Slashdot Mirror
Study Suggests That HUD Tech May Actually Reduce Driving Safety
Zothecula writes: Having a heads-up display constantly feed you information while cruising down the road may make you feel like a jet pilot ready to avoid any potential danger but recent findings suggest otherwise. Studies done at the University of Toronto show that the HUD multi-tasking method of driving a vehicle is dangerous. "Drivers need to divide their attention to deal with this added visual information," said Department of Psychology professor Ian Spence, who led the research. "Not only will drivers have to concentrate on what’s happening on the road around them as they’ve always done, they’ll also have to attend to whatever warning pops up on the windshield in front of them."
IF you have some kind of info 'popping up', there's your problem there. Show speed. Show specific information. Do not constantly CHANGE that information to make drivers deal with new data.
Similar statements could be made for desktops, where tray icon pop-ups for updates, email and chat notifications distract and interrupt workflows.
Maybe both for desktops and cars, this problem can be solved by detecting whether the user is currently focussed (on the road or a task) or relaxed/idle, and may be interrupted. Mylyn is a very impressive demo of thinking in this direction, I would like to see more of it.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Quelle surprise! You ain't targeting bogeys. You're driving down the road. Stay on task and chill.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Like, seriously?
My wife's 'vette has a hud in it and the first thing I do when I drive the car is turn the hud off. When flying the best advice is to keep your head 'out of the cockpit', in other words scanning the skies around you. New pilots' are always glued to the instruments, mature pilots eyes are focused outside except for quick scans of the instruments.
hey! everything gets hacked. just you wait.
You do not need to be driving. You do not need HUDs to tell you that the red sign up ahead is a stop sign. Nor do you need some accident early-warning system - if you WATCHED THE FUCKING ROAD you'd likely see the accident scene before getting to it (some locations/obstructions of scenery may give varying results.)
And wait for your night vision to get completely turned to ass when they start introducing these HUDs in different colors as a fashion statement. Anything other than red - you're much more likely to crash at night because your night vision is being fucked with.
HUDs MAKE ZERO SENSE IN TYPICAL CIVILIAN APPLICATIONS.
Keep that shit in the military where it belongs.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
it's cool.
They asked the people to report a box showing up? That isn't normal when driving, therefor the test its self might be distracting.
HUD displays should only be used to display info that is normally checked anyway like the speedometer as well as things like the new IR cameras that can detect deer near the side of the road which will be invisible. Having displays pop up some virtual brake lights on a stopped or slowing down car is fine but it has to be done right. It took aviation decades to get the basics for instruments right. The stuff that looks cool on a HUD demo in an office isn't what will work best in cars on a dark foggy road.
Don't throw distracting trivia at the driver. DO use computational methods to highlight things the driver should definitely pay attention to that might not be obvious.
For example: if the view ahead is obstructed, or visibility is limited, a supplementary warning about oncoming objects that are out of sight could be useful.
Study shows that when you misuse HUD, it can distract drivers.
But if you're showing them an alert about something they're clearly not aware of, then are you making them more or less aware of their surroundings?
If they don't have to look down to see the next navigation instruction, are you making them more or less aware of their surroundings?
Bullshit story is bullshit. Welcome to Slashdot!
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
When the dangers of driving while holding a cell phone became clear, many places banned hand-held cellphones while driving but allowed hands-free cell phones. After further research, it seems clear that hand-free cell phones aren't any safer. Even a little distraction can be very dangerous when you need quick reflexes. Minor distractions are particularly dangerous because most of the time you don't need quick reflexes; you're just cruising down the highway -- lulling you into a false sense of security. I'm guessing a HUD causes similar problems.
Who would have thought that distracting drivers with information would make them less safe as drivers?
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
But does the HUD reduce profit margins?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
The difference is that a fighter pilot has been selected for their skills, esp. with multi-tasking and processing a rapidly evolving environment. Few candidates actually make it past the starting gate. Drivers on the other hand are only weeded down to those that can stay in a lane, use a turn signal, and apply the brakes at an intersection. You can be an almost entirely incompetent driver and pass your exam. If you fail you can generally can continue to retake the test until you pass. Eventually the dice will land just right.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
We have had a century to figure out the "unplugged" car interface, and it is simpler: dials for speed and tachometer, nothing else. Drivers train from an early age to drive with this sort of instrumentation.
The lack of safety with these HUD's is likely a consequence of inexperience both on the part of the HUD designers and the drivers. Once the interfaces themselves iterate a few times, and then drivers get experienced with them, I imagine they'll be much safer.
Sorry, it just had to be said.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Only display that which needs immediate attention.
Have gnu, will travel.
I reported some facts, added a little interpretation, and finished with one sentence of speculation. Where did I suggest banning anything?
Surprisingly, you reminded me of something relevant. IIRC, there's evidence that talking on a cell phone (hands free or not) is _more_ distracting than talking to a passenger in the car. (I don't have time to look up sources ATM.) It sounds weird, but it's plausible that interacting with something that's actually in the car is less distracting that paying attention to a disembodied voice. Most of the "distractions" you mentioned aren't interactions in the same way. E.g. you don't have a back-and-forth interaction with a license plate or even a radio; you just look or listen.
What the fuck are you popping up at the driver? Put current speed, RPMs, fuel level and maybe oil/water temperature along the bottom of the windshield so they can just see it without taking their eyes off the road and call it good. Maybe the entire problem is just really bad user interface design.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
We have a "Head Down Display"
Since if you travel more than a few k's over the limit, you should expect to be pulled over, ticketed and issued demerit points.
No speedometer?
What the hell is the instrument panel in a car for?
HUDs only make sense if you're truly a supervisor of the vehicle, not the control system.
In aircraft/drones, HUDs are OK cause the aircraft really flies itself, the pilot is there for emergency situations and what I call trimming (small adjustments).
In a car, you control everything--still want to end up in that ditch--pretty easy....sure go ahread....
Once we get real supervisory based cars, yes, HUDs make no sense other than wiz bang. And much like 8" touchscreens & phone integration in cars are whiz bang--are distractions currently.
I flew with a HUD as a Naval Aviator for over 20 years. A fighter HUD provides a lot of information that simply is not available head down, or is more intuitively available head up. You get aircraft attitude, altitude and airspeed all in one place, and in addition you get aircraft flight path, which is not really available head-down.
Other than speed (that doesn't change that fast in a car) all the other crap presented in car HUDs are better off on a head-down display. And in a fighter, stuff like route steering and data-link test messages are presented head-down.
Additionally, an aircraft HUD is focused at infinity (not really, but close enough that there is no visual accommodation required). Virtually everything you are looking at while in an airplane is miles away. Even landing, you are still looking at thousands of feet until the final seconds, so the accommodation matches. A car HUD conversely is projected up in front of objects measured in 10's of feet, and some accommodation is present, meaning you don't have the feel that you are looking at the projection on the real world, it's in front of it (or even behind.
Fighter pilots go through countless hours of training to learn how to deal with a HUD during air combat. During the other 90% of flight time there's nothing for them to hit if they're not paying attention to the sky. Drivers, on the other hand, go through a few hours of just barley paying attention in drivers ed., and/or a few minutes skimming the book just to pass the test before taking to the road. Automobile driving requires constant attention to the road, and with no training what so ever what do you think joe sixpack will be paying attention to because "I thought I was supposed to focus on the HUD, and it would tell me what to do"?
Remember, 50% of the population is below average intelligence, and I'm sure a good 25 to 30 percent of the above average think they can handle texting while driving as well. HUDs for automobiles is a very bad idea, and there's no reason for them.
--- Keep the choice with the user..
People invariably think that they are much better at multitasking then they really are. Every time someone does a controlled study they find out that interruptions have a profound impact on most peoples ability to function. It doesn'tmake any difference if the interruption is when you are online trying to complete a task or in a car and driving. Attention switch has an intrinsic cost.
I've know a few military aircraft pilots and they are the only people I would trust to use a cell phone while driving a car. And they don't do it because they know it is too dangerous. It's just not worth the risk.,
Why is Snark Required?
Why are we trying to stamp out technology like a hud for driving, but not demanding that any nitwit that thinks they can use their smartphone and drive shot?
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
In a sense, I have a HUD. Over the years, I've found it invaluable. It's a good, old-fashioned GPS with a sucker-mount. My job involves a lot of driving on unfamiliar two-lane highways in rural Ontario. I keep my GPS mounted just below eye level to the left. It gives me my speed, the shape of the road just ahead, and it will pop up an actual point-of-view picture of some exits and entrances from larger highways. This is available to me without having to take my eyes off the road even for a split second.
It has saved me from at least a couple of accidents (probably minor, but you never know) and allowed me to concentrate on driving rather than trying to spot the appropriate turn-off. These often aren't marked at all, or have a sign the size of a banker's conscience...great for reading as you miss it on the way past.
That said, even just shifting my concentration from the road to the GPS and back did require a little learning. The most important (and safest) thing, though, is that my eyes are never entirely off the road ahead. In addition to keeping me safely on a road that may take some unexpected turns, this has certainly saved the lives of a large number of apparently suicide-prone wildlife and domestic animals. On a purely practical level, anyone who has ever hit something the size of a deer knows it's no laughing matter. Two of those idiotic creatures are alive today thanks to my "HUD". And so am I.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
When I had a car that showed its speed in a more visible location, I kept looking there initially. When I first had a car which told me how much fuel I was using at any moment, I kept glancing there. Then the novelty wore off and I just returned to more standard driving distractions. :)
Besides, this test really was lame. They couldn't even use a PC with a driving simulation or something?
The first time I ran out of gas, I nearly had a heart attack as the car put up 3 warning signs and asked if I wanted to be directed to the nearest gas station. :-D
The HUD must not be all that great if you keep running out of gas multiple times.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Your name reminds me of a pertinent story. When I was younger I had a midlife crisis. I bought a, then new, Dodge Viper. It was great for a guy who had recently been divorced. Until my kids moved in with me.
Anyhow, it had nothing nor could I order it with anything. It had a number of gauges. It had NO radio - it did not even have a slot to put in a radio nor did it have speaker slots to put speakers. Instead you listened to the engine. And it was beautiful. I paid much more attention to driving in that car than I paid in any other car (and I am a bit of a car buff as is evidenced by my many car stories - I always have a car analogy) and I think the reason for this was the car was just too damned much fun to not pay attention to driving and, secondly, there were no non-function related distractions in the car other than an occasional college chick.
The bad part is that it was my only car and the payments and insurance were pretty intense for that period of my life. I ended up selling it. I kind of wish I had it back again. The kids moved in with me, Daddy has the best toys, and I bought a 9-5 wagon. That car, not the wagon, and I had some great (and scary) times together.
Anyhow, I suspect it is not just HUD that is the problem but distraction that is the problem. You are paying attention when you are doing the Axl Rose Shuffle, on purpose, in a snow storm but you are not paying nearly as much attention when you are cruising down the highway and just passed your 600th mile of driving today. You are also likely paying less attention when you are playing some sort of simulation on a computer, regardless of what the researchers ask of you, because the penalty for failing to notice something is not nearly as high as it is when you are driving. Also, I tend to pay more attention when I am driving too fast or driving off-road. I live in the middle of nowhere so I can get away with it to some extent but I still am much more attentive and even tend to change my driving position before doing so.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
He painstakingly measured how much information an astronaut/jet pilot could pay attention to at once, and react to within a certain time frame.
Aviation folks have an awesome term for when pilots freeze from information overload. They call it having a helmet fire which to this day cracks me up and is a perfect term for the problem.
I've one question to anyone who can speak on the capabilities of a car HUD. Do they remain "in focus" when the driver is looking into the distance? This is common on aircraft HUDs. Just wondering how it's adapted to cars. Thank you.
I live in the middle of nowhere so I can get away with it to some extent but I still am much more attentive and even tend to change my driving position before doing so.
that's why these cars have three or four seating positions, right? One for me, one more for me, and if there's any left then maybe I'll let someone else have one... but I'm going to also need a backup of my primary settings in case someone craps on them
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I had a HUD in my Car for over 9 years. Limited but essential information that allowed me to keep my eye on the road. Never had to look at Dash, Radio or other distractions. As you drive with the HUD it is not the center of attention unless warning about hazard or failure. Limit the Info to necessary and driver safety should improve not decline. In the 9.5 years I had the HUD, no accidents.
When I first moved to Quebec I was shocked at the number of drivers who would just blow through a stoplight. I mentioned it one day, and someone said "it's not surprising, most of them can't tell what colour the light is anyway."
I teach sailing. I've noticed that almost all students are nearly incapable of switching their attention among multiple things. They fixate on what they're doing with the throttle when backing out of a slip and forget about watching where the boat is. Or they remember to watch off the stern and forget about the bow. Actually sailing, they watch their heading and forget about the wind, or vice versa. If they get distracted, it all goes to hell. But, with practice and a teacher reminding them, they learn. Sometimes we chat so they get practice having a conversation (and more importantly, ignoring a conversation when necessary) and sailing at the same time.
I remember my driving instructor doing the same thing. Do you know what's behind you? When was the last time you checked your mirrors? How fast are you going? What did that sign say?
You can learn to deal with distractions, but you have to specifically practice, and it doesn't hurt to have a teacher.
1. No matter how much you post this I will not argue the point with you. You are wrong, and that is all I need to say.
2. You do realize that what you are doing could be considered libel against AB+ don't you? Many of your claims are actually patently false as I have shown you in the past.
Now take that and go cry in your cereal. I don't need to argue with idiots on the internet, and no amount of you trying to prove yourself right will ever prove you right as numerous people have posted to you in the past couple of days.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I agree entirely. That and people really overrate their own ability. I was trained to drive as it was my MOS. Thank you for your tax dollars - you also paid for my education and I appreciate that as well. I manage to drive well enough. I have taken a number of other courses, a variety of defensive driving classes, and the "Racing School" programs from Skip Barber. I have done a number of other programs as well because, well, I like driving and I think it is my responsibility to be a good driver - especially if I am going to break the rules. (I do, I do so in a reasonably safe manner and live in an area where the risks are limited to just myself.)
So yes, I really do recall how bad I drove as a teen and then into my early adult years. I thought I was an excellent driver but I was constantly driving distracted, even drinking, screwing with the radio, playing around with passengers, and all that sort of thing. I even did stupid things like read a map while driving. I am lucky - I have never had an at-fault accident in my life - I have gone into a couple of snowbanks because I was playing around.
So yes, until you are really adept - well beyond the skills of a beginner - with any physical activity then you really should not be distracted. Having a good teacher who teaches you the basics AND does things like instructs you on how to deal with distractions is a good thing. Without detracting from their confidence it is important to instill a sense of fear and responsibility.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I do not have a steady lady friend at the moment so all the seat positions are mine! I do actually have a few setup for different situations. The car mentioned above only had manual seat controls (saving weight) and the seat was not comfortable at all when compared to a number of other cars. It was great at holding you in position (which was its point) with great lateral support and a stiff back. Get yourself almost too close to fit in there (with enough room to quickly reach the controls) and get your back into a vertical position and it was a glorious ride. I have owned and now own a few other sport cars (and sport sedans which is my final love, I think) and that car was the only one I have ever had that was truly a total driver's car. While stiff, but not uncomfortable, you could feel a pebble in the road at speed.
Half the trick was learning how to NOT take the car out sideways when starting off. Yet, at the same time, you could get over 1g of lateral acceleration which, at the time, was phenomenal. Of course you can get that in an Accord now but no Accord is going to be anything like that driving experience was. I own a BMW (two if you count a mostly trailer queen), just ordered a new one last week, and they say that they are the ultimate driving experience. That is true for some cases but not for pure driving connection. The driving experience offered by BMW is entirely different than that with the Dodge. The BMW is, if you want, a bit like a track car when you get the revs up but is also very heavy. The Dodge was much more like driving a slot car or, perhaps, a bit like the old Saab 900s Turbo when it was wearing speed-rated (Z) Pirelli sneakers when it first came out. To be honest, for functionality, I much prefer the BMW sports sedan. It is far more practical and has more than enough power if you want to play. They are even a blast on the track so long as you remember that it is a very heavy vehicle though it is designed well and feels much lighter than it is.
(I ordered a bespoke 640Li in case you are curious. It will be almost 3 months before I have it though. ~650 ponies is going to be a nice car to fall in love with.)
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I have no racing experience, and have never driven a vehicle any distance offroad. I shift by sound. Sometimes I glance at the tach (if present, my first manual shift car didn't have one) to calibrate my ears.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"playing around with passengers" He he.
I grew up in a small town and the motor association ran driving instruction classes at the high school. Pretty much everyone took them, because they were cheap, convenient, and gave you a discount on your insurance. I think the training was over about six months, with weekly classroom sessions and a dozen or so in-car sessions. They scheduled it in the winter to make things more fun. Add to that that most of us had been driving with parental supervision since we were 14, and quite a few "unofficially" on farms since well before that.
As an adult I moved to a different province. One of my friends decided he was going to get a drivers license (at 25 or so, about average for the city). He took an hour of instruction, hopped in a car and did his test. He came back and said driving is one of the hardest things he's ever done, but he'd passed.
I am not a huge fan of increased regulatory hurdles that can limit otherwise free people but I really do have to check my political leanings when I think about driving. I justify my potentially hypocritical thinking by acknowledging that driving is, ostensibly, a privilege and not a right. On the other hand, of course, it is a near-necessity if you are outside of an urban area or in an area that lacks adequate public transportation. In my country, the USA, public transportation is an almost taboo topic, what little there is has been designed by mouth-breathing morons, and is usually inefficient, poorly maintained, and is in dire need of updating. My country was designed to be used by automobiles.
Anyhow, I have realized that we need to make a few changes for the betterment of society - or, at least, that is my opinion. We really need to increase the required education and have more stringent tests as well as a longer probationary period before one is fully licensed. We need different classes of licenses as well. Just because you have a trailer hitch and a boat does not mean you are safe on the highways. Just because you managed to acquire a truck and affixed a snowplow to it does not mean you are safe to drive that truck around. I have had more worrisome interactions with drivers of those two types of vehicles than I have had with any other vehicle type out there and that includes amphetamine using truck drivers. I would almost rather share the road with drunk people.
So, yes... There is a lot to be said for good teaching AND for a lot of practice. Can one talk on the phone and drive safely? I have never had an incident which involved my using a phone and driving. Not one. I have, at the same time, had people pull into my lane without signaling while they were on the phone. I have had them cut me off while they were on the phone. I have been behind them and unwilling to pass because they were weaving while talking on the phone. I have seen drivers texting while on the phone and they were not even really in control of their vehicle nor the least bit attentive to their driving. Do we need to legislate to the lowest common denominator? It would appear so. I, after all, am *perfect* while driving and talking on the phone, just like everybody else. Of course I am...
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
It will probably be ok, -if- the designers and coders are required to -use- them from the earliest practical point in the project.
Deliver us from "new" things that were never used by the designers!