Relationships Between Older Drivers’ Cognitive Abilities as Assessed on the MoCA and Glance Patterns During Visual-Manual Radio Tuning While Driving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Research has established that long off-road glances increase crash risk, and other work has shown increased off-road glance behavior in older drivers. This study investigated the relationship between older drivers' (M = 66.3, range 61-69 years) cognitive abilities and the duration of off-road glances while engaged in secondary visual-manual activities. Method: Twenty-two drivers completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) prior to driving an instrumented vehicle and completing a set of radio-tuning tasks. Glance behavior was recorded and manually coded into 7 glance regions (toward the forward roadway, instrument cluster, center stack, rearview mirror, left, right, and other). Results: On average, older drivers with higher MoCA scores used shorter glances and glanced away from the forward roadway for less total time when manually tuning the radio. Discussion: These findings suggest that lower MoCA scores may represent a driving force behind the "age" differences reported in earlier studies of off-road glance behavior. Questions are raised concerning the identification of MoCA scores that might be used as inclusion cut-points in driving research and in identifying individuals needing further evaluation related to suitability for continuance of driving.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".