With semiautonomous vehicles and innovative assistance systems flooding the market, the characteristics of warning signals for automotive human–machine interfaces determine their effectiveness and usage. Within the context of advanced driver assistance systems, poorly designed warning signals have the potential to startle and distract drivers. Previous studies have investigated the effectiveness of multimodal warning signals and found that such signals reduce braking times. They are also associated with high levels of perceived urgency. This study aimed to investigate the effects of auditory, vibrotactile, and multimodal warning signals on perceived urgency, annoyance, and acceptability while varying the level of participants’ mental workload and the characteristics of the warning signals (interpulse interval). Results show that, compared with other signal modalities, multimodal warning signals appear to be effective in low-workload conditions but such effect disappears as the overall level of workload increases. These results are useful for the development of an adaptive warning signal system.
KuehnM., HummelT., and BendeJ.. Benefit Estimation of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems for Cars Derived from Real-Life Accidents. In Proceedings of the 21st International Technical Conference of the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles Conference (EVS), NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2009, pp. 1–10.
3.
RossiR., GastaldiM., BiondiF., and MulattiC.. Warning Sound to Affect Perceived Speed in Approaching Roundabout: Experiment with a Driving Simulator. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 87, 2013, pp. 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.609.
4.
BiondiF., RossiR., GastaldiM., and MulattiC.. Beeping ADAS: Reflexive Effect on Drivers’ Behavior. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 25, 2014, pp. 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.020.
5.
AdellE., VárhelyiA., and HjälmdahlM.. Auditory and Haptic Systems for In-Car Speed Management – A Comparative Real Life Study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 11, No. 6, 2008, pp. 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2008.04.003.
BiondiF., StrayerD. L., RossiR., GastaldiM., and MulattiC.. Advanced Driver Assistance Systems: Using Multimodal Redundant Warnings to Enhance Road Safety. Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 58, 2017, pp. 238–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.06.016.
8.
LöckenA., BorojeniS. S., MüllerH., ChuangL., SchroeterR., AlvarezI., et al. Workshop on Adaptive Ambient In-Vehicle Displays and Interactions. In Workshop on Adaptive Ambient In-Vehicle Displays and Interactions in Conjunction with Automotive UI, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 2015, pp. 1–4.
9.
BiondiF., and SkrypchukL.. Use Your Brain (and Light) for Innovative Human-Machine Interfaces. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer, New York, 2016, pp. 99–105.
10.
FrançoisM., OsiurakF., FortA., CraveP., and NavarroJ.. Automotive HMI Design and Participatory User Involvement: Review and Perspectives. Ergonomics, Vol. 60, No. 4, 2017, pp. 541–552.
11.
DuffieldT. J., and KrupeniaS.. Drivers’ Interaction Preferences in Autonomous Vehicle Multimodal Interactive Systems. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 59, No. 1, 2016, pp. 1302–1306. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931215591213.
12.
PielotM., PoppingaB., HeutenW., and BollS.. 6th Senses for Everyone! The Value of Multimodal Feedback in Handheld Navigation Aids. In ICMI 2011: 13th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, 2011, pp. 65–72.
13.
StrayerD. L., TurrillJ., CooperJ. M., ColemanJ. R., Medeiros-WardN., and BiondiF.. Assessing Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile. Human Factors, Vol. 57, No. 8, 2015, pp. 1300–1324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815575149.
14.
GevinsA., and CutilloB.. Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Component Processes in Human Working Memory. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, Vol. 87, No. 3, 1993, pp. 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(93)90119-G.
15.
OwenA. M., McMillanK. M., LairdA. R., and BullmoreE.. N-Back Working Memory Paradigm: A Meta-Analysis of Normative Functional Neuroimaging Studies. Human Brain Mapping, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2005, pp. 46–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20131.
HartS. G., and StavelandL. E.. Development of a Multidimensional Workload Rating Scale: Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In Human Mental Workload (HancockP. A. and MeshkatiN., eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1988, pp. 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9.
18.
FagerlonnJ.(2010). Distracting Effects of Auditory Warnings on Experienced Drivers. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Auditory Display, International Community for Auditory Display, 2010, pp. 127–132. http://icad.org/Proceedings/2010/Fagerl%C3%B6nn2010.pdf.
19.
MatthewsG., JoynerL., GilliandK., CampbellS., FalconerS., and HugginsJ.. Validation of a Comprehensive Stress State Questionnaire—Towards a State “Big Three”?Personnel Psychology, Vol. 7, 1999, pp. 335–350.
20.
ArnstenA. F. T., RaskindM. A., TaylorF. B., and ConnorD. F.. The Effects of Stress Exposure on Prefrontal Cortex: Translating Basic Research into Successful Treatments for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Neurobiology of Stress, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2015, pp. 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynstr.2014.10.002.
LippO. V., SiddleD. A., and DallP. J.. (2000). The Effect of Warning Stimulus Modality on Blink Startle Modification in Reaction Time Tasks. Psychophysiology, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2000, pp. 55–64. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10705767.
23.
ThorneG. L., DawsonM. E., and SchellA. M.. Effects of Perceptual Load on Startle Reflex Modification at a Long Lead Interval. Psychophysiology, Vol. 43, No. 5, 2006, pp. 498–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00420.x.
24.
DawsonM. E., RisslingA. J., SchellA. M., and WilcoxR.. Under What Conditions Can Human Affective Conditioning Occur Without Contingency Awareness? Test of the Evaluative Conditioning Paradigm. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), Vol. 7, No. 4, 2007, pp. 755–766. https://doi.org/10.1037/1528-3542.7.4.755.
25.
LewisB., EisertJ. L., and BaldwinC. L.. Effect of Tactile Location, Pulse Duration, and Interpulse Interval on Perceived Urgency. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2423, 2014, pp. 10–14. https://doi.org/10.3141/2423-02.
