Published at : 28 Jul 2023
Volume : IJtech
Vol 14, No 5 (2023)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v14i5.4778
Lovely Lady | Industrial Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, University of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa. Jln. Jend. Sudirman km 3, Cilegon – 42435, Indonesia |
Ani Umyati | Industrial Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, University of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa. Jln. Jend. Sudirman km 3, Cilegon – 42435, Indonesia |
The development of information technology has
provided electronic maps (e-maps) via mobile phones that help drivers find the
travel destinations, but using mobile phone also can disturb the driver’s concentration. The aims of the research
is to analyze the effects of using e-maps while driving on driver performance. The respondents
were private car drivers, and as many as 325 respondents filled out the
questionnaire. The drivers answered the
questions about their experience using e-map while driving and particular
behavior. As many as 45.54% of drivers involved in undesired circumstances such as changing lanes or
slowing down suddenly and 20.00% involved in a near-miss
accident. Meanwhile 39.94% of drivers stated to never be involved in any adverse event. The group of drivers who have
aberrant behavior was involved in adverse event more often than the group of
drivers who obey the rules (t-test, a=0.000).
Regression analysis is performed to analyze the correlation between four types
of aberrant behavior and the driver violations, there were moderate
correlations between the research variables. The use of e-maps do not increase traffic violations when
applied by obedient traffic rule drivers, but it does increase when
applied aberrant behavior drivers.
Aberrant behavior; Driver behavior; Error; Electronic map; Violation
Using electronic maps (e-maps) via mobile phones helps drivers find
travel destinations. These applications often used by drivers for guidance
while driving. Using e-maps while driving is a secondary task; all activities
that is done while driving not related to controlling or maneuvering the
vehicle and monitoring the traffic are considered as secondary tasks in
driving. Secondary tasks can disturb the driver’s concentration and cause
longer driver reaction times (Kaber et al., 2012). Driving a vehicle is a complex task that requires not only physical
skills for controlling the direction and speed of a vehicle, but also mental
skills for sustained monitoring of integrated perceptual and cognitive inputs
that allow a driver to make time-appropriate decisions. The use of mobile
phones while driving interferes concentration and it can cause the driver
experience a near miss or even an accident.
Drivers’ impaired concentration while driving is caused by external factors unrelated to driving activities. Concentration disorders affect drivers’ abilities to make decisions and decrease their performance while driving (Zuraida, Wijayanto, and Iridiastadi, 2022; Prat et al., 2017; Zuraida Iridiastadi, and Sutalaksana, 2017; Misokefalou et al., 2016; Eliou and Misokefalou, 2014; Kaber et al., 2012; Owens, McLaughlin, and Sudweeks, 2011). Included in this task are talking to passengers, smoking, listening to music, and using a mobile phone. The secondary tasks that require visual attention and psychomotor coordination significantly decrease driving performance, but the secondary tasks that only require memory scanning and the use of auditory modality, such as listening to music or the radio, do not decrease driving performance (Rodrick, Bhise, and Jothi, 2013).
Distraction is the process of breaking down the attention to driving
activities, which reduces the awareness, readiness, and performance of drivers,
making the driver’s reaction takes longer time when an event occurs. When
distracted, the driver’s attention moves from the traffic to objects that
interest them such as objects, advertising, or other things. Distraction
increases errors in driving and leads to accidents (Young and
Salmon, 2012). Distraction can cause cognitive failures that leads to errors on simple
tasks that should be easily accomplished. Cognitive abilities can vary between
people depends on their habits and skill mastery. Cognitive failure scores are
strongly correlated with the error rate in driving, but it is not correlate
with accidents experienced by drivers. In a study by Allahyari et al. (2008) stepwise regression analysis was performed for scoring factors that have
strong correlations with driving errors, and only the factors of lack of
concentration and social interaction had strong correlations with driving error
rates (Allahyari et
al., 2008). Distraction in the form of spatial reasoning tasks, such as the driver’s
secondary tasks, decrease the driver’s performance of the primary task of
driving: in research by (Hurts, 2011) demonstrated the spatial
reasoning version of the secondary task forced the participants to think about
the east–west orientation of familiar cities, data of reduced scores of driving
skills were measured with the Lane-Change Task.
Smartphone use makes drivers divide their attention. Smartphones allow
drivers to access information unrelated to driving activities, such as
entertainment or social media. Included in entertainment activities are
listening to or watching content related to music, the radio, and information.
Research about mobile phone use while driving has been conducted by several
researchers. Mobile phone use decreases driver performance, reaction time, and
awareness (Prat et al.,
2017; Oviedo-Trespalacios
et al., 2017). According to research by (Van-Dam, Kass,
and VanWormer, 2020), audible text messages decrease the driver’s awareness and increase the
speed of the vehicle for 10 seconds after the driver gets a message
notification. Mcnabb and Gray
(2016) stated that there a decrease in driver performance when using mobile phones
as assessed from brake reaction times, which significantly greater for drivers
who use smartphones to read information or text-based conditions than for those
who use smartphones to obtain
information by viewing images or image-based conditions, or in conditions of
not using a mobile phone while driving. Image-based mobile phone use is a safe
way to stay connected with information via mobile phones while driving. Lady and Susihono
(2019) examined the use of e-maps on smartphones while driving and calculated the
increase probability of a traffic accident use the Human Error Assessment and
Reduction Technique (HEART); the result of human error probability was 0.0106.
According to the drivers’ reports, they never experience accidents, but
sometimes another driver warns them because they inhibited the traffic.
According to Sucha, Sramkova,
and Risser (2014), there are some factors causing aberrant behavior in driving: dangerous
violations; dangerous errors; and not paying attention to driving,
straying, and loss of orientation. Included in the dangerous violation category
is the act of intentionally breaking the rules. Dangerous errors a type of
violation that involves absentminded of the driver. Driver Behavior
Questionnaire (DBQ) divides driving
offenses based on
the level
of awareness
of the
driver making the
offense. This questionnaire is already
used to survey driving behavior in various countries. Research by Harrison
showed high level of internal consistency for each item scales in the DBQ, and
the results support the use of the DBQ as a questionnaire outcome measure in an
evaluation study (Harrison, 2009). Researchers from several
countries showed that the DBQ had a high level of validity and reliability. The
translation of the DBQ is also addressed by Harrison (Harrison, 2009) this questionnaire shows a
high level of reliability when translated into Finnish and Dutch.
The use of e-maps in the form of Global Positioning System (GPS)
navigation can improve the driver performance (Cochran and Dickerson, 2019), (Dickerson, 2020), but also interferes the driver concentration. Higher interference is
experienced when driving in urban areas (Yared and Patterson, 2020), and
using small GPS displays also add distraction to drivers. Interference due to
the use of GPS navigation can cause eye glances and decrease driving
performance (Jensen,
Skov, Thiruravichandran, 2020). The impact of using e-maps
on driver performance has not been specifically studied. Driving distractions
due to the use of mobile phones should be considered for driving safety when
using the e-map. The hypothesis in this study is the increase use of e-maps
while driving is suspected to disrupt driver concentration as well as the use
of mobile phones while driving and resulting in an increase in driving
violations. The a of the research is to
evaluate the psychological effects of using e-maps while driving
on driver, analyzing the effects of using e-maps while driving on driver
involvement in adverse event, identify types of aberrant
behavior of drivers and analyze the factors that cause drivers to make
violations.
This
study analyzed the driving conditions experienced by drivers while driving
using an e-map. The study also identified drivers’ violation habits while
driving. Driver involvement in adverse event and habits of violations were
obtained from respondent answer based on their experiences.
2.1. Respondents
Respondents of this study were passenger car drivers who lived in several
cities in Indonesia. Respondents included men and women with an age range
between 18 and 66 years old. All respondents were confirmed to have a driver’s
license, have more than six months of driving experience, and have used e-maps
via mobile phones while driving.
Some questionnaires
were given
directly to the respondents
and for
others respondent who lived in
different cities from
researcher, the questionnaires distributed through
google form.
There were 325 respondents who filled out the questionnaire, but 5
questionnaires were not processed further because the respondents had never
used an e-map while driving. There were 72.31% male respondents and 27.69% female respondents
in the research.
2.2. Research Location
The
dissemination of questionnaires was conducted in several cities in Indonesia. The data illustrated driving habits and e-map use in developing countries with
heavy traffic, limited pedestrian facilities, and lack of public transport. Many people
in Indonesia prefer to use passenger cars for transportation rather than public
transport because the availability of mass transportation is still limited and
the level of service is still need to be improved. The public transport trips within the cities have not
yet been integrated from origin to destination.
2.3. Questionnaire
The
questionnaire consists of three parts. The first section contains respondent
data covering age, gender, education level, length of driving experience, city
of residence, and ownership of a driver’s license. The second section contains
some questions about the effects of using e-maps on incidents and accidents
that the driver has experienced while driving. According
to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE, 2004) there are two adverse events in accident investigations, namely incidents
and accidents. Two types of incidents are near-miss accident and undesired
circumstance. A near-miss is a condition that has the potential to cause injury
but which has a short interval of time separating it from being an
accident. An undesired circumstance is a
set of conditions or circumstances that have the potential to cause injury such
as changing lines or slowing down suddenly. An accident is a condition that
results in losses for all parties involved in the accident, including the
driver, the system, and the company in which the accident occurred.
The
third section is questions about driving
habits. The questions in this section developed from the Driver Behavior Questionaire (DBQ).
The DBQ is a self-report questionnaire developed as a measurement of aberrant
driving behaviors (Eliou and Misokefalou, 2014; Sucha Sramkova, and Risser, 2014). The
questions in the questionnaire compiled by grouping drivers’ aberrant behavior
into four types of wrong driving habits: errors, lapses, violations, and
aggressive violations. The main distinction between these four types involves
were the degree of planned action and conscious decision making. Errors
characterized by unplanned actions. Lapses are aberrant behavior regarding
failure to pay attention to traffic and recall failure. Violations are aberrant
behavior which the driver intentionally and consciously done. DBQ uses a
six-point Likert scale (1=never; 2=hardly ever; 3=occasionally; 4=often; 5=
frequently; 6=nearly all the time) (Sucha Sramkova, and Risser, 2014; Martinussen et al., 2013). Likert scale with even numbers rather than Likert scale with odd numbers
of choices, because the Likert scale with odd number of choices give respondents
a choice of neutral answers. Respondents were asked to answer
any misconduct statements according to their tendencies.
2.4. Data Processing
The first stage of data processing was to calculate the percentage of
each adverse event experienced by respondents.
The assessment was carried out on aberrant behavior of respondents and tested the difference
between groups of
respondents. The respondents were grouped by
gender and their
experience in adverse
event. Male and female
have different
daily activities
tendencies, male often
involved more to outdoor
activities compared to female. Reaction time recorded by men was significantly faster than
women (Jain et al., 2015; Lipps, Galecki, and
Ashton-Miller, 2011). High frequency of activity
in outdoor
affects the speed
of a
person's movement so
it is
suspected that this
condition also affects the driving agility and the level of
involvement of both
groups of respondents
in undesirable
conditions while driving. A person's habits is influenced by the motivation to act safely or
unsafely manifested in all of
their activities (Hendratmoko, Guritnaningsih,
and Tjahjono, 2016). The
differences in the
involvement of the
two groups
of drivers
in undesirable
conditions were statistically
tested using two
tails of
t-test. It was
found that
there were
differences in driving
experience in adverse
event based on person’s behavior. Linear
regression was used to
see if
aberrant behavior had an
effect on driver
involvement in adverse
event.
Respondents
independently reported their experiences of driving. Some respondents claimed
to have been involved in adverse event. Regression
analysis was
used to describe the effects of using e-maps while driving on respondents’
involvement in adverse event.
3.1. Effects of Using
E-maps while Driving
Aberrant
behavior was done by some of drivers who used e-maps while
driving. Sometimes the aberrant behavior were caused of the
drivers lack of concentration on the traffic. The effects of using e-maps on
driver performance were assessed on four types of adverse event: the frequency
of driver involvement in a near-miss accident condition, frequency of
driver
involvement in an undesired circumstances such as changing lines or slowing
down suddenly and got horns from
other drivers, frequency of driver involvement in an accident, and
increased traffic violations. Driver involvement in a near miss condition was quite
high, at 20.00% of the respondents have involved in range of frequency
from hardly ever until often. Data the effects of using e-maps on driving experiences
is shown in Table 1.
Table 1 The effects of using e-maps on
driving experiences
An
analysis of driver reports due to e-map use while driving found it had an
effect on the increase in traffic accidents. A total of 3.69% of respondents
reported being involved in an accident while using an e-map.
An accident
is a terrible event that inflicts material harm on the person involved and the
system in which the person works. The use of e-maps while driving has a
considerable effect on increased driver involvement in near-miss and undesired
circumstances and a lower effect on increased accidents.
Although the
use of e-maps while driving had a low effect on traffic accidents, it caused
more traffic disruptions, as 20% of respondents had involved in near-miss and
45.54% of respondents reported involved in undesired circumstances and getting
horns. Some secondary tasks cause drivers to not pay attention to the traffic,
such as not giving signal when turning or changing lanes, driving at
slower speeds, or reacting more slowly. Not focusing while driving makes
drivers involved in undesired circumstances. Traffic violations are
intentional and conscious acts by the drivers, 32.62% of respondents felt they
had made traffic violations at an increased rate while driving and using
e-maps.
Some
respondents said they had been involved in one or two adverse event, even some
of other respondents said they had experienced in all these adverse events. But on the other hand 39.94% of
respondents stated that they had never been involved in any adverse event. When driving using e-map, they never
experience incident, accident,
and they also have not done traffic violations.
3.2. Driver Behavior
Respondents
reported their wrong driving habits through the statements in the
DBQ. There are 8 questions in each group of error and lapse, and there are 6
questions in each group of violations and aggressive violations.
Table 2 gives
information about the average of respondents’ answers about four types of
aberrant behavior while driving.
Table 2 Average driver aberrant behavior while driving (in a six-point Likert scale)
The research identified two groups of drivers which based on
gender and their experience involved in adverse event while driving using e-maps. Two
groups of drivers based on their experience involved in adverse event were the
group who had involved in and who had never
been involved in any of adverse event. The first group said they
had been involved in near-miss condition, undesired
circumstance, accident, or made an increase of traffic violations. And
the second group had never
been involved in any of undesirable conditions.
The error
and lapse group were characterized by accidental aberrant behavior. The error
includes ignoring the speed of other vehicles when overtaking,
not using the rearview mirror when
switching lanes, forget to give signal, and braking too fast. Included in the
lapse group are driving equipped with the wrong gear, making driving mistakes
on certain roads, forget to turn on the turn signal. The violation and
aggressive violation group was deliberate actions. The violations such as
speeding and crossing red lights and aggressive violation involve aggression
towards other road users, for example, sounding the horn to display aggression,
to drive on the roadside to avoid traffic jams, and showing resentment.
Male and female groups have the same level of frequency of
making errors and lapses when they drive. However, males are significantly more
likely to do violations (a=0.00) and aggressive violations (a=0.014) than
females. Both violations and aggressive violations are intentional and
conscious acts done by the drivers to achieve their specific aims while
driving. Some groups of men are impatient with the characteristics of other
drivers, want to to drive at high speeds, driving emotionally, and so on.
Driver
behavior in both groups of experience in incidents and
accidents are compared and found the level of aberrant
behavior were higher on the group who had involved in adverse event.
The lapse
group was the most aberrant behavior that drivers made when they
drove using e-maps. A lapse is a mistake caused by forgetting or not knowing
about something; it is an accidental act by the driver in facing traffic
conditions.
3.3. Influence of Driving Habits on Driving Irregularities when
Using E-maps
Daily driving
habits
influenced the driver behavior while driving using e-maps. Four
groups of aberrant behavior in driving: errors, lapses, violations, and
aggressive violations were partially tested their
difference between the groups of drivers involved and never involved in adverse events. The t-test output on each type of
aberrant behavior as the significance value (a) presented
in Table 3.
Table 3 Difference of drivers’
habits on groups of drivers had involved in adverse event
The aberrant behavior that drivers show in daily driving and their
experience when they drove using e-maps are closely related. Statistical analysis using t-tests was partially conducted between two groups
of drivers based on their experience driving using
e-map. There was a significant difference in the level of
aberrant behavior between groups of drivers who were involved in adverse event and those
who never get involved.
Significant differences were found in the four types of driving habits (a=0.000
for all of aberrant behavior type: error, lapse, violation, and aggressive
violation). The aberrant
behavior of group that had been involved in adverse event when using e-maps was higher than those who does not get
involved in adverse event.
The involvement of adverse event when using e-maps occurred in
groups of drivers who had aberrant behavior, meanwhile
there was no involving in adverse event while driving using e-maps on drivers who had good behavior. Groups with aberrant behavior will do traffic violations easily
when using e-map, meanwhile groups that have good behavior will still follow the traffic
rules. The driver who use an e-maps while driving will not hampere the traffic
because the compliant driver will still run
the traffic rule even when using the e-map, so there will not be a traffic
violations increasement. The increase in
violations only occured by the drivers who have aberrant
behavior in daily driving, so it is necessary to improve the aberrant behavior of drivers
in driving.
Regression analysis was conducted on the driver involvement in adverse
event as dependent variables and the aberrant behavior of errors, false,
violations, and aggressive violations as independent variables. The output of
the regression analysis was multiple R = 0.48, which explains the relationship
between dependent variables involvement in adverse event and independent
variables at the moderate level.
The Planned Behavior Theory describes a person's habits
influenced by the intention to perform an action. This theory is used as the
basis for how a person does aberrant behavior and unsafe actions in driving (Hendratmoko,
Guritnaningsih, and Tjahjono,
2016). Intention represents someone's motivation to act safely or unsafely
that consciously planned to do. Intentions formed by three variables: attitude,
subjective norm, and perceived behavior control. Attitude is defined as the
positive or negative beliefs to display a certain behavior; Subjective Norm is
a person's perception of the social pressure to perform or not perform the
behavior; and Perceived Behavior Control described as the perception of the
behavior of ease or difficulty. The intention to
perform an action
in this
case can
be seen
from the
motivation of drivers
to act
unsafely which indicated by the high
frequency of aberrant behavior
carried out by
them.
Lowering the negative effect of using e-maps on safety in driving could
be done in two approaches. The first approach was by focused on the driver.
Driving safety is influenced by the intention of each individual to act safe or
unsafe. Driving safety could be achieved through individual approaches by
improving the basic human values and risk perception of the individual (Sutalaksana, Zakiyah, and Widyanti, 2019).
Increased driver discipline in driving and driver knowledge of traffic rules
was the first solution. The second approach was carried out to the process of
using e-maps in driving, by creating a Standard Operation Procedure (SOP) for
using of e-maps. The SOP
explains the steps
taken by
drivers in two stages:
the preparation
stage for
using e-map
and the
driving stage.
Using e-maps while driving decrease the drivers’
performance and increase their involvement in adverse event in some drivers. As many as 45.54% respondents said they have involved in undesired circumstance in range of frequency from hardly ever until
often. As many as 32.62% of respondents said they have made increasing violations and 20% of respondents have involved in a near-miss condition. On the other hand, as many as 39.94% of respondents stated they had never been involved in
any adverse event. Aberrant behavior and the drivers’ involvement in adverse event have a medium
correlation. Involvement in adverse event experienced by the wrong habit of drivers. Drivers who have never been
involved in adverse event when using e-maps have a good traffic habit. The use of e-maps by good habit drivers didn’t impede the traffic. In order of using e-map not to interfere with traffic, it is necessary to increase awareness of drivers
who have aberrant behavior in driving.
Thank you for assistancing in collecting data
for assistants of Ergonomics and Work Design Laboratorium in 2020, University
of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa - Indonesia.
Allahyari, T., Saraji, G.N., Adi, J., Hosseini,
M., Iravani, M., Younesian, M., Kass, S.J., 2008. Cognitive Failures, Driving Errors and Driving Accidents. International Journal of
Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, Volume
14(2), pp. 149–158
Cochran, L.M., Dickerson, A.E. 2019. Driving While Navigating: On-Road Driving Performance Using GPS
or Printed Instructions. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, Volume
86(1), pp. 61–69
Dickerson, A.E., 2020. Use of GPS for Older Adults to Decrease Driving Risk: Perceptions From Users and Non-Users. Geriatrics Volume 5(3), p.
60
Eliou, N., Misokefalou, E., 2014. Comparative Analysis of Drivers’
Distraction Assessment Methods. In: 22nd
ICTCT Workshop, Towards and Beyond the, pp. 1–9
Harrison, W., 2009. Reliability of the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire in a Sample of
Novice Drivers. In: Proceedings of the Australasian Road Safety
Research, Policing and Education Conference. Volume 13, pp. 661–675
Hendratmoko, P., Guritnaningsih, Tjahjono, T., 2016. Analysis
Interaction Between Preferences and
Intention for Determining the Behavior of Vehicle
Maintenance Pay as a Basis for
Transportation Road Safety Assessment. International Journal of Technology, Volume (7)1, 105–113
Health and Safety Executive (HSE), 2004. HSG245: Investigating Accidents and Incidents. Health and Safety Executive. Available online
at: https://www.hse.gov.uk /pubns/hsg245.pdf , accessed on June 15, 2022
Hurts, K., 2011. Driver Distraction, Crosstalk, and Spatial Reasoning. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Volume 14(4), pp. 300–312
Jain, A., Bansal, R., Kumar, A., Singh, K.D., 2015. A Comparative
Study of Visual And Auditory Reaction Times on The Basis of Gender znd
Physical Activity Levels of
Medical First Year Students. International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research, Volume 5(2), pp. 124–127
Jensen, B.S., Skov, M.B.,
Thiruravichandran, N., 2010. Studying Driver Attention and Behaviour for Three Configurations of GPS Navigation in Real Traffic Driving. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1271-1280
Kaber, D.B., Liang, Y., Zhang, Y., Rogers,
M.L., Gangakhedkar, S., 2012. Driver Performance Effects of Simultaneous Visual and Cognitive Distraction and
Adaptation Behavior. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Volume 15(5), pp. 491–501
Lady, L., Susihono, W., 2019. Effect of
Using Electronic Map While Driving on
Human Error Probability. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and
Operations Management,
pp. 1464–1473
Lipps, D.B., Galecki,
A.T., Ashton-Miller, J.A., 2011.
On the implications of a sex difference in the reaction times of sprinters at
the Beijing Olympics. PLoS ONE, Volume 6(10), pp. 4–8
Martinussen, L.M., Hakamies-Blomqvist, L.,
Moller, M., Ozkan, T., Lajunen, T., 2013.
Age, Gender, Mileage and the DBQ: The Validity of the Driver Behavior
Questionnaire in Different Driver Groups. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Volume 52, pp. 228–236
Mcnabb, J., Gray, R., 2016. Staying Connected on the Road?: A Comparison of Different Types
of Smart Phone Use in a Driving Simulator. PLoS one, Volume 11(2), pp. 1–13
Misokefalou, E., Papadimitriou, F., Kopelias,
P., Eliou, N., 2016. Evaluating Driver Distraction Factors in
Urban Motorways. A Naturalistic Study Conducted in Attica Tollway, Greece. Transportation Research
Procedia,
Volume 15, pp. 771–782
Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., King, M., Haque, M.M., Washington, S., 2017. Risk Factors of Mobile Phone Use While Driving in Queensland?:
Prevalence, Attitudes, Crash Risk Perception, and Task-Management Strategies. PLoS One, Volume
12(9), pp. 1–17
Owens, J.M., McLaughlin, S.B., Sudweeks, J., 2011. Driver Performance While Text Messaging
Using Handheld and
In-Vehicle Systems. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Volume
43(3), pp. 939–947
Prat, F., Gras, M. E., Planes, M., Font-Mayolas,
S., Sullman, M.J.M., 2017.
Driving Distractions: An Insight Gained From Roadside Interviews On Their
Prevalence And Factors Associated With Driver Distraction. Transportation Research
Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Volume
45, pp. 194–207
Rodrick, D., Bhise, V., Jothi, V., 2013. Effects of Driver and Secondary Task
Characteristics on Lane Change Test Performance. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industries, Volume 23(6), pp. 560–572
Sucha, M., Sramkova, L., Risser, R., 2014. The Manchester Driver Behaviour
Questionnaire: Self-Reports of
Aberrant Behaviour Among Czech Drivers. European Transport Research Review, Volume 6(4), pp. 493–502
Sutalaksana, I.Z., Zakiyah,
S.Z.Z., Widyanti, A., 2019.
Linking Basic Human Values, Risk Perception, Risk Behavior and Accident Rates: The Road To Occupational
Safety. International
Journal of Technology, Volume 10(5), pp. 918–929
Van-Dam,
J., Kass, S.J., VanWormer, L., 2020. The Effects Of Passive Mobile Phone
Interaction On Situation Awareness and
Driving Performance. Journal of Transportation Safety and Security, Volume 12(8), pp. 1007–1024
Yared, T.,
Patterson, P., 2020. The Impact of Navigation System Display Size and Environmental Illumination on
Young Driver Mental Workload. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Volume 74, pp. 330–344
Young, K.L., Salmon, P.M., 2012. Examining The Relationship Between Driver
Distraction and Driving Errors: a Discussion of Theory,
Studies and Methods. Safety Science, Volume
50(2), pp. 165–174
Zuraida, R., Iridiastadi,
H., Sutalaksana, I.Z., 2017.
Indonesian Drivers Characteristics Assiciated With Road Accidents. International Journal of
Technology, Volume 8(2), pp. 311–319
Zuraida, R., Wijayanto,
T., Iridiastadi, H., 2022.
Fatigue during Prolonged Simulated Driving: An Electroencephalogram Study. International Journal of
Technology, Volume 13(2), pp. 286–296