China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Wireless Personal Communications: A Perspective
Published in Jerry D. Gibson, The Communications Handbook, 2018
Low-tier handsets will work in vehicles on village and city streets at speeds up to 30 or 40 mi/h, and the required handoffs make use of computer technology that is rapidly becoming inexpensive. As noted earlier, vehicular speed handoff is readily accomplished with PACS. Reliable handoff has been demonstrated for PACS at speeds in excess of 70 mi/h. Highways between populated areas, and also streets within them, will need to be covered by high-tier cellular PCS, but users are likely to use vehicular sets in these cellular systems. Frequently the vehicular mobile user will want a different communications device anyway, e.g., a hands-free phone. The use of hands-free phones in vehicles is becoming a legal requirement in some places now and is likely to become a requirement in many more places in the future. Thus, handsets may not be legally usable in vehicles anyway. With widespread deployment of low-tier PCS systems, the one handset of choice will be the low-power, low-tier PCS pocket handset or voice/data communicator.
What Technologies Do People Use When Driving and Why?
Published in Katie J. Parnell, Neville A. Stanton, Katherine L. Plant, Driver Distraction, 2018
Katie J. Parnell, Neville A. Stanton, Katherine L. Plant
In line with other conclusions in the literature, younger drivers (e.g. Lamble et al., 2002; Pöysti et al., 2005; McEvoy et al.., 2006; Young & Lenné, 2010), and the middle age male group (Engelberg et al., 2015; Pope et al., 2017) reported themselves to be more likely to engage with technologies while driving than the older age group. The older age group were found to differ on their attitudes towards technological tasks and their physical ability to interact with them while driving, further supporting previous findings in the literature (Strayer & Drews, 2004; Walsh et al., 2008; Pope et al., 2017). Drivers stated that they would, generally, be more likely to engage with tasks on the hands-free phone than on the handheld phone. The legislation in the UK that permits the use of hands-free phones but prohibits handheld mobile phone use may be one reason for this. The bans on mobile phone use propelled the industry to respond with advanced hands-free communication devices that allow drivers to be contactable while driving. Yet, research has suggested that hands-free communication is no safer than handheld mobile phone use (Strayer & Johnston, 2001; Horrey & Wickens, 2006). While the hands-free aspect limits the physical aspects of the distraction, the cognitive component of talking on the phone still has a negative impact on the driving task when using a hands-free device (Törnros & Bolling, 2005; Treffner & Barrett, 2004). Despite this evidence, hands-free devices are still permitted and are even readily built-in to modern vehicles by manufacturers that are then actively used by the driver who may not be aware of the increased risk talking on the hands-free phone may cause.
AI for In-Vehicle Infotainment Systems
Published in Josep Aulinas, Hanky Sjafrie, AI for Cars, 2021
Voice control has long been embraced within the offering of multimodal user interfaces in cars as well – and for good reason. Not only does voice control allow better comfort for drivers; it saves lives too. According to a report published by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in 2019, distraction accounted for 8% of all fatal crashes occurring on U.S. roadways in 2017 [29]. Hands-free user interfaces such as voice control improve safety by helping drivers keep their eyes on the road.
Driver distraction and inattention in fatal and injury crashes: Findings from in-depth road crash data
Published in Traffic Injury Prevention, 2019
Overall, distraction from mobile phone use was identified in 2.5% of crashes, a level that is slightly higher than phone use reported by Beanland et al. (2013; 0.9%) when smartphone ownership was much lower and comparable to the recent study by Sundfør et al. (2019; 2–4%). It is possible that illegal distracting behaviors, such as phone use, are still underreported in this study despite assurances of confidentiality and the lack of legal consequences. Although based on a small sample (n = 4), it is interesting that the 3 crashes in which the mode of mobile phone use was known, drivers were using the phone in hands-free mode, which is legal in South Australia. Hands-free mode is designed to reduce physical distraction when driving. However, there was still cognitive and auditory distraction from holding a conversation and, in each case, there was also visual distraction associated with phone use (e.g., looking for the button to accept/reject the call). Consequently, evidence from these case studies highlights the potential dangers associated with hands-free phone use on driving performance.
Structural equation model analysis for the evaluation of overall driving performance: A driving simulator study focusing on driver distraction
Published in Traffic Injury Prevention, 2018
Driver distraction factors can be subdivided into those that occur outside the vehicle (external) and those that occur inside the vehicle (in-vehicle). In-vehicle sources of distraction include the use of cell phone (either for conversing or for texting), conversation with passengers, smoking, eating or drinking, listening to music, and in-vehicle assistance systems (e.g., navigation systems; Johnson et al. 2004; Neyens and Boyle 2008), and their effects are largely examined by means of simulator experiments (Bellinger et al. 2009; Horberry et al. 2006; Yannis et al. 2014). Numerous studies have sought to examine the relative effects of handheld and hands-free mobile phones on driving performance. Research findings have typically revealed that using a handheld phone degrades driving performance significantly and, in response, many countries have prohibited the use of handheld cell phones while driving (Matthews et al. 2003). Based on the results of numerous studies examining handheld cell phones, researchers concluded that the main risk associated with cell phone use while driving was the physical interference caused by handling and manipulating the phone (Briem and Hedman 1995; Brookhuis et al. 1991). However, as subsequent research discovered, although the physical distraction associated with handling the phone can present a significant safety hazard, the cognitive distraction associated with being engaged in a conversation can also have a considerable effect on driving. Indeed, many studies have found that conversing on a hands-free phone while driving is no safer than using a handheld phone (Haigney et al. 2000; Matthews et al. 2003; Redelmeier and Tibshirani 1997; Strayer et al. 2003).
Investigating the Impact of Mounted Mobile Phones on Driving Behavior
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2022
Although the use of handheld mobile phones while driving has been prohibited, drivers’ desire to use mobile phones has not disappeared; accordingly, hands-free mobile phone technology was introduced. Hands-free mobile phones utilize technologies, such as Bluetooth headsets and voice commands, to enable mobile phone functions (e.g., calls) without holding the mobile phone (Nunes & Recarte, 2002). One aspect of hands-free mobile usage is mounting devices, which involves placing the mobile phone in a phone holder inside the vehicle.