Detecting driver stress and hazard anticipation using real‐time cardiac measurement: A simulator study

FIGURE 1. Adaptation and simplification of the model of anticipation in driving (Stahl et al., 2014)

FIGURE 2. Overview of the drivers’ route in Trip 1 (control conditions) and Trip 2 (experimental conditions), as well as the mean changes in heart rate and speed for unpredictable (U), predictable (P), and predictable and familiar (PF) hazardous events, analyzed over two time windows (postcue and postevent)

FIGURE 3. Overview of the equipment: homemade driving simulator, Biopac MP160 data acquisition system, Logitech G29 steering wheel and pedals

FIGURE 4. (a) Changes in heart rate and speed relative to the last half‐second prior to cue‐onset and event‐onset when drivers experienced the control condition (gray) and the unpredictable (U) experimental condition (blue). Cues and events were either ON (visible) or OFF (invisible). Shaded areas denote standard errors of the mean. An overall significant difference between conditions is represented by blue asterisks as follows: *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. Time points with significant differences between the experimental and control conditions are displayed at the top of each figure as a blue horizontal line. The pictures depict cue OFF (left‐side) and event ON (right‐side). (b) Changes in heart rate and speed, averaged over the post‐event time window, for the control and experimental conditions, in the high‐ and low‐perceived stress groups

FIGURE 5. (a) Changes in heart rate and speed relative to the last half‐second prior to cue‐onset and event‐onset when drivers experienced the control condition (gray) and the predictable (P) experimental condition (blue). Cues and events were either ON (visible) or OFF (invisible). Shaded areas denote standard errors of the mean. An overall significant difference between conditions is represented by blue asterisks as follows: *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. Time points with significant differences between the experimental and control conditions are displayed at the top of each figure as a blue horizontal line. The pictures depict cue ON (left‐side) and event ON (right‐side). (b) Changes in heart rate and speed, averaged over the post‐event time window, for the control and experimental conditions, in the high‐ and low‐perceived stress groups

FIGURE 6. Changes in heart rate and speed relative to the last half‐second prior to cue‐onset and event‐onset when drivers experienced the control condition (gray) and the predictable and familiar (PF) experimental condition (blue). Cues and events were systematically ON (visible). Shaded areas denote standard errors of the mean. Time points with significant differences relative to baseline (t = −0.5 s) are displayed at the top of each figure as a black horizontal line. The pictures depict cue ON (left‐side) and event ON (right‐side)