Skip to main content

It’s time to stop and think about in-car HMIs

The sophistication of automotive human machine interfaces (HMIs) is easy to underestimate.
August 30, 2019 Read time: 2 mins

The sophistication of automotive human machine interfaces (HMIs) is easy to underestimate.

But – and it’s a big but - research suggests that text messaging and using an entertainment system are more distracting than a hands-free mobile phone call. But we also know from research that making a hands-free call is actually more distracting than driving under the influence of alcohol. Using unfamiliar car controls and car displays, or add-on media such as music devices can in turn be more distracting than using a hands-free device.

So this is an area where we should begin to exercise caution. The variety of tasks that are now routinely conducted via HMIs has increased significantly – and this means that so has the likely growth in distraction effects. Safety research group 491 TRL rightly suggests that we need to know more: the work that we have on mobile phone use in cars, for example, may not be relevant to modern HMIs. Also, maybe there is a need to limit the features that can be added to HMIs.

We must at least think it possible that, given the pace of technological change, we can’t be sure what effect this is having on road safety. The law, as it stands, does not outlaw HMI development. But as Dr Shaun Helman, chief scientist of TRL, points out: “A legal HMI in your car has plenty of scope to be badly designed.”

This is not to criticise any car manufacturer – or indeed, any driver. But there is enough danger on the road without adding to it. Distraction – any distraction – makes driving more risky. We need to understand the effects that these services have on the way we drive. Just because we can in effect turn our car dashboards into smartphones, it doesn’t mean we should.

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Zendrive: lunchtime driving in San Francisco riskier than rush hour
    January 23, 2018
    Lunch-hour driving across the San Francisco Bay Area between 11.00am and 2.00pm is riskier than morning and evening rush hour commutes with more than 50% of routes presenting a greater risk to drivers during lunch hour. These latest findings come from Zendrive’s Bay Area Commute Safety Snapshot which also revealed that the San Mateo Bridge is overall more dangerous during morning commutes between 6.00am to 11.00am.
  • A change of tack
    December 18, 2017
    For some time, it has been evident that the quickening pace of technological advancement has been outpacing the ability of legislators to introduce new laws and amend existing legislation. One example was, apparently, UK legislation specifying that vehicles are fitted with filament lights which was drafted to outlaw acetylene lamps but a century later delayed the introduction of LED technology on vehicles.
  • America fires V2V starting gun
    April 7, 2014
    Leo McCloskey, ITS America’s senior vice president for Technical Programs, talks to Jason Barnes about what the recent NHTSA ruling on light vehicle connectivity means for cooperative infrastructures in North America. In early February the US Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced it had decided to start taking steps to enable Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communication technology for light vehicles. In so doing, the many safety-related applicati
  • Holding the line in the public interest
    October 5, 2016
    The pace of development and trials of driverless vehicles would lead many to believe they are the answer to all transportation problems. They are not – indeed self-driving cars will create more problems than they solve. Autonomous vehicle dominate the transport agenda because big business has launched a public relations battle to convince politicians, law makers and the public at large the driverless technology is unquestionably the solution to road deaths, congestion, poor air quality and other ills.