Task Interruption and Control Recovery Strategies After Take-Over Requests Emphasize Need for Measures of Situation Awareness

IF 2.2 3区工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING

Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries Pub Date : 2020-11-01 DOI:10.1177/0018720819866976

T. Vogelpohl, Franziska Gehlmann, M. Vollrath

{"title":"Task Interruption and Control Recovery Strategies After Take-Over Requests Emphasize Need for Measures of Situation Awareness","authors":"T. Vogelpohl, Franziska Gehlmann, M. Vollrath","doi":"10.1177/0018720819866976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective Our objective was to determine whether there is a need to go beyond measures of automation deactivation time to understand the transition to manual driving after take-over requests (TORs) using the example of office tasks as nondriving-related tasks (NDRTs). Background Office tasks are likely NDRTs during automated commutes to/from work. Complex tasks can influence how manual control and visual attention is recovered after TORs. Method N = 51 participants in a driving simulator performed either one of two office tasks or no task (between subjects). We recorded reaction times in a high-urgency and low-urgency scenario (within subjects) and analyzed task interruption strategies. Results 90% of the participants who performed an NDRT deactivated the automation after 7 to 8 s. However, 90% of the same drivers looked at the side mirror for the first time only after 11 to 14 s. Drivers with office tasks either interrupted the tasks sequentially or in parallel. Strategies were not adapted to the take-over situation or the task but appeared to be due to individual preferences. Conclusion Drivers engaged in NDRTs may neglect lower priority subtasks after a TOR, such as mirror checking. Therefore, there is a need to go beyond measures of automation deactivation time to understand the transition to manual driving. Using analyses of attentional dynamics during take-over situations may enhance the safety of future car-driver handover assistance systems. Application If low driver availability is detected, TORs should only be used as a fallback option if sufficient time and adaptive driver support can be provided.","PeriodicalId":55048,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries","volume":"50 1","pages":"1190 - 1211"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819866976","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 17

Abstract

Objective Our objective was to determine whether there is a need to go beyond measures of automation deactivation time to understand the transition to manual driving after take-over requests (TORs) using the example of office tasks as nondriving-related tasks (NDRTs). Background Office tasks are likely NDRTs during automated commutes to/from work. Complex tasks can influence how manual control and visual attention is recovered after TORs. Method N = 51 participants in a driving simulator performed either one of two office tasks or no task (between subjects). We recorded reaction times in a high-urgency and low-urgency scenario (within subjects) and analyzed task interruption strategies. Results 90% of the participants who performed an NDRT deactivated the automation after 7 to 8 s. However, 90% of the same drivers looked at the side mirror for the first time only after 11 to 14 s. Drivers with office tasks either interrupted the tasks sequentially or in parallel. Strategies were not adapted to the take-over situation or the task but appeared to be due to individual preferences. Conclusion Drivers engaged in NDRTs may neglect lower priority subtasks after a TOR, such as mirror checking. Therefore, there is a need to go beyond measures of automation deactivation time to understand the transition to manual driving. Using analyses of attentional dynamics during take-over situations may enhance the safety of future car-driver handover assistance systems. Application If low driver availability is detected, TORs should only be used as a fallback option if sufficient time and adaptive driver support can be provided.

查看原文本刊更多论文

接管请求后的任务中断和控制恢复策略强调需要采取态势感知措施

我们的目标是确定是否有必要超越自动化停用时间的衡量标准，以理解接管请求(tor)后向手动驾驶的过渡，并以办公室任务作为非驾驶相关任务(NDRTs)为例。在上下班的自动通勤中，后台办公任务很可能是ndrt。复杂的任务可以影响手控和视觉注意力在TORs后的恢复。方法51名受试者在驾驶模拟器中执行两项办公室任务中的一项或不执行任务(受试者之间)。我们记录了在高紧急和低紧急情况下的反应时间(在受试者中)，并分析了任务中断策略。结果90%的NDRT参与者在7 ~ 8 s后自动停止。然而，90%的司机在11到14秒后才第一次看后视镜。具有办公任务的驱动程序可以顺序地或并行地中断任务。策略并不适应接管情况或任务，而似乎是由于个人偏好。在TOR之后，从事NDRTs的驾驶员可能会忽略低优先级的子任务，例如镜像检查。因此，有必要超越自动停用时间的测量来理解向手动驾驶的过渡。通过对接管过程中注意力动力学的分析，可以提高未来汽车驾驶员交接辅助系统的安全性。如果检测到低驱动程序可用性，则只有在可以提供足够的时间和自适应驱动程序支持的情况下，才应该将tor用作备用选项。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 管理科学-工程：制造

CiteScore

5.20

自引率

8.30%

发文量

审稿时长

6.0 months

期刊介绍： The purpose of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries is to facilitate discovery, integration, and application of scientific knowledge about human aspects of manufacturing, and to provide a forum for worldwide dissemination of such knowledge for its application and benefit to manufacturing industries. The journal covers a broad spectrum of ergonomics and human factors issues with a focus on the design, operation and management of contemporary manufacturing systems, both in the shop floor and office environments, in the quest for manufacturing agility, i.e. enhancement and integration of human skills with hardware performance for improved market competitiveness, management of change, product and process quality, and human-system reliability. The inter- and cross-disciplinary nature of the journal allows for a wide scope of issues relevant to manufacturing system design and engineering, human resource management, social, organizational, safety, and health issues. Examples of specific subject areas of interest include: implementation of advanced manufacturing technology, human aspects of computer-aided design and engineering, work design, compensation and appraisal, selection training and education, labor-management relations, agile manufacturing and virtual companies, human factors in total quality management, prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, ergonomics of workplace, equipment and tool design, ergonomics programs, guides and standards for industry, automation safety and robot systems, human skills development and knowledge enhancing technologies, reliability, and safety and worker health issues.