Driver distraction: Lessons from the world of Formula 1

Formula 1 - as the pinnacle of Motorsport - showcases driving in arguably its most intensive form. You don't get a driving experience that is faster, more precise, more demanding. A lap in an F1 car makes the stressful school run look like a 50p ride in a Postman Pat van outside the local post office.

Just as F1 is the driving force behind many developments that end up in mainstream cars, I believe this concentrated form of driving can teach us a lot about driver distraction.  In particular, Controls and Feedback.

Given that nearly every new car launched these days comes fitted with a large touchscreen housing everything from car setup controls to climate control to audio to satellite navigation...why don't we see touchscreens in F1 cars?

It sounds like an absurd question, but it reveals a lot.

The answer is simple. Any distraction to an F1 driver will hinder performance. And the most direct means to alter a setting on a car that is doing 200mph, is through a button, switch or dial that offers precision, clarity and feedback (and therefore minimal distraction) when operated.






Any engineer that asks an F1 driver to navigate menus or tap or slide a finger across a smooth surface to effect a precise change to their vehicle at speed, would be laughed at and fired.

Shift the scenario from the racetrack to public roads and whilst speeds are lowered significantly, pedestrians and other road users are added into the mix.  Why should touch screens be any more suitable to this more conventional scenario?

In Sunday's Brazilian Grand Prix, Jenson button told his race engineer over the radio, ""Dave will you stop talking to me in braking zones. Stop talking to me in braking zones."  He was quite upset. Why? Because speech interaction is distracting. The levels of concentration required to feed an F1 car around a race track expose the impact distractions can have on driving performance.

And if Jenson gets distracted, you can bet almost every driver on our roads gets distracted too. Especially if there's a glossy, internet-connected iPad blinking away and tempting you from the centre console.

So do I see a place for touch screens and voice controls in cars? Yes I do. But not in the way they are currently being developed. Motorsport pushes the boundaries of automotive development. We would do well to learn some lessons from that world about what helps and what hinders a driver's performance.

Putting the touch into touchscreens (Part 2)

As discussed in  Part 1 (Putting the touch into touchscreens), touchscreens need to offer more feedback than a smooth, glassy touch in order t obe a safe addition to the in-car experience.  And a few clever people have developed solutions that start to do just that:

A rotary dial embedded in a touchscreen

A solution touted by QNX, is to plonk a multi-function rotary dial into the middle of a screen.  As the user navigates through the interfaces, the dial performs different functions and the content around the dial changes.  So, frequently used functions like changing volume or temperature can be achieved without having to take eyes off the road - in a manner that mimics more conventional centre consoles.

And as the surrounding touch screen can be operated independently for more compelx tasks such as changing destination, the user gets the best of both worlds.  Embedding the dial in the screen bridges the gap between interface and display, unlike iDrive-type solutions which positions the two physically apart, placing a more significant cognitive load on the user.

A touchscreen with dynamic switchgear and floating dial

This is a very clever solution by a very clever industrial and interaction designer Miha Feuš.  Using magic (probably) he takes the QNX example above a step further by enabling the rotary dial to move to a meaningful place on the touchscreen in response to an action.  Furthermore, the function of the dial adjusts to be relevant to its new context.  (View a full demo)

The interface is further enhanced with switchgear at the base of the screen.  These switches can behave in a number of ways, once again based on the interface selected.  It feels a little too overelaborate for practical use, but it functions as a fantastic proof of concept.

Have you seen any other examples of touchscreens being enhanced by haptic feedback?

Putting the touch into touchscreens (Part 1)

It is the big trend in in-car interfaces: replacing buttons and dials with functions in a touch screen.  But can the smooth, clean surface of a touchscreenoffer anything like the reassuring feedback of a button or a dial?

The Volvo Coupe Concept interior

Tesla started it all with the massive 17" screen in the Model S and it seems every manufacturer wants to follow in their footsteps. 
Volvo recently displayed their Coupe Concept with a beautiful interior dominated by a large central interactive display.  Even the new Peugeot 308 does away with many of the buttons you'd expect to find in a centre console, replacing them with functions housed within a touchscreen.

Whilst the interiors are looking minimalist and sleek as a result, hiding functions behind a screen means drivers now need to look and think about functions that were largely instinctive when there was a button or a dial to fumble for and tweak.  And if drivers are looking at and thinking about a screen, they're not looking at and thinking about the road in front of them.

So how do we make touchscreens safe to use whilst driving?  The answer lies in their name - the sense of touch - or haptic feedback to be more scientific.  Essentially, the answer is to segment functions within the car: functions that are accessed frequently and infrequently.

The interior of the Peugeot 308

Frequently actioned functions that should not require cognitive effort (like changing track or turnign up the heater) should be supported with an input device that offers tactile feedback.

The most obvious example of this is in a task like changing gear in a manual car.  Gear changes happen frequently in a journey, so the cognitive load around changing a gear should be kept as light as possible.  The thought of replacing a gear lever or flappy paddles with a touch screen that the driver needs to tap every time they wish to change up or down is absurd.

Infrequently actioned functions can generally afford a slightly higher cognitive load.  Opening and closing a roof, or even a window for that matter happens seldom on any journey and often when the vehicle is stationary, so using a touch screen to initiate these functions sound almost surprisingly sensible.

Of course this split isn't that simple - just becasue a function isn't needed frequently, doesn't mean it shouldn't be immediately and instinctively accessible.  A hooter is a good example of this, and there are many more similar functions to consider when identifying the most appropriate interface to action them.

So can we make a flat, glossy touchscreen work for functions that just need haptic feedback?  Continued in Part 2...