Effectiveness of Auditory and Vibrotactile Cuing for Driver’s Enhanced Attention under Noisy Environment

Abstract: If the warning signal is presented via visual or auditory stimulus, the auditory or visual interference with other information might arise. On the other hand, if vibrotactile cue is used, such interference would be surely reduced. Therefore, it is expected that a vibrotactile signal would be very promising as a warning signal especially under noisy environment. In order to clarify the most suitable modality of cue (warning) to a visual hazard under noisy environment, the following two cues were used in the experiment: (1) auditory cue and (2) vibrotactile cue. The condition of SOA (Stimulus Onset Asynchrony) was set to 0s, 0.5s, and 1s. The noose level inside the experimental chamber was 60dB(A), 70dB(A), 80dB(A), and 90dB(A). It was hypothesized that vibrotactile cue under noisy environment is more effective for quickening the reaction to a hazard than auditory cue. As a result, it was verified that the vibrotactile warning got more and more effective with the increase of noise level. The reaction time to the auditory warning was remarkably affected by the noise level, while the reaction time to the vibrotactile warning was not affected by the noise level at all. Moreover, the SOA condition did not remarkably affect the reaction time to the auditory or the vibrotactile warnings.

Keywords: Auditory Warning, Vibrotactile Warning, Automotive Warning System, Noisy Environment, SOA

DOI: 10.54941/ahfe1001230

Cite this paper:

​