Secondary task and risky driving behavior: a test of the mediating effect of situation awareness

• Autorzy: Hartono B. , Gozali M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

A theoretical model is developed by using a contingency perspective to hypothesize the relationship between a secondary task and risky driving behavior. It is conjectured that the relationship between the two variables is mediated by situation awareness (SA). An experiment is designed and administered to provide empirical evidence. Thirty Indonesian students as subjects were required to carry out a driving assignment in a simulated environment. Empirical evidence suggests that SA provides a partial mediation effect towards the relationship between a secondary task and risky driving behavior. It is also found that a secondary task has a significant effect on risky driving behavior. The secondary task also becomes a significant explanation of SA. In addition, working memory capacity, experience and gender are found to have no significant impact towards SA.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

secondary task; risky driving; simulation; situation awareness; mediation; contingency; Indonesia

PL

kierowcy i maszyniści; tolerancja ryzyka; świadomość ryzyka

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: Vol. 21, No. 3
• Strony: 399--404
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Hartono B.

• Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia

autor

Gozali M.

• Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia

Bibliografia

• 1.Number of accidents and casualties by category. Ministry of Transportation, Indonesia; 2013.
• 2.Billings CE, Reynard WD. Human factors in aircraft incidents: results of a 7-year study. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1984;55(10):960-965.
• 3.Australian Transport Safety Bureau. Runway excursions. Part 1. A Word wide review of commercial jet air craft runway excursions. Canberra: Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB); 2009.
• 4.Blanco M, Biever WJ, Gallagher JP, et al. The impact of secondary task cognitive processing demand on driving performance. Accid Anal Prev. 2006;38(5):895-906. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2006.02.015
• 5.Klauer SG, Dingus TA, Neale VL, et al. The impact of driver in attention on near-crash/crashrisk: an analysis using the 100-car naturalistic driving study data (DOT HS 810 594). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; 2006.
• 6.Drory A. Effects of rest and secondary task on simulated truck-drivingtask performance. Hum Factors. 1985;27(2):201-207.
• 7.Sagberg F. Road accidents caused by drivers falling asleep. Accid Anal Prev. 1999;31(6):639-649. doi: 10.1016/S0001-4575(99)00023-8
• 8.Valent F, Di Bartolomeo S, Marchetti R, et al. A case-cross over study of sleep and work hours and the risk of road traffic accidents. Sleep. 2010;33(3):349-354.
• 9.Smolensky MH, Di Milia L, Ohayon MM, et al. Sleep disorders, medical conditions, and road accident risk. Accid Anal Prev. 2011;43(2):533-548. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.12.004
• 10.Endsley MR. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors. 1995;37(1):32–64. doi: 10.1518/001872095779049543
• 11.Gonzalez C, Wimisberg J. Situation awareness in dynamic decision making: effects of practice and working memory. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak. 2007;1(1):56-74. doi: 10.1177/155534340700100103
• 12.SheikNainar MAA. Development and empirical assessment of a model of situation awareness for multi-tasking with locomotion; 2007.
• 13.King B, Ajovalasit M. Mobile device tactile interaction in multi-tasking activities. London: Brunel University; 2012.
• 14.Jones DG, Endsley MR. Investigation of situation awareness serrors. In: 8th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology. Columbus (OH): Ohio State University; 1995.
• 15.Strater LD et al. PC-based tools to improve infantry situation awareness. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Sage Publications; 2004.
• 16.Gugerty LJ. Situation awareness during driving: explicit and implicit knowledge in dynamic spatial memory. J Exp Psychol Appl. 1997;3(1):42-66. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.3.1.42
• 17.Zhang Y. Visual and cognitive distraction effects on driver behavior and an approach to distraction state classification [dissertation]. Raleigh (NC): North Carolina State University; 2011.
• 18.Ma R, Kaber DB. Situation awareness and workload in driving while using adaptive cruise control and a cell phone. Int J Ind Ergon. 2005;35(10):939-953. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2005.04.002
• 19.Di Stasia LL, Álvarez-Valbuenaa V, Cañasa JJ, et al. Riskbehaviour and mental workload: multimodal assessment techniques applied to motorbike riding simulation. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2009;12(5):361-370. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2009.02.004
• 20.Endsley MR. Theoretical underpinnings of situation awareness: a critical eview. In: Endsley MR, Garland DJ, editors. Situation awareness analysis and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2000. p. 3-32.
• 21.Miller D. Toward a new contingency approach: the search for organizational gestalts. Journal of Management Studies. 1981;18(1):1-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1981.tb00088.x
• 22.Ruuska I, Vartiainen M. Characteristics of knowledge sharing communities in project organizations. International J Proj Manage. 2005;23(5):374-379. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.01.003
• 23.SheikNainar MAA. Development and empirical assessment of a model of situation awareness for multitasking with locomotion [dissertation]. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University; 2007.
• 24.Endsley MR. Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). In: Aerospace and Electronics Conference, 1988. NAECON 1988., Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National. IEEE. 1988. vol. 3, p. 789-795 DOI 10.1109/NAECON.1988.195097
• 25.Endsley MR. Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors. 1995;37(1):65-84. doi: 10.1518/001872095779049499
• 26.Endsley MR. Direct measurement of situation awareness: validity and use of SAGAT. In: Endsley MR, Garland D.J, editors. Situation awareness analysis and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2000. p. 147-173.
• 27.Wu HS. How to model mediating and moderating effects [presentation]. Center for Family and Demographic Research Workshop Series. 2011. Retrieved May 5, 2014, from https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/center-for-family-and-demographic-research/documents/Workshops/2011-workshop-How-to-Model-Mediating-and-Moderating-Effects.pdfhttps://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/center-for-family-and-demographic-research/documents/Workshops/2011-workshop-How-to-Model-Mediating-and-Moderating-Effects.pdf
• 28.Strayer DL, Drews FA. Multi-tasking in the automobile. In: Kramer AF, Wiegmann DA, Kirlik A, editors. Applied attention. From theory to practice. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006. p. 121-133.
• 29.Just MA, Keller TA, Cynkar J. A decrease in brain activation associated with driving when listening to someone speak. Brain Res. 2008;1205:70-80. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.12.075

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie ze środków MNiSW w ramach umowy 812/P-DUN/2016 na działalność upowszechniającą naukę.