The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis
Driving warning systems are of great help in notifying emergencies. Based on the results of former studies as well as the multisensory integration effect (MIE), the current meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of utilizing unimodal (i.e., auditory, visual, and tactile) and multimodal (i.e.,...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Applied Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/2/527 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832589299776749568 |
|---|---|
| author | Ao Zhu Ko-Hsuan Ma Annebella Tsz Ho Choi Duoduo Hu Chuan-Peng Hu Peng Peng Jibo He |
| author_facet | Ao Zhu Ko-Hsuan Ma Annebella Tsz Ho Choi Duoduo Hu Chuan-Peng Hu Peng Peng Jibo He |
| author_sort | Ao Zhu |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Driving warning systems are of great help in notifying emergencies. Based on the results of former studies as well as the multisensory integration effect (MIE), the current meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of utilizing unimodal (i.e., auditory, visual, and tactile) and multimodal (i.e., bimodal and trimodal) driving warning systems in drivers’ response time. Sixty eligible articles representing 308 individual studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed: First, both auditory warnings (pooled Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.61, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and tactile warnings (pooled Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.32, <i>p</i> < 0.01) were found to reduce the response time significantly compared to no warning, but visual warnings did not produce significant benefit; Second, tactile warnings outperformed the visual warnings (pooled Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.11 to 1.37, <i>p</i> < 0.05); Third, auditory-tactile bimodal warnings surpassed unimodal warnings (<i>p</i> < 0.05); Fourth, drivers’ response time under trimodal warning conditions were shorter than that under bimodal warning conditions but not in a significant level. Overall, the results support multisensory redundant signal effect hypothesis in multimodal conditions. Current study provides a quantitative understanding of the effectiveness of driving warnings and could contribute to the design of related technologies. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-f37d298586d74a52a110d6fceb64542f |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2076-3417 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Applied Sciences |
| spelling | doaj-art-f37d298586d74a52a110d6fceb64542f2025-01-24T13:19:42ZengMDPI AGApplied Sciences2076-34172025-01-0115252710.3390/app15020527The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-AnalysisAo Zhu0Ko-Hsuan Ma1Annebella Tsz Ho Choi2Duoduo Hu3Chuan-Peng Hu4Peng Peng5Jibo He6Department of Psychology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, ChinaDepartment of Psychology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, ChinaDepartment of Psychology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, ChinaSchool of Psychology, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070, ChinaSchool of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210024, ChinaDepartment of Special Education, College of Education, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USASchool of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210024, ChinaDriving warning systems are of great help in notifying emergencies. Based on the results of former studies as well as the multisensory integration effect (MIE), the current meta-analysis investigated the effectiveness of utilizing unimodal (i.e., auditory, visual, and tactile) and multimodal (i.e., bimodal and trimodal) driving warning systems in drivers’ response time. Sixty eligible articles representing 308 individual studies were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed: First, both auditory warnings (pooled Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.34 to 1.61, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and tactile warnings (pooled Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.32, <i>p</i> < 0.01) were found to reduce the response time significantly compared to no warning, but visual warnings did not produce significant benefit; Second, tactile warnings outperformed the visual warnings (pooled Hedges’ <i>g</i> = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.11 to 1.37, <i>p</i> < 0.05); Third, auditory-tactile bimodal warnings surpassed unimodal warnings (<i>p</i> < 0.05); Fourth, drivers’ response time under trimodal warning conditions were shorter than that under bimodal warning conditions but not in a significant level. Overall, the results support multisensory redundant signal effect hypothesis in multimodal conditions. Current study provides a quantitative understanding of the effectiveness of driving warnings and could contribute to the design of related technologies.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/2/527accident prevention systemsmeta-analysisresponse timesensory modalitymultisensory integration effect |
| spellingShingle | Ao Zhu Ko-Hsuan Ma Annebella Tsz Ho Choi Duoduo Hu Chuan-Peng Hu Peng Peng Jibo He The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis Applied Sciences accident prevention systems meta-analysis response time sensory modality multisensory integration effect |
| title | The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis |
| title_full | The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis |
| title_fullStr | The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis |
| title_short | The Effectiveness of Unimodal and Multimodal Warnings on Drivers’ Response Time: A Meta-Analysis |
| title_sort | effectiveness of unimodal and multimodal warnings on drivers response time a meta analysis |
| topic | accident prevention systems meta-analysis response time sensory modality multisensory integration effect |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/2/527 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aozhu theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT kohsuanma theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT annebellatszhochoi theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT duoduohu theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT chuanpenghu theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT pengpeng theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT jibohe theeffectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT aozhu effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT kohsuanma effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT annebellatszhochoi effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT duoduohu effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT chuanpenghu effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT pengpeng effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis AT jibohe effectivenessofunimodalandmultimodalwarningsondriversresponsetimeametaanalysis |