Bryan Reimer

Advanced driver assistance systems are increasingly available in consumer vehicles, making the study of drivers’ behavioral adaptation and the impact of automation beneficial for driving safety. Concerns over driver’s being out-of-the-loop, coupled with known limitations of automation, has led research to focus on time-critical, system-initiated disengagements. This study used real-world data to assess drivers’ response to, and recovery from, automation-initiated disengagements by quantifying… Show more

Advanced driver assistance systems are increasingly available in consumer vehicles, making the study of drivers’ behavioral adaptation and the impact of automation beneficial for driving safety. Concerns over driver’s being out-of-the-loop, coupled with known limitations of automation, has led research to focus on time-critical, system-initiated disengagements. This study used real-world data to assess drivers’ response to, and recovery from, automation-initiated disengagements by quantifying changes in visual attention, vehicle control, and time to steady-state behaviors. Show less

A driving simulation study assessed the impact of vocally entering an alpha numeric destination into Google Glass relative to voice and touch-entry methods using a handheld Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. Driving performance (standard deviation of lateral lane position and longitudinal velocity) and reaction to a light detection response task (DRT) were recorded for a gender-balanced sample of 24 young adult drivers. Task completion time and subjective workload ratings were also measured. Using… Show more

A driving simulation study assessed the impact of vocally entering an alpha numeric destination into Google Glass relative to voice and touch-entry methods using a handheld Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. Driving performance (standard deviation of lateral lane position and longitudinal velocity) and reaction to a light detection response task (DRT) were recorded for a gender-balanced sample of 24 young adult drivers. Task completion time and subjective workload ratings were also measured. Using Google Glass for destination entry had a statistically higher miss rate than using the Samsung Galaxy S4 voice interface, the Google Glass method took less time to complete, and the two methods were given comparable workload ratings by participants. In agreement with previous work, both voice interfaces performed significantly better than touch entry; this was seen in workload ratings, task duration, lateral lane control, and DRT metrics. Finally, irrespective of device or modality, destination entry significantly decreased responsiveness to events in the forward scene (as measured by the DRT reaction time) as compared to the baseline driving. Show less

A driving simulation study assessed the impact of vocally entering an alpha numeric destination into Google Glass relative to voice and touch-entry methods using a handheld Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. Driving performance (standard deviation of lateral lane position and longitudinal velocity) and reaction to a light detection response task (DRT) were recorded for a gender-balanced sample of 24 young adult drivers. Task completion time and subjective workload ratings were also measured. Using… Show more

A driving simulation study assessed the impact of vocally entering an alpha numeric destination into Google Glass relative to voice and touch-entry methods using a handheld Samsung Galaxy S4 smartphone. Driving performance (standard deviation of lateral lane position and longitudinal velocity) and reaction to a light detection response task (DRT) were recorded for a gender-balanced sample of 24 young adult drivers. Task completion time and subjective workload ratings were also measured. Using Google Glass for destination entry had a statistically higher miss rate than using the Samsung Galaxy S4 voice interface, the Google Glass method took less time to complete, and the two methods were given comparable workload ratings by participants. In agreement with previous work, both voice interfaces performed significantly better than touch entry; this was seen in workload ratings, task duration, lateral lane control, and DRT metrics. Finally, irrespective of device or modality, destination entry significantly decreased responsiveness to events in the forward scene (as measured by the DRT reaction time) as compared to the baseline driving. Show less

Accid Anal Prev. 2013 Mar;52:125-32.
Impact of age and cognitive demand on lane choice and changing under actual highway conditions.
Reimer B, Donmez B, Lavallière M, Mehler B, Coughlin JF, Teasdale N.
PMID: 23333319