Success in motorsport requires total system performance; car and driver must work in harmony to extract all available performance in the system.

On the vehicle side, advancements in vehicle performance and safety is the result of decades of automotive research. Despite the ever increasing knowledge available to the grassroots motorsport community of today, the driver remains a major determinant of performance.

We conducted a literature review to better understand the current research in high performance driver development. This is a brief summary of our findings:

“Driver Science”

In a general review of sport sciences in motorsport, Potkanowicz and Mendel liken the racing driver to an athlete. Sports science aims to improve the fitness level of an athlete to reduce stress on the body during competition. A training program that applies the principle of specificity requires understanding the physical stressors faced by the athlete; however, limited published research into driving-specific stressors limits the application targeted task-specific training. The term “driver science” is coined to describe the role of the driver in the car-driver system and to encourage further research in this field.

More succinctly, Potkanowicz and Mendel make the following comparison:

Not to study the driver is to ignore a very important part of the driver-car system; not to have empirical data available about what the driver is experiencing in the cockpit is analogous to ignoring all the data related to engine performance and then expecting the engine to run well or to last the whole race.

Perceptual-Cognitive Hierarchy

In a document analysis of professional coaching literature, Lappi categorizes deliberate practice techniques in terms of a cognitive hierarchy. The McRuer Hierarchy describes three cognitive processes involved in driving:

Navigation: track representation and route selection
Guidance: visual preview and situational awareness
Control: sensory feedback and motor commands

After categorizing the examples of deliberate practice, Lappi describes each task in terms of the underlying cognitive mechanisms. Deliberate practice tasks classified as navigational emphasized visualization of the track environment and visualization of the desired path (ie. racing line). This implies that long-term memory is critical in high-level executive path planning and chunking of relevant reference points based on prior experience.

High speed corner negotiation therefore requires a high degree of perceptual-cognitive expertise, and cannot be reduced down to a feedback wayfinding task. Lappi’s review provides a basis in which the driving task can be broken down into constitutive cognitive processes.

Gaze Control

In a comparison between racing and non-racing drivers, van Leeuwen uses eye-tracking in a driving simulator to find differences in gaze control. The study enlisted seven racing drivers and ten non-racing drivers to drive four ten-minute driving sessions in a fixed-base driving simulator. Eye gaze in non-racing drivers corresponded to the tangent point model, whereas racing drivers displayed variable gaze behaviour and larger head rotations compared to non-racing drivers. Differences are also found in lap time performance, with racing drivers displaying higher levels of steer, throttle and brake activity.

Laboratory test of drivers (racing and non-racing) by Guidetti et al. applied saccade and attentional tests to measure visual performance. Saccadic suppression occurs due to motion blur during eye movement, causing a suppression of visual perception. This loss of visual perception, even momentarily, can impact sensory-motor decision making required for high-speed vehicle maneuvering. Racing drivers displayed faster reaction and accuracy in the saccade test compared to non-racing drivers, and can better generate a corrective antisaccade in the presence of visual distractions.

Driving is inherently a visual task. Increasing the visual preview window and developing visual strategies that reduces saccadic movements can be trained to improve driver performance.

“Looking Ahead” - A Use Case

The pervasive use of the phrase “look ahead!” demonstrates an important aspect of high speed vehicle maneuvering. The end objective is to increase the visual preview window perceived by the driver. While the phrase is seemingly simple to understand, deconstructing the phrase reveals multiple cognitive steps.

At the guidance level, one must have an internal representation of the path such that one knows what to look at. Path generation relies on long-term memory to recall the most effective route. Because driving occurs on a scene-by-scene basis, the line is generated using key landmarks of the track. Preparation and reflection of known trajectories can help encode this information into long-term memory.

Increasing the visual preview horizon is the fundamental goal of looking ahead. The tangent point model suggests that drivers typically look at the apex point of the upcoming corner. In contrast, racing drivers adjust their gaze to the outside just as they begin to turn into the corner. Visual preview is anticipatory based on knowing the trajectory a-priori to entering the corner. Looking ahead allows you to take advantage of this information to maneuver the vehicle.

Looking ahead also changes how your eyes and head move. In a comparison between racing drivers and non-racing drivers, it is shown that racing drivers rotate their heads in a way that maintains a zero head-to-eye angle. Using your eyes to look ahead can be considered undesirable due to saccadic suppression, and therefore switching to physically rotating your head may be a desirable strategy to keep you focused on the path ahead.

Closing Remarks

Driver development and the application of “driver science” is still in its infancy. Vehicle development is comparatively simple given the complexity of human cognition and physiology; however, this does not preclude us from seeking improvements in this area. If the driver remains to be a major determinant of vehicle performance, then the notion of driver development should be subject to study proportionate to its importance. In the same way the vehicle can be analyzed, the same should be said about driver development. It is through better understanding of the car-driver system can total system performance be achieved.

References

Potkanowicz, Edward S., and Ronald W. Mendel. “The Case for Driver Science in Motorsport: A Review and Recommendations.” Sports Medicine 43, no. 7 (July 2013): 565–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-013-0040-2.
Lappi, Otto. “The Racer’s Mind—How Core Perceptual-Cognitive Expertise Is Reflected in Deliberate Practice Procedures in Professional Motorsport.” Frontiers in Psychology 9 (August 13, 2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01294.
Leeuwen, Peter M. van, Stefan de Groot, Riender Happee, and Joost C. F. de Winter. “Differences between Racing and Non-Racing Drivers: A Simulator Study Using Eye-Tracking.” Edited by Jun Xu. PLOS ONE 12, no. 11 (November 9, 2017): e0186871. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186871.
Guidetti, G., R. Guidetti, Maurizio Manfredi, Marco Manfredi, A. Lucchetta, and S. Livio. “Saccades and Driving.” Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica 39, no. 3 (June 2019): 186–96. https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-2176.