《SAE J2365-2002 Calculation of the Time to Complete In-Vehicle Navigation and Route Guidance Tasks.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《SAE J2365-2002 Calculation of the Time to Complete In-Vehicle Navigation and Route Guidance Tasks.pdf（23页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising therefr
2、om, is the sole responsibility of the user.” SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be reaffirmed, revised, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and suggestions. TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: +1 (724) 776-4970 FAX: +1 (724) 776-0790 SAE WEB ADDRESS h
3、ttp:/www.sae.org Copyright 2002 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. All rights reserved.Printed in U.S.A. SURFACE VEHICLE 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 RECOMMENDED PRACTICE J2365 ISSUED MAY2002 Issued2002-05 Calculation of the Time to Complete In-Vehicle Navigation and Route Gu
4、idance Tasks ForewordA measure of usability and safety of a product is the time required to use that product to complete tasks of interest (Rubin, 1994). There is considerable data on task completion times for conventional controls and displays such as the headlights, windshield wipers, the speedome
5、ter, the fuel gauge, and audio systems (Kurokawa, 1990; Green, 1999d). Current evidence is that navigation and route guidance systems have some functions that can take significantly more time to use than conventional controls and displays (Kurokawa, 1990; Green, 1999a,c; Tijerina, Parmer, and Goodma
6、n, 1998). Furthermore, at various points in the design of a product, there may be alternative user interfaces under consideration, and ease of use (as measured by task completion time) should be one of the selection criteria. Therefore, the determination of task completion time is useful. Task compl
7、etion times can be determined using a sample of drivers to complete tasks of interest. However, that process may require a completed design, available only late in development, and obtaining a suitable driver sample may be cumbersome. As an alternative, the method described in this recommended pract
8、ice may be used to calculate static total task times, early in the design. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.Scope. 2 2.References. 2 2.1Applicable Publications 2 2.2Related Publications. 3 3.Definitions.5 4.Calculation Method. 6 Appendix A Operator Times 9 Appendix B Calculation Example.10 Appendix C Tabular Sum
9、mary of Example Calculation.19 SAE J2365 Issued MAY2002 -2- 1.ScopeThis SAE Recommended Practice applies to both Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) and aftermarket route-guidance and navigation system functions for passenger vehicles. This recommended practice provides a method for calculating th
10、e time required to complete navigation system-related tasks. These estimates may be used as an aid to assess the safety and usability of alternative navigation and route guidance system interfaces to assist in their design. This document does not consider voice-activated controls, voice output from
11、the navigation system, communication between the driver and others, or passenger operation. 2.References 2.1Applicable PublicationsThe following publications form a part of this specification to the extent specified herein. 2.1.1ACM PUBLICATIONAvailable from Association for Computing Machinery, Head
12、quarters Office, One Astor Plaza, 1515 Broadway, New York, NY 10036-5701, Tel: (+1) 212-869-7440, www.acm.org. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., and Newell, A. (1980). The Keystroke-Level Model for User Performance Time with Interactive Systems, Communications of the ACM, July, 23(7), 396-410. 2.1.2LAWRENCE
13、ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES AND HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERACTION PUBLICATIONSAvailable from Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, http:/ 10 Industrial Avenue, Mahway, NJ 07430P2262, Fax: (+1) 201-236-0072/Toll Free, 1-800-9-BOOKS-9. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., and Newell, A. (1983). The Psychology of Human-Computer Interacti
14、on, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Olson, J.R. and Nilsen, E. (1987-1988). Analysis of the Cognition Involved in Spreadsheet Software Interaction, Human-Computer Interaction, 3, 309-349. 2.1.3INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SOCIETY OF AMERICA PUBLICATIONAvailable from Intelligent Transportat
15、ion Society of America (ITSA), http:/www.itsa.org/, 400 Virginia Avenue SW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20024-2730, Tel: (+1) 202-484-4847 Fax: (+1) 202-484-3483. Green, P. (1999a). The 15-Second Rule for Driver Information Systems, ITS America Ninth Annual Meeting Conference Proceedings, Washington,
16、 D.C.: Intelligent Transportation Society of America, (CD-ROM). 2.1.4HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SOCIETYAvailable from Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, http:/ hfes.org, Box 1369, Santa Monica, CA 90496-1369, Tel: (+1) 310-394-1811, Fax: (+1) 310-394-2410. Green, P. (1999b). Estimating Complian
17、ce with the 15-Second Rule for Driver-Interface Usability and Safety, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (CD-ROM). 2.1.5UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE PUBLICATIONSAvailable from
18、 the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, www.umtri.umich.edu, 2901 Baxter Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2105 USA, Tel: (+1) 734-764-2172, Fax: (+1) 734-936-1081. Green, P. (1999c). Navigation System Data Entry: Estimation of Task Times (Technical Report UMTRI- 99-17), Ann Arbor, MI
19、, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. Green, P. (1999d). Visual and Task Demands of Driver Information Systems (Technical Report UMTRI- 98-16), Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. Manes, D., Green, P., and Hunter, D. (1998). Predicti
20、on of Destination Entry and Retrieval Times Using Keystroke-Level Models, (Technical Report UMTRI-96-37, also released as EECS-ITS LAB FT97- 077), Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. SAE J2365 Issued MAY2002 -3- Nowakowski, C. and Green, P. (2000). Prediction
21、 of Menu Selection Times Parked and While Driving Using the SAE J2365 Method (Technical Report 2000-49), Ann Arbor, MI, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. Nowakowski, C., Utsui, Y., and Green, P. (2000). Navigation System Evaluation: The Effects of Driver Workload and Inpu
22、t Devices on Destination Entry Time and Driving Performance and Their Implications to the SAE Recommended Practice (Technical Report UMTRI-2000-20), Ann Arbor, MI, The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. 2.1.6NORTH HOLLAND PUBLICATIONAvailable from North Holland Publishing, c/o
23、 Elsevier Science, http:/ www.elsevier.nl/, Elsevier Science, Regional Sales Office, Customer Support Department, P.O., Box 945, New York, NY 10159-0945 USA, Tel: (+1) 212-633-3730, Toll-Free number for North American customers: 1-888-4ES-INFO (437-4636), Fax: (+1) 212-633-3680. Kieras, D. E. (1997)
24、. A Guide to GOMS Model Usability Evaluation Using NGOMSL. In M. Helander, T. Landauer, and P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. (Second Edition). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 733-766. 2.1.7VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONAvailable from UMI, 300 North
25、 Zeeb Road, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346. Kurokawa, K. (1990). Development of an Evaluation Program for Automotive Instrument Panel Design (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation), Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 2.1.8WILEY PUBLICATIONAvailable from Wiley, htt
26、p:/ Corporate Headquarters, 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158-0012, Tel: (+1) 212-850-6000, Fax: (+1) 212-850-6088. Rubin, J. (1994). Handbook of Usability Testing, New York, NY: Wiley. 2.1.9MCGRAW-HILL PUBLICATIONAvailable from McGraw-Hill, General Customer Service, The McGraw-Hill Companies, P.
27、O. Box 182604, Columbus, OH 43272, Tel: (+1) 877-833-5524, Fax: (+1) 614-759-3759, http:/ /mcgraw-. Schwab, J.L. (1971). Methods Time Measurement (section 5, chapter 2) in Maynard, H.B (ed). Industrial Engineering Handbook, New York: McGraw-Hill. 2.1.10VERTIS PUBLICATIONAvailable from Intelligent Tr
28、ansportation Society of America (ITSA), http:/ www.itsa.org/ 400 Virginia Avenue SW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20024-2730, Tel: (+1) 202-484-4847 Fax: (+1) 202-484-3483. Tijerina, L., Parmer, E., greater magnification of a map display; determining the location of a point of interest; and canceling
29、route guidance. 3.7SubgoalChange in system or device state necessary to achieve a goal. Examples include reach to a device, entering a street name, entering a street address. 3.8TaskSequence of control operations (i.e., a specific method) leading to a goal or subgoal at which the driver will normall
30、y persist until the goal is reached. Example: Obtaining guidance by entering a street address using the scrolling list method until route guidance is initiated. 3.9MethodDescription of how a goal is accomplished. Example, a location might be entered using (1) the street address method (entering the
31、city, street, building number, and routing criteria) or (2) the intersection method (entering the city, the first street name, the second street name, and routing criteria). 3.10 Total Task TimeTime to complete a task. 3.11 Static Total Task TimeTotal task time measured in a stationary vehicle, buck
32、, or mock-up in which a subject is only performing the task of interest. 3.12 Computationally-Interrupted TaskTask where the driver must wait 1.5 seconds or more for the driver interface to respond to a driver input in order to complete a task, such as when an off-board computer is queried. 3.13 In
33、MotionWhen a vehicles speed exceeds the minimum nonzero speed that can be reliably detected by the vehicles sensors. 3.14 OperatorAn elementary perceptual, physical, or cognitive action. Example: a key stroke, a reach, or a mental operation (see Appendix A for a Table of Operator Times). SAE J2365 I
34、ssued MAY2002 -6- 3.15 ShortcutAn alternative method by which a task may be completed more quickly. EXAMPLEFor the PathMaster navigation interface, when a city is being selected, recently visited cities appear before the alphabetical list of cities. 3.16 Pseudo codeDescription of a computer program
35、that utilizes English (or some other natural language) phrases (e.g., add a to b, compute the square room of the sum) in a structure similar to that of a programming language (usually an indented outline). Pseudo code lacks the syntax rules of formal computer languages such as BASIC or C and is not
36、intended to compile. Pseudo code is often a precursor to formal coding. 4.Calculation Method 4.1OverviewThe calculation method is based on the goals, operators, methods and selection rules (GOMS) model described by Card, Moran, and Newell (1980, 1983). For background on the calculation method see Gr
37、een (1999b,d). The basic approach involves top-down, successive decomposition of a task. The analyst divides the task into logical steps. For each step the analyst identifies the human and device task operators. Sometimes analysts get stuck using this approach because they are not sure how to divide
38、 a task into steps. In those cases, utilizing a bottom-up approach may overcome such roadblocks. The GOMS approach assumes error-free performance, well-learned tasks, and particular locations of controls, assumptions typically violated in the operation of motor vehicles. Modifications have been made
39、 to the GOMS model (e.g., Kieras, 1997) to improve the accuracy of the method and adjust the parameters to more closely approximate the task times in motor vehicles. More specifically, the general process is: 4.1.1OBTAIN EITHER: a working prototype of the interface; or a simulation of the interface;
40、 or a videotape of a user operating the interface; or a step-by-step operational description. Also obtain the city and street database used, as well as any other data the system might access (e.g., dynamic traffic information). Supporting documentation (e.g., quick reference card, user manual) is al
41、so helpful. 4.1.2Identify the goals (e.g., enter a street address, enter an intersection). 4.1.3For each goal, identify the associated other subgoals to achieve it. Goals may be at multiple levels. 4.1.4For each goal and subgoal, identify the methods (e.g., the list search method) used to achieve th
42、em. Document the methods with a detailed explanation. 4.1.4.1AdviceThe videotape assists in the accurate analysis of the methods used by subjects. Videotapes provide a useful record of screen actions, example screens and when a user pauses for a mental operation, pauses that analysts may omit when t
43、hen just think about what users might do. When recording, be sure the camera is perpendicular to the test screen and interference due to the users hand is minimized. Also make sure the image is closely cropped around the display so the change of single characters is readily apparent on the recording
44、. Using a second camera viewing from the side and painting the sides of switches contrasting colors makes the depression of short throw switches easier to see on the recording. SAE J2365 Issued MAY2002 -7- 4.1.5Convert the detailed explanation of the methods into a computer-program like format (pseu
45、do code). 4.1.6Identify the computational assumptions with regard to users knowledge of various methods of task completion (Table 1). TABLE 1COMPUTATIONAL ASSUMPTIONS Analysis AssumptionCommentsAdjustment to Analysis Error-free performanceThe computational method assumes drivers start with accurate
46、and complete information about the destination and do not make any mistakes in entering information. In fact, errors can be quite high, ranging from 10 to 50 % of the trials. Rather than attempting to determine the probability of each error and the time to correct it, the completion time can be incr
47、eased by 25% to account for typical performance. Routine cognitive taskThe method assumes that drivers know what to do at each step. However, navigation system use is not a highly learned task for some drivers and drivers sometimes forget what to do. Model estimates are improved by including additio
48、nal mental operations where forgetting is likely to occur (Card, Moran and Newell, 1983). Adjustments for forgetting should be based on empirical analysis or using expert rules. Automotive context (The original model was developed for predicting task times in an office.) The position of a mouse vari
49、es from movement to movement but automotive controls do not. However, automotive controls may require greater reach accuracy. In addition, vehicle motion may slightly elevate times to reach for controls. Utilize automotive-specific estimates of reach and movement time. Evaluators may wish to develop their own operator values or correction factors, as well as additional application rules to improve estimates. Warm startThe navigation system is assumed to be on and the disclaimer screen is cleared. Start task estimat