The influence of auditory feedback on The influence of auditory feedback on speed choice, violations and comfort in speed choice, violations and comfort in a driving simulation game a driving simulation game E. Hellier, A. Naweed, G. Walker, P. Husband, J. Edworthy Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 591– for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plym ment of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK Drivers Centre, Devon County Council, Exeter, UK 報報
20
Embed
The influence of auditory feedback on speed choice, violations and comfort in a driving simulation game E. Hellier, A. Naweed, G. Walker, P. Husband, J.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
The influence of auditory feedback on speed choice, The influence of auditory feedback on speed choice, violations and comfort in a driving simulation gameviolations and comfort in a driving simulation game
E. Hellier, A. Naweed, G. Walker, P. Husband, J. Edworthy
Transportation Research Part F 14 (2011) 591–599
Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UKDepartment of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UKDevon Drivers Centre, Devon County Council, Exeter, UK
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)
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
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)
Gender vs. engine feedback levelSignificant(F(3, 43) = 7.64, p < .01)
Experiment1-Results and discussion
-Subjective measures-Subjective measuresComfort vs. loudnesspositive correlation (r(48) = .49, p < .01)Realism ratingsno relationships with any subjective or objective measures (M = 3.2, ‘somewhat realistic’).
engine feedback level vs. comfort ratingssignificant effect (F(3, 44) = 10.71, p < .01).- Sidak post hoc tests revealed significant differences.
Sidak pair-wise comparisons
85 dB(A) A
75 dB(A) A
65 dB(A) A
No feedback B
Experiment1-Results and discussion
-Subjective measures-Subjective measuresComfort vs. loudnessSignificant positive correlation (r(48) = .49, p < .01)
Realism ratings showed no relationships with any subjective or objective measures (M = 3.2, ‘somewhat realistic’).
Engine feedback level vs. comfort ratingsSignificant (F(3, 44) = 10.71, p < .01).- Sidak post hoc tests revealed significant differences between the no feedback condition.
Sidak pair-wise comparisons
No feedback A
65 dB(A) B
75 dB(A) B
85 dB(A) B
Experiment1-Results and discussion
-Subjective measures-Subjective measuresEngine feedback noise level vs. loudness Significant (F(3, 44) = 64.35, p < .01).-Sidak post hoc analysis significant differences
Four different levels of engine noise feedback (no engine, 70dB(A), 75dB(A), 80dB(A))Measured by recorded:Average speedViolationsSubjective measures(7 point Likert-type scales)
Experiment2-Participants
24 participantsMale:12, aged:29-42 year, M=29.5 yearsFemales :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)
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.
Experiment2-Results and discussion
-Realism of the simulation-Realism of the simulationMean 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.
Experiment2-Results and discussion
-Average driving speed-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.
Average speed Sidak pair-wise comparisons
No engine noise 70.88 mph A
75 - A B 70 - B C 80 65.23 mph C
Experiment2-Results and discussion
-The effect of age and gender on speed-The effect of age and gender on speedSex vs. average speed Significant (F(1, 22) = 856, MSe = 515.20, p < .01).Average speed : Male(25 mph) > femaleSex vs. noise level(F(3, 66) = .02, p > .05).Age vs. driving experienceHighly correlated (r = 0.76, p < .01)
Experiment2-Results and discussion
-Violations-Violations
Noise level vs. violationsSignificant (F(1.5, 34.4) = 4.11, MSe = 158.5, p < .05).--Sidak pair wise comparisons revealed significant differences.