Cited by 92Sleep and Work-Related FatigueHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyMind wandering and attention

Real-time driver drowsiness feedback improves driver alertness and self-reported driving performance

Open access
Aidman, Eugene, Chadunow, Carolyn, Johnson, Kayla, Reece, John·2015·Accident Analysis & Prevention

Abstract

Driver drowsiness has been implicated as a major causal factor in road accidents. Tools that allow remote monitoring and management of driver fatigue are used in the mining and road transport industries. Increasing drivers' own awareness of their drowsiness levels using such tools may also reduce risk of accidents. The study examined the effects of real-time blink-velocity-derived drowsiness feedback on driver performance and levels of alertness in a military setting. A sample of 15 Army Reserve personnel (1 female) aged 21-59 (M=41.3, SD=11.1) volunteered to being monitored by an infra-red oculography-based Optalert Alertness Monitoring System (OAMS) while they performed their regular driving tasks, including on-duty tasks and commuting to and from duty, for a continuous period of 4-8 weeks. For approximately half that period, blink-velocity-derived Johns Drowsiness Scale (JDS) scores were fed back to the driver in a counterbalanced repeated-measures design, resulting in a total of 419 driving periods under "feedback" and 385 periods under "no-feedback" condition. Overall, the provision of real-time feedback resulted in reduced drowsiness (lower JDS scores) and improved alertness and driving performance ratings. The effect was small and varied across the 24-h circadian cycle but it remained robust after controlling for time of day and driving task duration. Both the number of JDS peaks counted for each trip and their duration declined in the presence of drowsiness feedback, indicating a dynamic pattern that is consistent with a genuine, entropy-reducing feedback mechanism (as distinct from random re-alerting) behind the observed effect. Its mechanisms and practical utility have yet to be fully explored. Direct examination of the alternative, random re-alerting explanation of this feedback effect is an important step for future research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aap.2015.03.041

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The finding that ATCO alertness positively correlates with occurrences is not consistent with previous research showing high alertness related to better performance.

    “The finding is not consistent with previous research that showed that high alertness was related to better performance (Aidman, Chadunow, Johnson, & Reece, 2015; Galy & Mélan, 2015; Sallinen et al., 2017).”

    From The Analysis of Occurrences Associated with Air Traffic Volume and Air Traffic Controllers’ Alertness for Fatigue Risk Management (2021) · cites this paper as Aidman, Chadunow, Johnson, & Reece, 2015

    The Results (§3.2) report that drivers receiving feedback rated themselves as more alert and rated their safe-distance keeping more highly. This supports a relationship between alertness and one self-reported aspect of driving performance, but the paper does not establish better performance generally: its other performance appraisals were not significantly improved, and the cited result is not about ATCOs. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

11 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Aidman, E., Chadunow, C., Johnson, K., 2012. Effects of real-time drowsiness feedback on driver fatigue and performance in Army Reserve personnel. Paper presented at Defence Human Sciences Symposium, November 2012; Adelaide.
  2. Aidman, E., Chadunow, C., Johnson, K., Coombs, G., Fidock, J., 2012b. Driver Fatigue in an Army Reserve Regiment: A Multi-Method Field Study with Experimental Manipulation. DSTO-TR-2759. Defence Science & Technology Organisation, Edinburgh, South Australia, pp. 1-63.
  3. CaterpillarGlobalMining, 2008. Operator Fatigue Detection Technology Review. Caterpillar, Peoria, IL.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aidman, E., Chadunow, C., Johnson, K., & Reece, J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Defence Science and Technology Group (AU)
  • ACAP University College (AU)
Corresponding author
Aidman, Eugene
Venue
Accident Analysis & Prevention
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-08
Volume
81
Pages
8-13
ISSN
0001-4575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047332672
Cited by
92
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7
FWCI
11.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Accident Analysis & Prevention (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
Keywords
driver drowsiness, real-time feedback, driver alertness, eye movement recording, military vehicle drivers, driving performance, circadian rhythm, fatigue monitoring, road safety
MeSH terms
Accidents, Traffic, Adult, Attention, Automobile Driving, Biofeedback, Psychology, Blinking, Electrooculography, Fatigue, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Sleep Stages, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review