Effects of auditory and tactile warning on response to visual hazards under a noisy environment

• Published in: Applied ergonomics 2017-04, Vol.60, p.58-67
• Main Authors: Murata, Atsuo, Kuroda, Takashi, Karwowski, Waldemar
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acoustic Stimulation; Auditory cue; Auditory Perception; Automobile Driving; Automotive warning system; Computer Simulation; Cues; Humans; Male; Noise; Noise outside a vehicle; Physical Stimulation; Reaction Time; Signal Detection, Psychological; SOA; Tactile cue; Task Performance and Analysis; Touch Perception; Vibration; Visual Perception; White noise; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0003-6870; 1872-9126
• DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2016.11.002

A warning signal presented via a visual or an auditory cue might interfere with auditory or visual information inside and outside a vehicle. On the other hand, such interference would be certainly reduced if a tactile cue is used. Therefore, it is expected that tactile cues would be promising as warning signals, especially in a noisy environment. In order to determine the most suitable modality of cue (warning) to a visual hazard in noisy environments, auditory and tactile cues were examined in this study. The condition of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was set to 0ms, 500ms, and 1000ms. Two types of noises were used: white noise and noise outside a vehicle recorded in a real-world driving environment. The noise level LAeq (equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level) inside the experimental chamber of each type of noise was adjusted to approximately 60 dB (A), 70 dB (A), and 80 dB (A). As a result, it was verified that tactile warning was more effective than auditory warning. When the noise outside a vehicle from a real-driving environment was used as the noise inside the experimental chamber, the reaction time to the auditory warning was not affected by the noise level. •The most suitable cue to a visual hazard under noisy environment was explored.•As a whole, the tactile warning was more effective than the auditory warning.•The reaction to the auditory cue was less affected by the out-of-vehicle noise level.•The reaction time to a hazard tended to be short under a noise outside of a vehicle.