# Situational Awareness Assessment of Drivers Boosted by Eye-Tracking Metrics: A Literature Review
## 2 Materials and Methods  
For this review, this study performed a systematic and descriptive analysis to identify the most relevant literature. The methodology employed in selecting noteworthy studies is graphically depicted in Figure 1. The review comprises three phases: identification, screening, and inclusion of records. In the first phase of identification, the preliminary search generated a list of 190 documents, and two records were removed before screening. In this phase, the strategy involved formulating a guiding question to facilitate the identification, evaluation, and synthesis of research in the domain of driving while assessing its relevance throughout the review process. The search strategy employed allowed us to potentially identify as many eligible studies as possible. In identification phase, all reviewers actively participated in determining the eligibility of a record for inclusion in the review. Scopus and Web of Science databases were systematically queried to source a spectrum of the current research, encompassing diverse domains and potential areas of inquiry [19]. To curate the search terms for the databases, we adopted a bifurcated approach. First, the recent literature review of [9] was used to extract multiple variations and acronyms of the keyword \"situational awareness\", i.e., \"SA\", \"situation awareness\" and \"awareness state\"; similarly, for the second keyword, i.e., \"eye-tracking\", we used multiple variations: \"eye-tracking\", \"eye-tracker\", \"eye movements\", \"gaze patterns\", \"eye moves\", \"eye track\", and \"gaze behavior\" (including those that assess visual attention, gaze behavior, and perception). Psychological measurements or data obtained from humans by using sensors [9] and oculomotor events were defined and classified based on the recent reviews by [9; 21]. Second, we focused on keywords covering the scope of study delineated in this review--specifically, the domain of driving. Hence, we considered terms such as \"driving\", \"drive\", \"drives\", \"automobilist\", \"chauffeur\", and \"vehicle operator\", among others, across contexts that included autonomous, semiautonomous motor, commercial, and heavy  
Figure 1: Process used to identify and select relevant studies [20]. vehicles, within the realms of both naturalistic driving and driving simulation. The terminology \"naturalistic driving\" refers to experiments conducted in authentic field settings, while \"driving simulation\" refers to experiments conducted via laboratory simulations or virtual reality. To facilitate the bibliographic exploration within the databases, the Boolean operators \"AND\" and \"OR\" were judiciously employed. For the screening phase, 188 reports were assessed for eligibility, and the citations and bibliographical information, abstracts, and keywords were extracted and screened. The following inclusion criteria were used: articles dealing with (1) assessment of SA in humans, (2) assessment of SA with eye tracking (these may contain additional assessment tools, i.e., questionnaires, encephalograms, etc. ), and (3) application of assessment of SA in the domain of driving. Restrictions on eligibility criteria, such as language, were considered; only records in English were kept in the sample, and access restrictions (publication status) were considered. Furthermore, we used the following exclusion criteria: (1) SA was not evaluated; instead, only the stress or mental workload was measured. However, these articles were included if they measured a psychological variable other than SA. (2) Eye tracking was not used to assess SA. (3) The study pertained to fields unrelated to driving. Throughout this phase, all reviewers participated in addressing selection bias as part of adherence to eligibility criteria. Any disagreements regarding adherence were reviewed and discussed among the reviewers to reach consensus. Similarly, an author took samples from the excluded records to verify that the eligibility criteria had been applied correctly.