TY - GEN
T1 - Effects of auditory and tactile warning on drivers’ response to hazard under noisy environment
AU - Murata, Atsuo
AU - Kuroda, Takashi
PY - 2015/1/1
Y1 - 2015/1/1
N2 - If the warning signal is presented via visual or auditory stimulus, the auditory or visual interference with other information might arise. On the other hand, if vibrotactile cue is used, such interference would be surely reduced. Therefore, it is expected that a vibrotactile signal would be very promising as a warning signal especially under noisy environment. In order to clarify the most suitable modality of cue (warning) to a visual hazard under noisy environment, the following two cues were used in the experiment: (1) auditory cue and (2) vibrotactile cue. The condition of SOA (Stimulus Onset Asynchrony) was set to 0 s, 0.5 s, and 1 s. The outside noise under the real-driving environment was recorded and edited for the experiment. The noise level inside the experimental chamber was 60 dB(A), 70 dB(A), 80 dB(A), and 90 dB(A). As a result, it was verified that the vibrotactile warning was more effective than the auditory warning. When the outside noise under the real-driving environment was used as the noise inside the experimental chamber, the reaction time to the auditory warning was not affected by the noise level.
AB - If the warning signal is presented via visual or auditory stimulus, the auditory or visual interference with other information might arise. On the other hand, if vibrotactile cue is used, such interference would be surely reduced. Therefore, it is expected that a vibrotactile signal would be very promising as a warning signal especially under noisy environment. In order to clarify the most suitable modality of cue (warning) to a visual hazard under noisy environment, the following two cues were used in the experiment: (1) auditory cue and (2) vibrotactile cue. The condition of SOA (Stimulus Onset Asynchrony) was set to 0 s, 0.5 s, and 1 s. The outside noise under the real-driving environment was recorded and edited for the experiment. The noise level inside the experimental chamber was 60 dB(A), 70 dB(A), 80 dB(A), and 90 dB(A). As a result, it was verified that the vibrotactile warning was more effective than the auditory warning. When the outside noise under the real-driving environment was used as the noise inside the experimental chamber, the reaction time to the auditory warning was not affected by the noise level.
KW - Auditory warning
KW - Automotive warning system
KW - Outside noise under the real-driving environment
KW - SOA
KW - Vibrotactile warning
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947281555&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84947281555&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-20373-7_5
DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-20373-7_5
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84947281555
SN - 9783319203720
T3 - Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
SP - 45
EP - 53
BT - Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics - 12th International Conference, EPCE 2015 Held as Part of HCI International 2015, Proceedings
A2 - Harris, Don
PB - Springer Verlag
T2 - 12th International Conference on Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, EPCE 2015 Held as Part of 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, HCI International 2015
Y2 - 2 August 2015 through 7 August 2015
ER -