Engrossed in conversation: The impact of cell phones on simulated driving performance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal, 2018
Background: Background: Conversation over the cell phone while driving is a known risk factor for road traffic crash. Using handsfree to talk on the cell phone may remove visual and manual distraction yet not the cognitive distraction. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to better understand the mechanisms of cognitive distraction due to hands-free cell phone conversation (HFPC) while driving. Methods: Twelve male and 12 female University students in Tehran, Iran, were selected via the consecutive convenient sampling method, and randomly assigned to one of the following administrations of cross-over quasi-experimental study design, during year 2016: Administration 1, participants performed the tests while involved in HFPC, took rest for 60 minute, and then performed the tests another time without HFPC; Administration 2, participants performed the tests without HFPC, took rest, and then performed the tests another time with HFPC. Each participant moved to the other administration after 7 to 10 days. The Vienna test system (VTS) was used to measure simple and choice reaction time, selective attention, visual orientation, and visual memory. Linear regression analysis was used to study the change in test scores due to HFPC. Results: The mean age of participants was 27.1 ± 5.3 years. A history of road traffic crash (regardless of severity) was reported among 9 (37.5%) participants in the previous year. Hands-free cell phone conversation while driving was directly associated with mean time correct rejection score (P < 0.01) (selective attention), omitted response (P < 0.01) and median reaction time (P < 0.01) (choice reaction time), and mean reaction time (P < 0.01) (Simple reaction time). Moreover, HPFC was inversely associated with sum hits (P = 0.05) (selective attention), incorrect (P < 0.02) and correct response (P < 0.01) (choice reaction time), score based on viewing and working time (P < 0. 01) (visual orientation), and visual memory performance (P < 0.01). Conclusions: Using hands-free devices to converse during driving, impaired reaction time, selective attention, visual orientation and visual memory, which are essential for safe driving. Thus, the use of these devices does not preclude cognitive distraction and should be restricted.
Cell-Phone?Induced Driver Distraction
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2007
Our research examined the effects of hands-free cell-phone conversations on simulated driving. We found that even when participants looked directly at objects in the driving environment, they were less likely to create a durable memory of those objects if they were conversing on a cell phone. This pattern was obtained for objects of both high and low relevance, suggesting that very little semantic analysis of the objects occurs outside the restricted focus of attention. Moreover, in-vehicle conversations do not interfere with driving as much as cell-phone conversations do, because drivers are better able to synchronize the processing demands of driving with in-vehicle conversations than with cell-phone conversations. Together, these data support an inattention-blindness interpretation wherein the disruptive effects of cell-phone conversations on driving are due in large part to the diversion of attention from driving to the phone conversation.
The distraction effects of phone use during a crucial driving maneuver
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2003
Forty-two licensed drivers were tested in an experiment that required them to respond to an in-vehicle phone at the same time that they were faced with making a crucial stopping decision. Using test track facilities, we also examined the influence of driver gender and driver age on these dual-task response capacities. Each driver was given task practice and then performed a first block of 24 trials, where one trial represented one circuit of the test track. Half of the trials were control conditions in which neither the stop-light was activated nor was the in-vehicle phone triggered. Four trials required only stop-light response and a further four, phone response only. The remaining four trials required the driver to complete each task simultaneously. The order of presentation of specific trials was randomized and the whole sequence was repeated in a second block giving 48 trials per driver. In-vehicle phone response also contained an embedded memory task that was evaluated at the end of each trial circuit. Results confirmed our previous observation that in the dual-task condition there was a slower response to the light change. To compensate for this slowed response, drivers subsequently brake more intensely. Most importantly, we recorded a critical 15% increase in non-response to the stop-light in the presence of the phone distraction task which equates with increased stop-light violations on the open road. These response patterns varied by driver age and driver gender. In particular, age had a large effect on task components that required speed of response to multiple, simultaneous demands. Since driving represents a highly complex and interactive environment, it is not possible to specify a simplistic relationship between these distraction effects and outcome crash patterns. However, we can conclude that such in-vehicle technologies erode performance safety margin and distract drivers from their critical primary task of vehicle control. As such it can be anticipated that a causal relation exists to collision events. This is a crucial concern for all in-vehicle device designers and for the many safety researchers and professionals seeking to reduce the adverse impacts of vehicle collisions.
Effects of naturalistic cell phone conversations on driving performance
Journal of Safety Research, 2004
Problem: The prevalence of automobile drivers talking on cell phones is growing, but the effect of that behavior on driving performance is unclear. Also unclear is the relationship between the difficulty level of a phone conversation and the resulting distraction. Method: This study used a driving simulator to determine the effect that easy and difficult cell phone conversations have on driving performance. Results: Cell phone use caused participants to have higher variation in accelerator pedal position, drive more slowly with more variation in speed, and report a higher level of workload regardless of conversation difficulty level. Conclusions: Drivers may cope with the additional stress of phone conversations by enduring higher workloads or setting reduced performance goals. Impact on Industry: Because an increasing number of people talk on the phone while driving, crashes caused by distracted drivers using cell phones will cause disruptions in business, as well as injury, disability, and permanent loss of personnel.
Effects of mobile telephone tasks on driving performance: a driving simulator study
Mobile phone use while driving is increasing among road users. Although the most of countries made illegal the cell phone use while driving, the drivers still use it both for calling and texting. Several studies investigated the distraction factors related to the use of mobile while driving and the effects on road safety. The main findings of these studies generally demonstrated an increasing of reaction time and decreasing of driving performance especially during not critical driving conditions, while the evaluation of the effects of mobile use during critical driving conditions is not so much investigates. The overall objective of this work is to contribute to the evaluation of the effects of the mobile phone use on driving safety. Specifically the effects of using cellular phone at the same time the driver is faced with making a critical stopping decision are investigated. The experiments are carried out using an interactive driving simulator. Three different road scenarios (urban road, rural road and motorway) are simulated. Thirty subjects take part to the experiments and drive four times each scenario: one time without calling (control scenario) and the other three times answering the calls by hand-held mobile, hands-free mobile and hands-free voice device. The driver's reaction time, the deceleration rate, the speed and the following distance are evaluated. The main effects of driving and calling are observed in the urban scenario, where the decreasing of driving performance is much more evident than in the rural and motorway scenario. Not significant differences on driving performances are found across the three telephone modes.
PsycEXTRA Dataset
The report describes research to investigate the effects of wireless phone use on driving performance and behavior. The main objectives were to assess: 1) the distraction potential of wireless phone use while driving, and 2) the difference in distraction caused by the use of a Hands-Free wireless phone interface versus that associated with use of a Hand-Held interface. This research was conducted by NHTSA using the National Advanced Driving Simulator (NADS) in collaboration with NADS staff. Driving performance was examined in four events, including: (1) car-following, (2) lead-vehicle braking, (3) lead-vehicle cut in, and (4) merging. Phone conversation impaired performance most consistently during car following, resulting in an increase of approximately 0.3 to 0.4 seconds in drivers' delay in responding to lead-vehicle speed changes, relative to performance without phone conversation. Steering entropy (error) also increased during phone conversation in car-following events, reflecting an increase in high-frequency steering corrections. Increased steering reversal rates indicated increased workload during phone conversation. There was little evidence of performance impairment due to phone conversation for the other three events. Neither the lead-vehicle braking nor lead-vehicle cut-in events exhibited the predicted slowing in accelerator release and brake response times. The merge event also did not provide consistent evidence of degraded performance due to phone use generally, with the notable exception based on analysis of eye glance data, that while engaged in phone conversation, drivers devoted less visual attention to planning for an upcoming merge event. Older and younger drivers did not exhibit consistently degraded driving performance due to phone conversation than middle-aged drivers. There were modest differences among interface conditions. Specifically: (1) Hand-Held phone use interfered with steering and lane control more than the Voice Digit Dialing with Speaker Kit Hands-Free interface, and (2) the Voice Digit Dialing with Speaker Kit Hands-Free interface was associated with faster travel speeds than the Hand-Held interface. Differences between interface conditions were stronger for dialing and answering than for conversation. The Hand-Held interface was associated with fastest dialing times and fewest dialing errors while voice dialing was associated with fastest answering and hang-up times. No differences among interface conditions in phone conversation task performance were found. Post-drive questionnaire results showed that in most cases participants overestimated the ease of use afforded by Hands-Free phone interfaces. In general, participants considered the Hand-Held interface to be most difficult to use, followed by the Headset Hands-Free and Voice Digit Dialing with Speaker Kit Hands-Free interfaces, respectively.