Effects of the Amount of Information from Navigation Voice Guidance on Driving Performance
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsReviewer's Comments: (Minor Revisions)
This paper primarily investigates the impact of navigation and guidance information volume on driving behavior effectiveness. The writing style and expression in the paper are appropriate, and the experimental work is sufficient. However, there are some issues that need to be addressed:
(1)The theoretical support in the paper is somewhat outdated and does not reflect the current state of research.
(2)The paper does not mention the duration of playback for the four types of navigation information in the experiments. Please provide further details and discuss whether the duration of navigation information affects the experimental results.
(3)The rationale for choosing the grey near-optimal decision-making method in section 2.8.2 is not adequately explained. Please provide additional justification.
(4)In section 3.5, "Comprehensive evaluations of prompt messages" the conclusion that "Obviously, with the enhancement of the level of detail of the prompt messages, the utility values of the four prompt messages also increased." is based solely on the setting of the four prompt messages of navigation information. Would setting fivefold or sixfold information lead to better results? This conclusion is not universal. Additionally, it needs to be explained why the comprehensive utility value can reflect the the utility values of prompt messages. In actual situations, more prompt messages is not necessarily better, and according to your approach, there should be a turning point in the comprehensive utility value after Quadruple Message. Please provide supplementary explanations and justifications.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish expression is more standardized.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
We thank you for the time you have spent reviewing and improving our manuscript entitled “Effects of the amount of information from navigation voice guidance on driving performance”. We have implemented your comments and suggestions, and provide a point-by-point response explaining how we have addressed each comment. Please review our revised manuscript at your convenience. We look forward to the outcome of your assessment.
Sincerely,
Yang Bian Ph.D., Corresponding Author, Associate Professor
Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering
College of Metropolitan Transportation, Beijing University of Technology
Beijing 100124, P. R. China, Tel: +86-10-6739-0918; Email: bianyang@bjut.edu.cn
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis study investigates the effects of navigation voice guidance on driving performance. Although the topic is interesting, there are several issues which are not fully addressed.
1. What are the criteria for classifying evaluation indicators? Why propose such indicators? Using directly measured variables would yield the same results.
2. In my view, the varying effects of different messages largely stem from differences in the duration of message reception. Moreover, such differences are not very distinct.
3.What is the basis for the experimental environment design of free flow?
4. The discussion on the practical implications of the article is too simplistic.
Comments on the Quality of English Language
Average
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
We thank you for the time you have spent reviewing and improving our manuscript entitled “Effects of the amount of information from navigation voice guidance on driving performance”. We have implemented your comments and suggestions, and provide a point-by-point response explaining how we have addressed each comment. Please see the attachment for details. Please review our revised manuscript at your convenience. We look forward to the outcome of your assessment.
Sincerely,
Yang Bian Ph.D., Corresponding Author, Associate Professor
Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering
College of Metropolitan Transportation, Beijing University of Technology
Beijing 100124, P. R. China, Tel: +86-10-6739-0918; Email: bianyang@bjut.edu.cn
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper focuses on navigation voice guidance systems and explore their impact on driving performance. The experiment is well described and the results are explained in a detailed manner. In general, I rate this work as very positive and relevant for the readers focusing on design and development of automotive user interfaces. However, I still have some questions and suggestions for this paper.
1. In the abstract, the four types of prompt messages are represented by PMT_A, PMT_B, PMT_C, and PMT_D, while in the main text, they are represented by Single Message, Double Message, Triple Message, and Quadruple Message. Which representation is correct? Please maintain consistency between the main text and abstract representation.
2. The complex interplay between visual and auditory information and its effects on driver attention has been well researched. I recommend broadening the literature review in the introduction to include papers on driver distraction and attention that could help to provide context for the presented study.
3. The authors introduced that the traffic flow was set free flow. Please provide some explanations of “free flow”. Does that mean there were no other vehicles at all or one could define the flow in number of vehicles per mile?
4. The authors analyzed differences in speed guided by four types of prompt messages in the whole zone and each subzone, whether these analyses consider the initial velocity, which is a key potential factor affecting the data analysis results.
5. I think the author’s statement on the idea of data analysis is not clear enough. Utility evaluation is also a part of data analysis. I suggest that 2.7 and 2.8 be merged into one section. In addition, the author needs to explain the reasons for re-selecting some evaluation indicators (e.g., coefficient of subzone speed variation) rather than based on the original dependent variable (e.g., acceleration at each subzone).
6. When presenting the results of data analysis, the author uses abbreviations for each subzone (S1, S2…), and I suggest using the full name to improve the readability of the article.
7. Are the messages Single, Double, Triple or Quadruple always true. Sometimes messages from navigation systems can be wrong or the driver acts wrongly following the systems instructions, whether the authors consider this situation when conducting the experiment.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe author demonstrates a commendable proficiency in English language writing. The manuscript exhibits a high level of clarity, coherence, and precision in expression, contributing significantly to its readability and comprehension. The use of appropriate vocabulary, syntax, and grammar further enhances the overall quality of the manuscript.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
We thank you for the time you have spent reviewing and improving our manuscript entitled “Effects of the amount of information from navigation voice guidance on driving performance”. We have implemented your comments and suggestions, and provide a point-by-point response explaining how we have addressed each comment. Please see the attachment for details. Please review our revised manuscript at your convenience. We look forward to the outcome of your assessment.
Sincerely,
Yang Bian Ph.D., Corresponding Author, Associate Professor
Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering
College of Metropolitan Transportation, Beijing University of Technology
Beijing 100124, P. R. China, Tel: +86-10-6739-0918; Email: bianyang@bjut.edu.cn
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this work, the authors have assessed the impact of voice-based navigation information volume on driving performance. To do so, they have effectively introduced the motivation behind the study, identified existing gaps in the literature, outlined the novelty of their research, detailed the objectives, and explained the methods used. Subsequently, the results are presented clearly, with a strong emphasis on the implications of these findings. However, the following minor revisions can further bolster their work,
1. The Abstract should include the motivation presented in the Introduction section. It would benefit from a brief introduction on the importance of navigation systems and their cognitive impacts.
2. The keyword list needs updating to include terms such as 'navigation systems' and 'driving behavior,' which are central to the study.
3. The Introduction section's first few lines are vague and require rewriting for clarity and precision.
4. The Methods section begins abruptly. It should provide an overview of its structure and what readers can expect.
5. Based on the results, the authors infer that increasing information in voice-based navigation has a greater utility to the driver than less information. However, I believe it is possible that in certain complex driving scenarios, additional information can lead to information overload, and therefore render a marginal gain or even reduction in utility. The authors must address this possibility in the Discussion section.
6. The conclusions should outline the study's limitations and propose future research directions in this area.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
We thank you for the time you have spent reviewing and improving our manuscript entitled “Effects of the amount of information from navigation voice guidance on driving performance”. We have implemented your comments and suggestions, and provide a point-by-point response explaining how we have addressed each comment. Please see the attachment. Please review our revised manuscript at your convenience. We look forward to the outcome of your assessment.
Sincerely,
Yang Bian Ph.D., Corresponding Author, Associate Professor
Beijing Key Laboratory of Traffic Engineering
College of Metropolitan Transportation, Beijing University of Technology
Beijing 100124, P. R. China, Tel: +86-10-6739-0918; Email: bianyang@bjut.edu.cn
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
