Enhancing IVIS Navigation Usability for Safer Driving

Kenna Pezzi

Prototyping, Contextual Inquiry, Interviews, Qualitative Data Analysis

Problem

In-Vehicle Navigation Systems (IVIS) often present usability challenges that contribute to driver distraction. Navigation features, in particular, are critical since drivers frequently rely on them for directions and efficient route planning. Complex interfaces, poor customization options, and reliance on touchscreen inputs increase the risk of accidents.

Goal

Design an IVIS navigation system that is intuitive, efficient, and customizable to minimize driver distraction.

Project Focus

Defining users and stakeholders is crucial to ensure the design meets the needs of those who will interact with or be impacted by the system. Understanding potential user behaviors, goals, and pain points helps create intuitive, efficient solutions, while stakeholder insights ensure the design aligns with broader safety, business, and regulatory priorities.

Stakeholders

  • Drivers
  • Passengers
  • Vehicle Manufacturers
  • Auto Technology Providers
  • Auto Safety Regulators
  • Insurance Companies
  • Academic Researchers
  • Auto Dealers & Service Centers

Potential Users

  • Private & Public Transportation Drivers
  • Passengers
  • Short and Long Distance Drivers
  • Work-related Drivers
  • Drivers with Accessibility Needs
  • Passengers
  • Parents
  • Elderly
  • Tourists
  • Emergency Service Providers

Conclusions Based on Defined Groups

The prototype design will incorporate insights from diverse user groups to prioritize safety, efficiency, and accessibility. The design considers the unique needs of short-distance drivers who require quick, familiar interactions, long-distance travelers who may need flexible and detailed route adjustments, and work-related drivers who often manage multiple stops or changing schedules.

Additionally, the system supports users with varying experience levels, drivers with accessibility needs, and those navigating unfamiliar areas, such as tourists or emergency service providers.

This design also reflects insights from stakeholders such as auto safety regulators and insurance companies, who prioritize minimizing driver distraction.

Proposed Solution

  • Fast, simple navigation setup for primary tasks like starting a route.
  • Efficient subtask management for actions like route changes or setting adjustments while driving.
  • Feedback mechanisms such as auditory and haptic signals to reduce visual distractions.
  • Customization options for text size, color contrast, and input methods (e.g., touch, voice, or gestures).
  • Enhanced accessibility features to support drivers with visual, auditory, or physical challenges.

By aligning with these insights, the design helps all users — from routine commuters to professional drivers — efficiently complete their tasks while staying focused on the road.

Research Questions

  1. How do drivers interact with IVIS while navigating?
  2. What challenges and frustrations arise with IVIS navigation systems?
  3. How do IVIS systems contribute to driver distractions?
  4. What usability issues occur during quick decision-making?
  5. How does IVIS usage change in various environments?

Method

To gain a more detailed understanding of user needs, interviews and contextual inquiry provide in-depth insights into user behaviors, preferences, and challenges. Research was collected as a group effort with other classmates, then analyzed separately.

Interview

Interviews give users the change to give qualitative feedback directly by exploring their experiences, frustrations, and desired features in a structured conversation. Interviewees were encouraged to describe real-life driving scenarios, helping researchers uncover common pain points and identify areas where IVIS systems fail to meet expectations.

General Setup

Interviews are conducted in-person or virtually or with recordings and detailed notes.

Contextual Inquiry

Contextual inquiry went further by observing participants in real-world driving scenarios. Researchers acted as passengers, observing drivers as they navigated roads, adjusted settings, and responded to distractions. This method provided valuable insights into environmental factors that influence IVIS use, such as traffic conditions, stress points, and multitasking behaviors.

General Setup

The researcher acts as a passenger while the participant drives to an unfamiliar location using their usual navigation system. Photos and videos are recorded when appropriate.

Research Insights

Affinity Diagram

Interview and contextual inquiry findings were analyzed and synthesized using FigJam, revealing the following 4 most relevant key themes that informed the prototype design:

    Distractions & Rerouting
    • Poor navigation clarity (unclear instructions, delayed directions, and small screens) forces drivers to rely on visual input.
    • Notifications and speeding alarms interrupt focus.
    • Drivers prefer phones for navigation due to real-time data accuracy, yet this increases distraction risks.
    • Drivers commonly resort to pulling over or using their phones when IVIS systems prove challenging mid-drive.
    Confidence & Comfortability
    • Clear visual and auditory feedback enhances driver confidence, especially while in motion.
    • Drivers often use voice commands to change destinations while driving alone.
    • Some drivers find voice directions noisy and unclear, while others value descriptive language like British Siri.
    • Users expressed a desire for more voice notification customization to reduce reliance on touchscreens.
    • Many prefer full voice interaction without touchscreen involvement for improved safety.
    • Turning off voice guidance while navigating is a common practice among some drivers.
    Navigation Preferences & Strategies
    • Drivers heavily rely on navigation apps for optimizing routes, especially during commutes and when seeking alternate routes.
    • Descriptive lane guidance, pre-trip planning, and travel time estimation are valued features.
    • Drivers appreciate easier ways to select alternate routes when facing congestion.
    • Drivers rely on automatic saving of frequent destinations for convenience.
    • When using a phone, drivers must enter destinations at stoplights or ask passengers to assist when available.
    Input Methods & Device Integration
    • Drivers use various input methods such as tactile wheels, phone keyboards, and voice assistants like Siri.
    • Drivers commonly use phones to type in new destinations, even while driving, though this poses safety risks.
    • Apple Maps is favored for its clear layout, while Google Maps is preferred for its real-time data and traffic updates.
    • CarPlay integration frequently enhances Apple Maps usability by allowing seamless visual access on vehicle displays.

FigJam Diagram

Prototype Features to Include

  • Improved Navigation Clarity
  • Enhanced Voice Command System
  • Minimized Distraction Features
  • Efficient Input Methods
  • Personalization & Accessibility
  • Safety Features

Low-Fidelity Prototype in Figma

High-Fidelity Prototype in Figma

Sources

1 CE Noticias Financieras. 2024. Goodbye to Touch Screens in Cars? ContentEngine LLC. Link

2 Ashley Colley, Jani Väyrynen, and Jonna Häkkilä. 2015. In-Car Touch Screen Interaction: Comparing Standard, Finger-Specific and Multi-Finger Interaction. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (PerDis '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 131–137. Link

3 Faren Huo, Tai Wang, Fei Fang, and Cong Sun. 2024. The Influence of Tactile Feedback in In-vehicle Central Control Interfaces on Driver Emotions: A Comparative Study of Touchscreens and Physical Buttons. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 101, 103586. Link

4 Hilkka Grahn, and Tuomo Kujala. 2020. Impacts of touch screen size, user interface design, and subtask boundaries on in-car task’s visual demand and driver distraction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 142, 102467. Link

5 Janez Kopač, and Franci Pušavec. 2019. Touch Screen Car Dashboards as Serious Danger for Causing Traffic Accidents. Mobility & Vehicle Mechanics 45, 4, 13–18. Link

6 Pablo Puente Guillen, Lee Skrypchuk, Karl Proctor, and Aditya Dandekar. 2024. How Do Different Feedback Modalities Affect Drivers’ Attention and Task Performance When Interacting with In-Vehicle Infotainment Systems. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 125–135. Link

7 Patrick Ebel, Christoph Lingenfelder, and Andreas Vogelsang. 2021. Measuring Interaction-based Secondary Task Load: A Large-Scale Approach Using Real-World Driving Data. 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. ACM, Leeds United Kingdom, p 1–4. Link

8 R. Ramnath, N. Kinnear, S. Chowdhury, and T. Hyatt. 2020. Interacting with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay when driving. 55 pages. Link

9 Rafael Krstačić, Alesandro Žužić, and Tihomir Orehovački. 2024. Safety Aspects of In-Vehicle Infotainment Systems: A Systematic Literature Review from 2012 to 2023. Electronics 13, 13, Article 2563. Link

10 SeungJun Kim, Anind K. Dey, Joonhwan Lee, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2011. Usability of car dashboard displays for elder drivers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 493–502. Link

11 Suhwan Jung, Jaehyun Park, Jungchul Park, Mungyeong Choe, Taehun Kim, Myungbin Choi, and Seunghwan Lee. "Effect of touch button interface on in-vehicle information systems usability." International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 37, no. 15 (2021): 1404-1422. Link

12 Xiaoning Zhao, Yuefeng Du, Lichao Yang, Enrong Mao, Dafang Guo, and Zhongxiang Zhu. 2024. Effects of Road Type and IVIS Task Type on Driver Behavior and Driving Performance in Agricultural Tractors. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 40, 12, 3159–3172. Link

13 Qi Zhongi, Jinyi Zhi, Yongsheng Xu, Pengfei Gao, and Shu Feng. "Assessing driver distraction from in-vehicle information system: an on-road study exploring the effects of input modalities and secondary task types." Scientific Reports 14, no. 1 (2024): 20289. Link