomics provides a multidisciplinary translational approach that merges elements of neuroscience, human factors, cognitive psychology, and ergonomics to study brain structure and function in everyday environments. Driving safety, particularly that of older drivers with cognitive impairments, is a fruitful application domain for neuroergonomics. Driving makes demands on multiple cognitive processes that are often studied in isolation and so presents a useful challenge in generalizing findings from controlled laboratory tasks to predict safety outcomes. Neurology and the cognitive sciences help explain the mechanisms of cognitive breakdowns that undermine driving safety. Ergonomics complements this explanation with the tools for systematically exploring the various layers of complexity that define the activity of driving. A variety of tools, such as part task simulators, driving simulators, and instrumented vehicles, provide a window into cognition in the natural settings needed to assess the generalizability of laboratory findings and can provide an array of potential interventions to increase driving safety.