26074
A Usability Evaluation of a Driver Training Application for Teens with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Friday, May 12, 2017: 10:00 AM-1:40 PM
Golden Gate Ballroom (Marriott Marquis Hotel)
M. A. Monahan1, J. O. Brooks2, C. Jenkins3 and J. Seeaner4, (1)Driver Rehabilitation Institute, Santa Rosa, CA, (2)DriveSafety, Inc., Greenville, SC, (3)Clemson University, Greenville, SC, (4)CU-ICAR, Greenville, SC
Background:  Learner and licensed drivers with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) make more driving errors than their peers without ASD. Yet there is a lack of driver training tools specifically designed for the learning preferences of individuals with ASD.

Objectives:  The objective is to design a driving training tool that incorporates learning preferences for individuals with ASD while adhering to usability principles (e.g., ease of learning and user satisfaction).

Methods:  A usability evaluation was conducted with four rounds of subjects, alternating between neuro-typical teens and teens with ASD. Each round of subjects tested the Drive FocusTM application (app) prototype. Subjects’ comments about the app were collected using a “think aloud” method while observations of their interaction with the app were recorded. A human factors psychologist and an occupational therapist reviewed the comments and observations and decided whether to and how to resolve problems based on usability principles and four learning preference themes. Next, the app was refined and the entire process was repeated again until four rounds of subjects had tested the App.

Results:  The number of comments/observations decreased within groups; subjects without ASD 245 (n=5) to 225 (n=8) while subjects with ASD: 125 (n=6) to 32 (n=5). The number of changes made to the app in support of learning preferences included themes of concrete language (55 changes), structure and predictability (41changes), visual information (21 changes), and generalization (8 changes).

Conclusions:  The total number of changes declined between the initial and final session for each of the participant groups (subjects without ASD and subjects with ASD) suggesting that the iterative process of the usability evaluation was helpful in improving the app. The decline in comments and observations was most notable among the ASD groups suggesting that the application of learning preference themes was particularly useful.