Assisting the older driver - SWOV

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Effects of a driver support system on workload and driving performance Functional age Young Middle Old Total Young (30‐50) 27 42 2 71 a Old (70+) 1 8 24 33 Total 28 50 26 104 a One chronologically young person did not complete the cognitive tests and could therefore not be assigned to one of the functional age groups. Table 8.1. Comparison of chronological and functional age groups (number of participants). 8.2.2. Procedure Participants were recruited by means of a newspaper article about the driving simulator, and by advertisements in supermarkets. All participants who had shown interest in participating in the study by ringing us or sending an e‐mail were called back to test them on sensitivity to simulator sickness and to check their driving experience. Those who appeared not to be sensitive to simulator sickness as indicated by never or seldom being sick while travelling by plane, train, boat or as a passenger at the back seat of a car (see Hoffman, Molino & Inman, 2003), and who had more than five years of driving experience were invited to participate in this study. Those willing to participate were informed about the experimental procedure and received some extra information by mail, as well as an informed consent form, a questionnaire on driving behaviour including questions on appreciation of a hypothetical driver support system (see Questionnaire), and information on how to find the driving simulator that was located in the University Medical Centre in Groningen (UMCG). Participants were invited twice to the UMCG. During their first visit, they returned the completed questionnaire and their signed informed consent form, they were administered the three tests on neuropsychological functioning (see Section 8.2.1), and they drove in the driving simulator for about 10 minutes as an extra test on sensitivity to simulator sickness. Thirtythree subjects (15 older and 18 younger participants) did not feel comfortable driving in the simulator car as indicated by their score on a questionnaire on simulator sickness (based on the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ); Kennedy, Lane, Berbaum & Lilienthal, 1993). Therefore, they were not invited for the second visit to the UMCG. 157
Assisting the older driver During their second visit, the remaining participants first went for a short familiarization drive (3.5 km) in the driving simulator. After that, they twice drove a 35‐minute route in the simulator car (16 or 18 km; see Section 8.2.4), once without and once with the support of an advanced driver assistance system (see Section 8.2.6). The order of the drives was counterbalanced between subjects (see Section 8.2.5). Between the first and second drive, participants had a break of 45 minutes. Before the beginning of each drive, participants were asked to adjust the seat’s position to make sure they could reach the pedals, and were instructed orally about what was expected from them during the drive that was about to start. They had to follow route instructions and were asked to try to adhere to the speed limit that was generally 50 km/h. After each drive, subjects had to fill in a questionnaire on motion sickness (based on the SSQ; Kennedy et al., 1993) and one on subjective workload (Rating Scale Mental Effort (RSME); Zijlstra & Van Doorn, 1985). After they had driven the simulator car equipped with the simulated support system, they also had to fill in a questionnaire regarding their opinion of the support given. This questionnaire included the same items on user acceptance as were included in the questionnaire that they filled in before their first visit to the UMCG (see Section 8.2.8). Despite the earlier tests on simulator sickness, 15 participants (6 older, 9 younger drivers) felt sick while driving in the driving simulator during their second visit. Another 17 subjects did not complete the second part of the experiment because they were not able to participate in the period in which the second visits were planned. As a result, behavioural data were available from 40 participants: 10 chronologically older adult drivers (70 to 88 years of age; μ = 75.5, σ = 6.2; 8 males, 2 females) and 30 chronologically younger participants (30 to 50 years of age; μ = 39.3, σ = 5.9; 22 males, 8 females). In terms of functional age, data were available from 10 functionally younger participants (30 to 70 years of chronological age; μ = 39.1; σ = 12.2; 7 males, 3 females), 20 functionally middle‐aged participants (32 to 71 years of chronological age; μ = 42.6; σ = 8.6; 16 males, 4 females), and 10 functionally older participants (37 to 88 years of chronological age; μ = 69.2; σ = 16.9; 7 males, 3 females). Those not capable of participating in the second part of the experiment, either because of serious symptoms of simulator sickness during the 10‐minute drive at their first visit or because of a full agenda, received 10 € for their participation in the first part of the experiment. All other participants received 20 € for their participation in the experiment, regardless of having completed all the drives that were planned for their second visit. 158
Page 1 and 2:
Assisting the older driver Intersec
Page 3 and 4:
SWOV‐Dissertatiereeks, Leidschend
Page 5 and 6:
Promotor: Copromotor: Beoordelingsc
Page 7 and 8:
3.2.3. Conclusions regarding future
Page 9 and 10:
7.3. Preconditions for safe use of
Page 12 and 13:
General introduction General introd
Page 14 and 15:
General introduction is answered by
Page 16 and 17:
Current state of the art: crashes a
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Physical and mental characteristics
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Strategies to improve the older dri
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Theoretical framework to identify n
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Intersection design and the older d
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Effects of intersection design on w
Page 106 and 107:
Effects of intersection design on w
Page 108 and 109: Effects of intersection design on w
Page 134 and 135: Advanced driver assistance systems
Page 154 and 155: Effects of a driver support system
Page 194 and 195: Summary, discussion and general con
Page 208 and 209:
Summary, discussion and general con
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214:
Page 217 and 218:
Assisting the older driver Bekiaris
Page 219 and 220:
Assisting the older driver (Eds.),
Page 221 and 222:
Assisting the older driver Plaines,
Page 223 and 224:
Assisting the older driver way driv
Page 225 and 226:
Assisting the older driver Barcelon
Page 227 and 228:
Assisting the older driver Guerrier
Page 229 and 230:
Assisting the older driver Center.
Page 231 and 232:
Assisting the older driver Kennedy,
Page 233 and 234:
Assisting the older driver Marottol
Page 235 and 236:
Assisting the older driver Moe, D.
Page 237 and 238:
Assisting the older driver Quilter,
Page 239 and 240:
Assisting the older driver Smiley,
Page 241 and 242:
Assisting the older driver Van Wins
Page 243 and 244:
Assisting the older driver Withaar,
Page 245 and 246:
Assisting the older driver Appendix
Page 248 and 249:
Samenvatting Samenvatting Dit proef
Page 250 and 251:
Samenvatting Verkeersveiligheidsmaa
Page 252 and 253:
Samenvatting jongere automobilisten
Page 254 and 255:
Samenvatting voordeel dat ze de rij
Page 256 and 257:
Dankwoord Dankwoord Het schrijven v
Page 258:
Curriculum Vitae Curriculum Vitae R
Page 261:
Assisting the older driver Nottingh
show all

Assisting the older driver - SWOV

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?