Engrossed in conversation: The impact of cell phones on simulated driving performance

The Impact of Text Driving on Driving Safety

“…The rationale behind our text development and selection lies in the idea of passive versus creative thought. By either presenting to or requesting information from a participant that incites or demands a thoughtful response as opposed to a simple regurgitation of fact, we can assuredly place a higher level of cognitive demand upon our subjects (Beede and Kass, 2006). For example, prompting the participant with a choice, perhaps siding on a controversial current event, they are forced to take a stance.…”

A decrease in brain activation associated with driving when listening to someone speak

“…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).…”

“…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.…”

Observation of risky driving behavior as a result of using in-vehicle technology in the Czech Republic

“…Beede and Kass (2006) report no difference in speed between drivers using and not using cell phone, drivers using cell phone also deviated less in their lateral position. They found that cell phone use decreases number of lane changes and increases number of attentional lapses and slowers driver's reactions.…”