Documents

DOI

We conceptually replicated three highly cited experiments on speed adaptation, by measuring drivers’ experienced risk (galvanic skin response; GSR), experienced task difficulty (self-reported task effort; SRTE), and safety margins (time-to-line-crossing; TLC) in a single experiment. The three measures were compared using a nonparametric index that captures the criteria of constancy during self-paced driving and sensitivity during forced-paced driving. In a driving simulator, 24 participants completed two forced-paced and one self-paced run. Each run held four different lane width conditions. Results showed that participants drove faster on wider lanes, thus confirming the expected speed adaptation. None of the three measures offered persuasive evidence for speed adaptation because they failed either the sensitivity criterion (GSR) or the constancy criterion (TLC, SRTE). An additional measure, steering reversal rate, outperformed the other three measures regarding sensitivity and constancy, prompting a further evaluation of the role of control activity in speed adaptation.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages22
JournalErgonomics: an international journal of research and practice in human factors and ergonomics
DOIs
StateE-pub ahead of print - Feb 2018

    Research areas

  • Behavioural adaptation, risk homeostasis, driving simulator, psychophysiology, safety margins

ID: 36751769