Influence of Auditory Feedback on Speed Choice, Violations, and Comfort in a Driving Simulation Game

1. E. Hellier, A. Naweed, G. Walker, P. Husband, J. Edworthy The influence of auditory feedback on speed choice, violations and comfort in a driving simulation game Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 591–599 Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK Devon Drivers Centre, Devon County Council, Exeter, UK 報告者：楊子群

2. Introduction 1.政府的目標是有效降低死忙及傷害，其中下列為每年度致命死亡人數： 2.駕駛者速度的變換與意外發生有關係(e.g. Baum, Lund, & Wells, 1989;Evans,2004) 3.Horswill & McKenna(1999)利用駕駛模擬測試速度變換，結果為當低分等級的feedback chose車速會比較快。

3. Purpose 運用駕駛模擬遊戲，探討下列四項之間關係： 1)提供不同的分貝等級的聽覺反應(auditory feedback) 2)舒適(comfort) 3)駕駛速度(Driving speed) 4)違反行為(violations)

4. Experiment1-Design Four different levels of engine noise feedback (no engine, 65dB(A), 75dB(A), 85dB(A)) Measured by recorded: Top speed Average speed Total time Subjective measures(7 point Likerttype scales)

5. Experiment1-Stimuli and materials 3x2 m sound attenuated laboratory. simulation software (Test Drive 5 2000, Infogames Entertainment). Computer with a 1.8 Ghz Pentium 4 processor. 120 x 170 cm image onto a white wall. Logitech Wingman Formula Force USB steering wheel and pedals. Altec Lansing Speakers (model 221). *noise levels maximum :simulator at 40 mph. no feedback : only ambient noise

6. Experiment1-Participants 48 participants 27 males (aged 18–27 years, M = 23.5 years) 21 females (aged 18–35 years, M = 25.1 years) normal or corrected to normal vision and hearing All had a full driving licence (Average driving experience : 5.25 years)

7. Experiment1-Procedure [Step1]每位受測者跑一次熟習操作及環境(5分鐘)。 [Step2]教導每位受測者假使如一般駕駛。 [Step3]正式實驗與練習的一樣路線。 [Step4]填寫問卷 [蒐集:舒適度(comfort)、響度(loundness)、模擬真實性(simulator realism)] =>李克特7點尺度評估（1分代表非常不滿意，7分代表非常滿意） 總實驗時間：20分鐘

8. Experiment1-Results and discussion -Average driving speed Significant effect of noise level on average speed (F(3, 44) = 9.02, p < .01). Sidak pair-wisecomparisons revealed significant differences (p < .01)

9. Experiment1-Results and discussion -Age and gender as covariates Age vs. Average speed Significant (F(1, 43) = 7.09, p < .05) Age vs. enginefeedback level Significant (F(3, 43) = 9.62, p < .01). Age & Average vs. enginefeedback level significant negative correlation (r(49) = .334, p < .05). Gender vs. Average speed Significant(F(1, 39) = 5.67, p < .05). -Male (M = 57.76 mph) driving fasterthan female (M = 46.68 mph). Gender vs. engine feedback level Significant(F(3, 43) = 7.64, p < .01)

10. Experiment1-Results and discussion -Subjective measures Comfort vs. loudness positive correlation (r(48) = .49, p < .01) Realism ratings no relationshipswith any subjective or objective measures (M = 3.2, ‘somewhat realistic’). engine feedback level vs. comfort ratings significant effect (F(3, 44) = 10.71, p < .01). - Sidak post hoctests revealed significant differences.

11. Experiment1-Results and discussion -Subjective measures Comfort vs. loudness Significant positive correlation (r(48) = .49, p < .01) Realism ratings showed no relationshipswith any subjective or objective measures (M = 3.2, ‘somewhat realistic’). Engine feedback level vs. comfort ratings Significant (F(3, 44) = 10.71, p < .01). - Sidak post hoctests revealed significant differences between the no feedback condition.

12. Experiment1-Results and discussion -Subjective measures Engine feedback noise level vs. loudness Significant (F(3, 44) = 64.35, p < .01). -Sidak post hoc analysis significant differences

13. Experiment1-Results and discussion -Subjective measures-Summarises

14. Experiment2-Design Four different levels of engine noise feedback (no engine, 70dB(A), 75dB(A), 80dB(A)) Measured by recorded: Average speed Violations Subjective measures(7 point Likert-type scales)

15. Experiment2-Participants 24 participants Male:12, aged:29-42 year, M=29.5 years Females :12, aged:19-31 years, M=26.1 years normal or corrected to normal vision and hearing All had a full driving licence (Average driving experience : 9.88 years)

16. Experiment2-Proceduce The realism of the simulation was assessed in pilot work. 7 participants(mean age: 29 years). Drive the course and were stopped at 5 points and asked to estimate the speed limit and rate the realism and level of external disturbance on a 10-pint scale. There was a 5 min break between successive trials.

17. Experiment2-Results and discussion -Realism of the simulation Mean realism score was 7 (st.dev. = 1.71) =>high degree of realism. Mean score for disturbance was 4.94 (st.dev. = 1.82)=>medium level Average estimated speed limit was 50 mph (st.dev. = 7.9). Actual speed limit of the road used for the trials.

18. Experiment2-Results and discussion -Average driving speed Significant effect of noise level on average speed (F(3, 69) = 3.15, MSe = 43.73, p < .05). -Sidak pair-wise comparisons revealed significant differences.

19. Experiment2-Results and discussion -The effect of age and gender on speed Sex vs. average speed Significant (F(1, 22) = 856, MSe = 515.20, p < .01). Average speed : Male(25 mph) > female Sex vs. noise level (F(3, 66) = .02, p > .05). Age vs. driving experience Highly correlated (r = 0.76, p < .01)

20. Experiment2-Results and discussion -Violations Noise level vs. violations Significant (F(1.5, 34.4) = 4.11, MSe = 158.5, p < .05). -Sidak pair wise comparisons revealed significant differences.