Dangerous intersections? A review of studies of fatigue and distraction in the automated vehicle.

The impacts of fatigue on the vehicle driver may change with technological advancements including automation and the increasing prevalence of potentially distracting in-car systems. This article reviews the authors' simulation studies of how fatigue, automation, and distraction may intersect as threats to safety. Distinguishing between states of active and passive fatigue supports understanding of fatigue and the development of countermeasures. Active fatigue is a stress-like state driven by overload of cognitive capabilities. Passive fatigue is produced by underload and monotony, and is associated with loss of task engagement and alertness. Our studies show that automated driving reliably elicits subjective symptoms of passive fatigue and also loss of alertness that persists following manual takeover. Passive fatigue also impairs attention and automation use in operators of Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs). Use of in-vehicle media has been proposed as a countermeasure to fatigue, but such media may also be distracting. Studies tested whether various forms of phone-based media interacted with automation-induced fatigue, but effects were complex and dependent on task configuration. Selection of fatigue countermeasures should be guided by an understanding of the form of fatigue confronting the operator. System design, regulation of level of automation, managing distraction, and selection of fatigue-resilient personnel are all possible interventions for passive fatigue, but careful evaluation of interventions is necessary prior to deployment.

Active and passive fatigue in simulated driving: discriminating styles of workload regulation and their safety impacts.

Despite the known dangers of driver fatigue, it is a difficult construct to study empirically. Different forms of task-induced fatigue may differ in their effects on driver performance and safety. Desmond and Hancock (2001) defined active and passive fatigue states that reflect different styles of workload regulation. In 2 driving simulator studies we investigated the multidimensional subjective states and safety outcomes associated with active and passive fatigue. Wind gusts were used to induce active fatigue, and full vehicle automation to induce passive fatigue. Drive duration was independently manipulated to track the development of fatigue states over time. Participants were undergraduate students. Study 1 (N = 108) focused on subjective response and associated cognitive stress processes, while Study 2 (N = 168) tested fatigue effects on vehicle control and alertness. In both studies the 2 fatigue manipulations produced different patterns of subjective response reflecting different styles of workload regulation, appraisal, and coping. Active fatigue was associated with distress, overload, and heightened coping efforts, whereas passive fatigue corresponded to large-magnitude declines in task engagement, cognitive underload, and reduced challenge appraisal. Study 2 showed that only passive fatigue reduced alertness, operationalized as speed of braking and steering responses to an emergency event. Passive fatigue also increased crash probability, but did not affect a measure of vehicle control. Findings support theories that see fatigue as an outcome of strategies for managing workload. The distinction between active and passive fatigue is important for assessment of fatigue and for evaluating automated driving systems which may induce dangerous levels of passive fatigue.