In-vehicle work zone messages prove to be more effective than portable roadside dynamic message signs.

The University of Minnesota's Department of Mechanical Engineering tested several interfaces for relaying work zone messages to drivers including a roadside, portable changeable message sign, a smartphone presenting only auditory messages, and a smartphone presenting audio-visual messages.

June 2017
Minnesota; United States

Background (Show)

Lesson Learned

  • There was better driving performance on key metrics including speed deviation and lane deviation for both in-vehicle message conditions relative to the roadside signs
  • Drivers reported significantly less mental workload, better usability, and greater work zone event recall for both in-vehicle conditions relative to the roadside sign condition.
  • For eye-tracking, drivers took their gaze off the road less often for the in-vehicle messaging conditions, as drivers had to look over to read the roadside signs to understand the messages.
  • The positive effects of in-vehicle messaging appeared to be elevated for the more difficult lane closure route in the driving performance data, suggesting that in-vehicle messages were helpful for more challenging roadway conditions.
  • If the in-vehicle messages are delivered in a controlled and driving-relevant manner, there appeared to be no effect of distraction and driving performance was improved
  • Placement of the smartphone did not appear to be a significant factor for driving performance when there was an auditory component for the messages.
  • The researchers recommend field testing in-vehicle message systems and exploring possible avenues of broad implementation.

Lesson Comments

No comments posted to date

Comment on this Lesson

To comment on this lesson, fill in the information below and click on submit. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field. Your name and email address, if provided, will not be posted, but are to contact you, if needed to clarify your comments.


In-Vehicle Work Zone Messages

Author: Morris, Nichole L.

Published By: Minnesota DOT

Source Date: June 2017

Other Reference Number: Final Report 2017-19

URL: https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/189538/MnDOT2017-19.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Lesson Contacts

Lesson Analyst:

Paige Cassell


Average User Rating

0 ( ratings)

Rate this Lesson

(click stars to rate)

Lesson ID: 2019-00887