28785258 Benjamin Read br1g16@soton.ac.

uk FEEG3004
19 Nov 18
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN PROTOCOL FOR A HUMAN FACTORS STUDY

Introduction

1. Fatigue has both physical and psychological aspects and can be defined as a cumulative
phenomenon, characterised by a ‘a loss of efficiency, and a disinclination for any kind of effort’
(Grandjean, 1979). Fatigue has long been recognised as negatively affecting driving performance;
considerable research in the field has shown that fatigue increases the frequency, amplitude and
variability of driver errors (P. Jackson, 2011). In general, fatigue is generated by any form of
activity or work, but at different rates dependent on a variety of factors, which can be grouped into
work load, environment and physiological condition. Driver errors are of particular concern as they
have the potential to lead to loss of vehicle control and subsequent serious injury and/or loss of life
of the driver, passengers and third parties. In order to mitigate the risk of driver fatigue in
professional drivers, legislation imposes minimum rest periods and maximum daily driving hours,
among other restrictions (UK Government, 2018).

Figure 1. Graphical representation of causes of fatigue, fatigue accumulation and fatigue

reduction (Grandjean, 1979).

2. The Ministry of Defence (MOD) makes use of a wide variety of vehicle sizes and types, and
is granted exemption from drivers’ hours legislation, but currently chooses to apply it as internal
policy, contained within the publication, JSP 800. JSP 800 offers a selection of drivers’ hours
‘Schemes’ which must be applied dependent on vehicle category and operational context; this
experiment will focus on Scheme B, which applies on-road to drivers of vehicles over 3.5 tonnes1,
vehicles with more than 8 passenger seats and notably, includes Armoured Fighting Vehicles
(AFV)2 (Ministry of Defence, 2014). This grouping implies that the MOD considers HGVs and
AFVs to cause comparable rates of driver fatigue, despite radically different working
environments.

a. HGVs. The majority of MOD HGVs are based on the MAN SV, a modern, wheeled
tactical truck platform that encompasses a broad range of sub-models. All have a closed,
insulated cabin broadly comparable to that of a modern civilian HGV, with conventional
controls, windscreen, seating and environmental systems. The driver is typically also the
vehicle commander3 (driver/commander).

1
In the UK vehicles over 3.5 tonnes are classified as HGVs.
2
Inclusive of a wide range of armoured, tracked vehicles.
3
Drivers are responsible for inputting control movements and maintaining course and speed, commanders have overall responsibility
for the vehicle and typically give navigational commands.
1
28785258 Benjamin Read br1g16@soton.ac.uk FEEG3004

b. AFVs. The MOD makes use of a range of AFVs with comparable driving
environments; for the purpose of this experiment the FV510 will be used as the
representative AFV. The FV510 was introduced in 1988 and is crewed by a driver,
commander and passengers, which are each accommodated in separate areas and
communicate by intercom. The driver is seated in an enclosed, hatched area; observation
is made4 through the open hatch and the vehicle is controlled with conventional pedals but
a non-conventional steering wheel. The driving environment is loud (ear-defence must be
worn) and vibration levels are higher than in wheeled vehicles. The driver is responsible for
maintaining safe course and speed, and responding to verbal orders from the commander.
The commander has overall responsibility for the vehicle and maintains control of the
vehicle via the driver.

Figure 2. SV driver’s cabin. Figure 3. FV510 driver’s cabin.

Study overview

3. Hypothesis – AFVs will cause greater driver fatigue than HGVs. Research of fatigue to
date supports this one-tailed hypothesis, based on three assumptions:

a. Greater workload. The AFV driver manages a greater workload; physically due to
operation of more manual controls and mentally due to reacting to verbal orders from the
vehicle commander.

b. Environment. The AFV driver experiences greater environmental discomfort due

to high noise and vibration.

c. Physiological condition. The AFV driver experiences stress/anxiety due to highly

restricted visibility.

4. Design. Participants will conduct a five-hour5, on-road simulated drive for each platform,
during the session their driving performance will be recorded, following the session they will be
surveyed on their fatigue. The independent variable in this study is the vehicle type; either AFV or
HGV. Driver fatigue will be the dependent variable and will be operationalised both qualitatively,
by survey, and quantitively, through measurement of the Driving Performance Indicators (DPI)
outlined below in Table 1 (P. Jackson, 2011).

4
In the Scheme B, on-road, non-tactical environment.
5
Longer than the JSP 800 maximum continuous driving period of 4.5 hours, to ensure the onset of fatigue.
2
28785258 Benjamin Read
DPI
Crossing of road centre or side lines
Exceeding speed limits
Reaction to stop lights and hazards
Reaction to commander’s orders (AFV)
br1g16@soton.ac.uk FEEG3004
Measure/s
No. of instances (#)
Distance crossed (m)
No. of instances (#)
Amount exceeded (mph)
Reaction time (seconds)
Reaction time (seconds)

Table 1. DPI and associated measures.

5. Two likely confounding variables in this experiment are drivers’ ability6, and tolerance to
noise and vibration, which will naturally differ between participants. These confounding variables
will be mitigated by conducting the experiment with repeated measures, whereby all participants
are tested on both platforms. One additional confounding variable is the impact of circadian
rhythm, which has been shown to cause greater fatigue during both early morning (0200-0600) and
mid-afternoon (1400-1600) (P. Jackson, 2011). This will be mitigated by conducting the
experiment across two days for each participant, with one platform tested each day between 0800-
1300.

Participants

6. Participants must be licenced to drive both the HGV and AFV. The experiment will look to
attract 40 participants and will use a stratified sampling method, where the population will be
divided into four subgroups based on age and gender; seen in Table 2. National Statistics data
show that approximately 10% of UK Armed Forces7 personnel are female; therefore, the study will
employ 4 females and 36 males (National Statistics, 2018). Although supporting statistical data is
unavailable, MOD working practices mean that younger personnel typically carry out the majority of
driving duties. For this reason, participants will be equally divided between under and over 22s,
which also means that both experienced (over 4 years) and inexperienced (under 4 years) drivers
will be represented. Random sampling within the subgroups will not be achievable as MOD will
supply participants based on availability, though this should still achieve a varied sample.
Recruitment incentives or advertisement will not be required as participants will complete testing as
part of their ordinary duties8.

Subgroup No. of participants

Female under 22s 2
Male under 22s 18
Female over 22s 2
Male over 22s 18

Table 2. Participant subgroup breakdown.

Measures and equipment

7. Simulators. The study will require simulators for both HGV and AFV. As environment is a
contributing factor to fatigue, both simulators will need to accurately and realistically represent the
working environment of each platform; in particular the AFV simulator must include representative
noise and vibration levels, additionally it must facilitate a vehicle commander9. Each platform’s
simulator should provide a different, but functionally comparable10 five-hour simulation which is
repeatable between participants. Simulators for both platforms are readily available within the
6
Some drivers will have more experience and/or ability in one platform or the other.
7
MOD civilian staff represent a negligible proportion of MOD HGV/AFV drivers and will not be considered.
8
MOD chain of command will task units with supplying personnel to the study.
9
The vehicle commander would be a member of experiment staff, who is able to observe vehicle progress and issue orders via
intercom.
10
The simulations must each provide sufficient stimuli for DPI measurement, but be sufficiently different that participants do not learn
the simulation, which could result in greater performance in the second session.
3
28785258 Benjamin Read br1g16@soton.ac.uk FEEG3004
MOD as they are used for driver training. If practicable, simulators should record DPIs and provide
this information at the end of each session, alternatively, observers can be employed to record this
data, though this would make recording of reaction times unfeasible. The DPIs are such that
frequency, amplitude and variability of errors will be indicated, in line with previous fatigue studies
(P. Jackson, 2011). Participants should be briefed to treat the simulator as they would a normal
vehicle and drive as they normally would.

8. Survey. Participants will complete elements of a written survey both before and after each
simulation session. The survey should provide a range of relevant qualitative data in a format this
is easily analysed; making use of a 1 – 10 scale. The survey should be easily understood by
participants11 and be no longer than required, this will ensure accuracy of answers and full
engagement. The complete survey can be seen in Figure 4.

SURVEY 1 – BEFORE DRIVING

No
Question Answer (X one box only)
.
1 How would you rate your driving ability on this vehicle? 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(Very Poor 1 – 10 Very Good)
2 How fatigued do you feel right now? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(Not at all 1 – 10 Completely)

SURVEY 2 – AFTER DRIVING

No
Question Answer (X one box only)
.
1 How fatigued do you feel right now? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(Not at all 1 – 10 Completely)
2 How much do you feel you need a break?13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(Not at all 1 – 10 Desperately)

Table 3. Participant survey 1 & 2.

9. Data analysis. On completion of the experiment, with data from both the simulator and
survey for each platform collected for each participant, data analysis can take place. Analysis of
the DPI and survey results will be conducted in isolation, as combination would require weighting
of one or the other, which would introduce bias to the experiment14. Analysis should focus on
identifying change in fatigue, rather than absolute values. The hypothesis would be supported by
results that showed a greater drop in performance during driving and greater rise in fatigue from
survey 1 to 2 in the AFV session. The hypothesis would be refuted by results that showed a
greater drop in performance during driving and greater rise in fatigue from survey 1 to 2 in the HGV
session, or results that showed a negligible difference between the AFV & HGV.

Procedure

10. The following experiment procedure is for two participants, the experiment can be scaled
with the use of additional simulators of identical specification, allowing for multiple participants to
take part concurrently, but it is vital that each participant’s experience is consistent; standardisation
is critical. Figure 4 describes the procedure.

11
Simple, clear questions / instructions without unnecessary technical terminology – fatigue should be defined prior.
12
Participants would be informed of which platform was being simulated immediately prior to survey.
13
Ideally this answer should correlate with Q1, however is included in case of reluctance to admit fatigue.
14
E.g. A participant was found to have committed many more errors but answered 1 (Not at all) for Q1 of survey 2 – which result should
carry more weight?
4
28785258 Benjamin Read br1g16@soton.ac.uk FEEG3004

Figure 4. Experiment procedure schematic.

Ethical considerations

11. The largest ethical consideration for this experiment is its military context. Participants
would need to be aware of the military application, which some may find unacceptable. This issue
is eliminated by the use of solely MOD staff for participants, which is necessitated by the
requirement for AFV driving experience. A second ethical consideration arises from the use of
MOD staff; previous experience with either platform may be linked to a past traumatic event,
meaning that the simulation may trigger post-traumatic stress (NHS, 2018). This risk can be
eliminated during participant selection at MOD level, with those at risk excluded. Alongside these
two considerations, the experiment will be subject to standard ethical practice, notably:

a. Informed consent. Despite taking part in the experiment as part of their daily
duties, participants can only do so if they have freely given their consent once fully aware of
5
28785258 Benjamin Read br1g16@soton.ac.uk FEEG3004
the study purpose and methods. Participants must also be aware of their right to withdraw,
without penalty, from the study at any stage.

b. Confidentiality and anonymity. Participants’ results will be anonymous, this is

particularly important as the experiment is testing skills related to their profession; individual
participants must not be linked to poor results and should be aware of this to encourage
honest responses to survey 2.

c. Debriefing. Participants must be debriefed in order to ensure they leave the study
in the same state of mind as when they joined. This will include once again explaining the
purpose and methodology of the experiment, checks of health and wellbeing and passing
on future contact details; ensuring that should issues develop after leaving, support can still
be accessed.

References

Grandjean, E., 1979. Fatigue in industry. British Journal of Industrial Medicine, Volume 36, pp.
175-186.

Ministry of Defence, 2014. JSP 800 - Volume 5, Road Transport, Part 1 - Directive. 5.0 ed.
s.l.:Ministry of Defence.

National Statistics, 2018. UK Armed Forces Biannual Diversity Statistics, London: UK Government.

NHS, 2018. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). [Online]

Available at: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-ptsd/
[Accessed 19 November 2018].

P. Jackson, C. H. A. N. R. N. M. L. S., 2011. Fatigue and Road Safety: A Critical Analysis of

Recent Evidence, London: Department for Transport.

UK Government, 2018. Drivers' Hours. [Online]

Available at: https://www.gov.uk/drivers-hours/gb-domestic-rules
[Accessed 18 November 2018].