Investigation into Effects of System Design on Metro Drivers’ Safety-Related Performance: An Eye-Tracking Study

Abstract

This paper explores performance shaping factors associated with holistic design aspects of metro systems affecting driver’s behaviour based on a case study using eye-tracking techniques. Train driving is a highly visual task where the physical environment provides key visual instructions. Eye–mind theories suggest that eye movements closely follow cognitive processes when it comes to interaction with the visual world. The data for this study have been collected in a representative urban rail system serving a metropolitan area with circa 1.2 million inhabitants during 20 in-service trials. Participating drivers were asked to wear an eye-tracker while driving a train as they would normally do. The study focuses on four areas of interest at four consecutive stations. The stations have similar characteristics but differ in terms of certain design elements which are mirrors, platforms, stopping position markers and positions of a running signal. Previous studies have demonstrated the importance of these elements to metro drivers. The paper assesses the usability of the system design elements through analysis of gaze fixations. Results suggest the importance of the positions of a mirror and a signal in relation to the cab, as well as the distance between a stopping point and a signal. Such factors as openness of stations, passenger loadings and informativeness of certain elements also demonstrated influence on drivers’ performance. It was also found that drivers sometimes do not check a signal before departing a station, which is a significant concern. The paper discusses factors potentially propagating such behaviour.

Keywords

Eye-tracking / System design / Human factors / Urban rail systems / Safety

References

[1] Castro C. Human factors of visual and cognitive performance in driving, 2009, Boca Raton: CRC Press

[2] Yarbus AL. Eye movements and vision, 1967, New York: Plenum Press

[3] Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) T152—Train driver visual strategies, 2005, London: RSSB

[4] Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) Development of SPAD risk management tools—summary report, 2006, London: RSSB

[5] Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) Understanding multi-SPAD signals and the effects of line identifiers on driver behaviour: an investigation into multi-SPAD signal D301 (T632), 2007, London: RSSB

[6] Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) SPAD and TPWS activity report. Quarter 2—2013/14, 2013, London: RSSB

[7] Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) Understanding human factors: a guide of the railway industry, 2008, London: RSSB

[8] Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) Precursor indicator model (PIM) for train accident risk, 2011, London: RSSB

[9] Howard DF. Tyne and Wear metro—a modern rapid transit system. Inst Mech Eng (Lond) Proc, 1976, 190(18): 121-136

[10] Prickett BR. Electrification of the Tyne and Wear metro. IEE Proc B Electric Power Appl, 1981, 128(2): 81-91

[11] Rjabovs A, Palacin R. Attitudes of metro drivers towards design of immediate physical environment and system layout. Urban Rail Transit, 2015, 1(2): 104-111

[12] Rjabovs A, Palacin R. The influence of system design-related factors on the safety performance of metro drivers. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part F J Rail Rapid Transit, 2017, 231(3): 317-328

[13] Naweed A, Balakrishnan G. Understanding the visual skills and strategies of train drivers in the urban rail environment. Work, 2014, 47(3): 339-352.

[14] Rjabovs A. Performance shaping factors affecting driver safety-related behaviour in urban rail systems: Tyne & Wear Metro case, 2017, Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Newcastle University

[15] Holmqvist K, Nyström M, Andersson R, Dewhurst R, Jarodzka H, Van de Weijer J. Eye tracking: a comprehensive guide to methods and measures, 2011, Oxford: OUP

[16] Jacob RJ, Karn KS. Radach R, Hyona J, Deubel H. Eye tracking in human–computer interaction and usability research: ready to deliver the promises. The mind’s eye, 2003, Amsterdam: Elsevier 573-605

[17] Kapitaniak B, Walczak M, Kosobudzki M, Jozwiak Z, Bortkiewicz A. Application of eye-tracking in the testing of drivers: a review of research. Int J Occup Med Environ Health, 2015, 28(6): 914-954

[18] Henderson JM, Weeks PA Jr Hollingworth A. The effects of semantic consistency on eye movements during complex scene viewing. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 1999, 25(1): 210

[19] Poole A, Ball LJ. Ghaoui C. Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. Encyclopedia of human computer interaction, 2006, Hershey: IGI Global 211-219

[20] Ehmke C, Wilson S (2007) Identifying web usability problems from eye-tracking data. In: Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group annual conference on people and computers: HCI… but not as we know it—volume 1. British Computer Society, London, pp 119–128

[21] Dzeng R-J, Lin C-T, Fang Y-C. Using eye-tracker to compare search patterns between experienced and novice workers for site hazard identification. Saf Sci, 2016, 82: 56-67

[22] Goldberg JH, Kotval XP. Computer interface evaluation using eye movements: methods and constructs. Int J Ind Ergon, 1999, 24(6): 631-645

[23] Harris Randall L., Christhilf David M.. What Do Pilots See in Displays?. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 1980, 24(1): 22-26

[24] Shinar D, McDowell ED, Rockwell TH. Eye movements in curve negotiation. Hum Factors, 1977, 19(1): 63-71

[25] Miura T (1990) Active function of eye movement and useful field of view in a realistic setting. In: Groner R, d'Ydewalle G, Parham R (eds)Studies in visual information processing, vol 1. From eye to mind: Information acquisition in perception, search, and reading. North-Holland, Oxford, pp 119–127

[26] Unema P, Rotting M. Brogan D. Differences in eye movements and mental workload between experienced and inexperienced motor-vehicle drivers. Visual search, 1990, London: Taylor & Francis 193-202.

[27] Van Orden KF, Limbert W, Makeig S, Jung T-P. Eye activity correlates of workload during a visuospatial memory task. Hum Factors, 2001, 43(1): 111-121

[28] Beck AT, Emery G, Greenberg RL. Anxiety disorders and phobias: a cognitive perspective, 2005, New York: Basic Books

[29] Crundall DE, Underwood G, Chapman PR. Underwood G. How much do novice drivers see? The effects of demand on visual search strategies in novice and experienced drivers. Eye guidance in reading and scene perception, 1998, Amsterdam: Elsevier 395-417

[30] Schulz CM Eye tracking for assessment of workload: a pilot study in an anaesthesia simulator environment. Br J Anaesth, 2010, 106(1): 44-50

[31] Coeckelbergh TR, Cornelissen FW, Brouwer WH, Kooijman AC. The effect of visual field defects on eye movements and practical fitness to drive. Vis Res, 2002, 42(5): 669-677

[32] Ho G, Scialfa CT, Caird JK, Graw T. Visual search for traffic signs: the effects of clutter, luminance, and aging. Hum Factors, 2001, 43(2): 194-207

[33] Aitchinson J, Davies K (2009) Drivers’ response to junction signalling: a simulator study (T669 Report). London

[34] Moore DS, McCabe GP, Craig BA. Introduction to the practice of statistics, 2009 6 New York: W.H. Freeman

[35] Tripathi K, Borrion H. Safe, secure or punctual? A simulator study of train driver response to reports of explosives on a metro train. Security Journal, 2016, 29(1): 87-105

[36] GI/RT7033 Lineside Operational Safety Signs, Railway Group Standards, London, 2009

[37] Morrel-Samuels P. Getting the truth into workplace surveys. Harv Bus Rev, 2002, 80(2): 111-118.

[38] Davies DR, Matthews G, Stammers RB, Westerman SJ. Human performance: cognition, stress and individual differences, 2013, London: Psychology Press

[39] Prottengeier J The effect of a standardised source of divided attention in airway management: a randomised, crossover, interventional manikin study. Eur J Anaesthesiol (EJA), 2016, 33(3): 195-203

[40] Basacik D, Gibson H (2015) Where is the platform? Wrong side door release at train stations. Presented at the Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors 2015

[41] Cynk S et al (2015) Qualitative study of platform-train interface incidents. In: Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) (ed) PTI strategy technical report. London

[42] Fitzpatrick K, Chrysler S, Park ES, Nelson A, Robertson J, Iragavarapu V. Driver workload at higher speeds, 2010, College Station: Texas Transportation Institute

[43] Multer J, Safar H, Roth E (2015) Understanding how signals passed at danger occur through the lens of sociotechnical systems. In: 5th International rail human factors meeting (London, UK)

[44] Deubel H. The time course of presaccadic attention shifts. Psychol Res, 2008, 72(6): 630

[45] Gibson H (2016) Industry human factors SPAD review-project summary report. Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB). https://www.sparkrail.org/Lists/Records/DispForm.aspx. Accessed 1 June 2019

[46] Li G, Hamilton I. Railway signal sighting: scientific evidence for sighting principles, 2003, London: Rail Safety and Standards Board