Garrett Weinberg

Multimodal Input in the Car, Today and Tomorrow

With the increased functionality offered by in-vehicle systems, multimodal input is emerging as an effective means of interaction to minimize driver distraction. This article describes the current state of this technology for automotive applications, various ways to combine modalities, and outlooks toward the future.

Developing a low-cost driving simulator for the evaluation of in-vehicle technologies

We present a case study concerning the development of a driving simulator at Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs. By relying largely on off-the-shelf components, we have kept the total system cost under USD 60,000, yet attained a level of fidelity comparable with more expensive, custom-built research simulators.

Evaluation of Different Speech and Touch Interfaces to In-Vehicle Music Retrieval Systems

In-vehicle music retrieval systems are becoming more and more popular. Previous studies have shown that they pose a real hazard to drivers when the interface is a tactile one which requires multiple entries and a combination of manual control and visual feedback. Voice interfaces exist as an alternative. Such interfaces can require either multiple or single conversational turns. In this study, each of 17 participants between the ages of 18 and 30 years old was asked to use three different music retrieval systems (one with a multiple entry touch interface, the iPod, one with a multiple turn voice interface, interface B, and one with a single turn voice interface, interface C) while driving through a virtual world. Measures of secondary task performance, eye behavior, vehicle control, and workload were recorded. When compared with the touch interface, the voice interfaces reduced the total time drivers spent with their eyes off the forward roadway, especially in prolonged glances, as well as both the total number of glances away from the forward roadway and the perceived workload. Furthermore, when compared with driving without a secondary task, both voice interfaces did not significantly impact hazard anticipation, the frequency of long glances away from the forward roadway, or vehicle control. The multiple turn voice interface (B) significantly increased both the time it took drivers to complete the task and the workload. The implications for interface design and safety are discussed.

Contextual push-to-talk: shortening voice dialogs to improve driving performance

We present a driving simulator-based evaluation of a new technique for simplifying in-vehicle device interactions and thereby improving driver safety. We show that the use of multiple, contextually linked push-to-talk buttons (Multi-PTT) shortens voice dialog duration versus the use of a conventional, single push-to-talk button (Single-PTT). This benefit comes without detriment to driving performance or visual attention to the forward roadway. Test subjects also preferred the Multi-PTT approach over the conventional approach, and reported that it imposed a lower cognitive workload.

Evaluation of Two Types of In-Vehicle Music Retrieval and Navigation Systems:

It has been documented that use of an In-Vehicle Information System [IVIS] can impair driving performance. In general, voice-controlled IVISs are considered less distracting than those controlled by touch and are therefore considered as less interfering with the driving task. However, certain types of voice-controlled IVISs may be better (less distracting) than others. In this study, we evaluated two variants of a voice-controlled in-vehicle music retrieval and navigation system in order to investigate the effect of a common affordance where the IVIS controls the pace and timing of a multi-turn interaction. Participants were asked to drive various scenarios in a simulator while engaging with either a user-paced IVIS or a system-paced IVIS. Driving performance measures and IVIS usability measures were collected. Our results indicated that when the driving task imposes higher mental effort (e.g., on a curved roadway), the user-paced IVIS was found to be more effective and safer to use, whereas when the driving task imposes low mental effort (e.g., on a straight roadway), the user-paced and the system-paced IVIS was less effective but still safer.