The guide sign
The visual cognition patterns of the guide sign included two parts; the first part was the visual recognition order of route and destination information.
The research on visual cognition orders was carried out from subjective and objective perspectives, as shown in
Figure 6. The subjective result was obtained through a questionnaire survey of 32 participants, and the objective data were obtained through the actual visual cognition to 28 target signs by 32 drivers (28 × 32 = 896 in total). The results showed that the proportion of priority recognition of destination information was slightly higher than that of route information, indicating that the destination information fulfills a stronger guiding function during the driver’s trip.
The second part of the visual cognition patterns of the guide sign was the EMT of different guide signs which contained different amounts of information.
The EMT results are shown in
Figure 7(a)–(d). The results imply that the EMT increases as the amount of destination information increases. This trend is not linear but instead follows a quadratic equation (R
2 > 0.85), indicating that the growth rate of the driver’s visual burden increases gradually with increasing destination information, and there is always an abrupt junction at which the EMT changes drastically. The abrupt junction indicates that the difference of EMT in neighboring destination information is the largest among the different destination information. The abrupt junction of 1-RI is 5-DI to 6-DI, as shown in the circle in
Figure 7(a), and the abrupt junction of 2-RI, 3-RI, and 4-RI is 6-DI to 7-DI, as shown in the circles in
Figure 7(b)–(d), respectively. The growth rate of EMT declines gradually with increasing route information, as shown in
Figure 7(e). The linear growth slope of EMT is 0.1478, 0.1207, 0.1399, and 0.088 ((EMT
8-DI– EMT
2-DI)/6) under the condition of 1-RI, 2-RI, 3-RI, and 4-RI, respectively. After 6-DI, the growth rate of EMT was largely consistent, as shown in
Figure 7(f).
According to the main effect analysis, there is a significant relationship between the EMT and destination information (p < 0.01), and there is no significant relationship between the EMT and route information (p = 0.122). Thus, the information was grouped into different levels by the S-N-K: the destination information was grouped into four levels (2-DI & 3-DI; 4-DI & 5-DI; 6-DI; 7-DI & 8-DI), and all route information was grouped into one level (1-RI, 2-RI, 3-RI, & 4-RI). The information levels stand for the different EMT; on the other hand, the EMT value of the high information volume group was significantly higher than that of the low information volume group; this difference can help observe the characteristics and patterns of visual cognition.
The EMT is jointly determined by the destination information and route information; therefore, to further analyze the influence of the guide signs, the influence parts of the destination and route information should be separated. However, there is an interaction effect between the destination and route information (p < 0.001); therefore, the influence of route information should be considered when analyzing the destination information area. Similarly, the influence of destination information should be considered when analyzing the route information area.
Relationship between route information and destination information
The destination information and route information play different roles in the guide signs, that is, they convey different messages to a driver and show different patterns in the eye movement parameters. The eye movement parameters of route information and destination information with the same amount of information are shown in
Figure 10. The saccade frequency and seek time have similar trends with the two types of information. Under an information volume of 2, route information and destination information yield similar saccade frequencies and seek times. With increasing information, the gap between the saccade frequencies and seek times of route information and destination information increases when the information volume is 3 and then decreases when the information volume is 4, as shown in
Figure 10(a) and (
b). The fixation duration is higher for the destination information than for the route information.
Under the same amount of information, the eye movement parameters of two types of information were selected to measure participants’ sensitivity to different types of information; the analysis results are shown in
Table 1.
As displayed in
Table 1, all destination information values are higher than the route information values in terms of saccade frequency, seek time, and duration fixation, and the p-values of saccade frequency, seek time, and duration fixation are 0.010, 0.002, and 0.000, respectively. This result indicates that under the same amount of information it will take more time for participants to seek and stare at the destination information than at the route information. Moreover, the SD of destination information is higher than that of route information in terms of saccade frequency, seek time, and duration fixation, indicating that drivers are more volatile when they identify destination information.
Threshold value of information
Information, including the route information and destination information, is one of the main study objectives of this article; therefore, in the study of information threshold, this article will also consider the road name information and place name information. To determine the threshold value of destination information, principal component analysis was used in this study to obtain composite indicators. The original indicators were the EMT (VD1), the saccade frequency of the destination information part (VD2), the seek time of the destination information part (VD3), and the fixation duration of the destination information part (VD4).
Taking 1-RI as an example, the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) test statistics of four original indicators was 0.795, which was higher than 0.5. The statistical value of the Bartlett spherical test was 30.441 (p < 0.001). After the raw data were normalized by Z, the correlation coefficient matrix table of each index was obtained. The absolute values of the data in
Table 2 were above 0.3, indicating a strong correlation between the variables.
Based on the principal component analysis, each indicator’s eigenvalue and contribution rate were calculated, and the total variance of the interpretation was obtained, as shown in
Table 3. According to the size of the eigenvalues (generally greater than 1), two factors (F
1, F
2) were selected. The extracted information accounted for 97.795% of the raw data information.
Through the regression algorithm, the loading formulas of two common factors were obtained
According to formulas (1) and (2) and the proportion of the corresponding eigenvalues of two common factors in the total extracted eigenvalues, the comprehensive scoring calculation method was obtained as follows
The comprehensive score of different traffic information under the condition 1-RI was calculated by formula (3). Similarly, the comprehensive scores of different traffic information under the conditions of 2-RI, 3-RI, and 4-RI were also calculated. The comprehensive score represents the recognition burden (RB) in a certain sense: a higher score represents that the driver bears a heavier burden. Different DIs correspond to the RB, and the relative change rate (RCR) of the RB between adjacent information represents the trend in the RB. The relationship between RB and RCR is shown in the following formula
where i and j represent the destination information volume, and both are less than or equal to 8.
In this article, the RCR was used to measure the information threshold, as shown in
Table 4.
There was a difference in the comprehensive scores of the seven levels of destination information. The lowest comprehensive score was 2-DI, while the highest comprehensive score was 8-DI, and the maximum RCR was between adjacent information 5-DI and 6-DI. The result of comprehensive evaluation is consistent with the cognition pattern to a certain degree, highlighting the objectivity and rationality of the method. Therefore, the threshold value of the destination information should be 5 under the condition of 1-RI. Similarly, the threshold values of destination information are 5, 4, and 3 under the conditions of 2-RI, 3-RI, and 4-RI, respectively.
According to the same method, EMT (VR1), the saccade frequency of the route information part (VR2), the seek time of the route information part (VR3), and the fixation duration of the route information part (VR4) were selected as the original indicators.
The KMO test statistic of the four original indicators was 0.665, and the statistical value of the Bartlett spherical test was 59.772 (p < 0.001). The extracted information comprised 85.454% of the raw data information. The results (RB) are shown in
Table 5.
The comprehensive scores increase with an increasing amount of route information and destination information, and the average RBs are −0.93074, −0.11077, 0.10441, and 0.94206 under the conditions of 1-RI, 2-RI, 3-RI, and 4-RI, respectively. Analysis of variance was selected to analyze the RB of information of the four routes, and the results showed that the RBs of 2-RI, 3-RI, and 4-RI were higher than that of 1-RI, the RB of 4-RI was higher than those of 2-RI and 3-RI, and the RBs of 3-RI and 4-RI had no significant relationship. Moreover, the maximum RCR was between adjacent information 3-RI and 4-RI; therefore, the threshold value of the route information should be 3.