The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0001-4575(02)00027-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a braking response

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

9
141
5
3

Year Published

2005
2005
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 276 publications
(167 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
9
141
5
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The results indicated that phone use caused reaction time to decrease by 19%. In addition, the study found no significant advantage of reducing reaction time that the hands-free phone would provide over the handheld model (Consiglio et al, 2003).…”
Section: Cell Phone Related Studies Of Distracted Drivingmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…The results indicated that phone use caused reaction time to decrease by 19%. In addition, the study found no significant advantage of reducing reaction time that the hands-free phone would provide over the handheld model (Consiglio et al, 2003).…”
Section: Cell Phone Related Studies Of Distracted Drivingmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…The motivation for such legislation may initially have been concern about interference caused by holding and dialing a cellular phone, and early studies suggested that the manual aspects of cellular phone use were the critical determinant of a decrement in driving performance (Drory, 1985). However, recent behavioral studies have shown that simulated driving performance is also disrupted by conversations using hands-free devices Nilsson, 1994, 1995;Anttila and Luoma 2005;Beede and Kass, 2006;Brookhuis et al, 1991;Consiglio et al, 2003;Horberry et al, 2006;Hunton and Rose, 2005;Jamson and Merat 2005;Lamble et al, 1999;Levy et al, 2006;Liu and Lee, 2005;Matthews et al, 2003;Patten et al, 2004;Ranney et al, 2005;Shinar et al, 2005;Strayer and Drews, 2004;Strayer et al, 2003Strayer et al, , 2006Strayer and Johnston, 2001;Bolling, 2005, 2006;Treffner and Barrett, 2004), and epidemiological studies of real-world accidents suggest that users of hands-free phones are just as likely to have an accident as users of hand-held devices (Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997;McEvoy et al, 2005). In their meta-analysis of recent dual-task driving studies, Horey and Wickens (2006) concluded that the costs to driving performance resulting from a secondary simulated conversation task were equivalent for hand-held and hands-free devices.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, multitasking of driving and conversing on a cell phone is technologically available, but intuitively seems dangerous in some circumstances. Although driving becomes sufficiently cognitively automated (Schneider, 1999) to permit experienced drivers to perform other tasks at the same time, such as carrying on a conversation, a large number of behavioral studies have now shown that performing another cognitive task while driving an actual or virtual car substantially degrades driving performance Nilsson, 1994, 1995;Anttila and Luoma, 2005;Beede and Kass, 2006;Brookhuis et al, 1991;Consiglio et al, 2003;Drory, 1985;Engström et al, 2005;Haigney et al, 2000;Hancock et al, 2003;Horberry et al, 2006;Horrey and Wickens, 2004;Hunton and Rose, 2005;Jamson and Merat, 2005;Kubose et al, 2006;Lamble et al, 1999;Lesch and Hancock, 2004;Liu and Lee, 2005;Matthews et al, 2003;McKnight and McKnight, 1993;Patten et al, 2004;Ranney et al, 2005; Nunes, 2000, 2003;Santos et al, 2005;Shinar et al, 2005; Drews, 2004, 2007;Strayer et al, 2003Strayer et al, , 2006Strayer and Johnston, 2001; Bolling, 2005, 2006;Treffner and Barrett, 2004). Although some of these studies show that some aspects of driving are unaffected by a secondary task (e.g., Haigney et al, 2000) and in some cases certain aspects improve (e.g., Brookhuis et al, 1991;Engström et al, 2005), a recent meta-analysis of the literature suggests a large overall decrement in driving performance when a secondary task is added (Horey and Wickens, 2006).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The only significant difference appeared in the multidimensional analysis that concerned Mobile [7]. A similar study was performed by Consiglio et al who revealed the elongation of reaction time due to cellular phone conversation [8]. These studies were carried out in laboratory conditions using models resembling a car cockpit and imitating well the conditions of natural road traffic.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…This impairment is complex and indicates the involvement of the central nervous system. It leads to decreasing visual ability [9] or speed of performing the movements necessary for braking [7,8].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%