David L Strayer1, Jonna Turrill2, Joel M Cooper3, James R Coleman2, Nathan Medeiros-Ward4, Francesco Biondi5. 1. University of Utah, Salt Lake CityPrecision Driving Research, Salt Lake City, UtahUniversity of Utah, Salt Lake CityUniversity of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of Padova, Padova, Italy David.Strayer@utah.edu. 2. University of Utah, Salt Lake City. 3. Precision Driving Research, Salt Lake City, Utah. 4. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. 5. University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to establish a systematic framework for measuring and understanding cognitive distraction in the automobile. BACKGROUND: Driver distraction from secondary in-vehicle activities is increasingly recognized as a significant source of injuries and fatalities on the roadway. METHOD: Across three studies, participants completed eight in-vehicle tasks commonly performed by the driver of an automobile. Primary, secondary, subjective, and physiological measures were collected and integrated into a cognitive distraction scale. RESULTS: In-vehicle activities, such as listening to the radio or an audio book, were associated with a low level of cognitive workload; the conversation activities of talking to a passenger in the vehicle or conversing with a friend on a handheld or hands-free cell phone were associated with a moderate level of cognitive workload; and using a speech-to-text interfaced e-mail system involved a high level of cognitive workload. CONCLUSION: The research established that there are significant impairments to driving that stem from the diversion of attention from the task of operating a motor vehicle and that the impairments to driving are directly related to the cognitive workload of these in-vehicle activities. Moreover, the adoption of voice-based systems in the vehicle may have unintended consequences that adversely affect traffic safety. APPLICATION: These findings can be used to help inform scientifically based policies on driver distraction, particularly as they relate to cognitive distraction stemming from the diversion of attention to other concurrent activities in the vehicle.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to establish a systematic framework for measuring and understanding cognitive distraction in the automobile. BACKGROUND: Driver distraction from secondary in-vehicle activities is increasingly recognized as a significant source of injuries and fatalities on the roadway. METHOD: Across three studies, participants completed eight in-vehicle tasks commonly performed by the driver of an automobile. Primary, secondary, subjective, and physiological measures were collected and integrated into a cognitive distraction scale. RESULTS: In-vehicle activities, such as listening to the radio or an audio book, were associated with a low level of cognitive workload; the conversation activities of talking to a passenger in the vehicle or conversing with a friend on a handheld or hands-free cell phone were associated with a moderate level of cognitive workload; and using a speech-to-text interfaced e-mail system involved a high level of cognitive workload. CONCLUSION: The research established that there are significant impairments to driving that stem from the diversion of attention from the task of operating a motor vehicle and that the impairments to driving are directly related to the cognitive workload of these in-vehicle activities. Moreover, the adoption of voice-based systems in the vehicle may have unintended consequences that adversely affect traffic safety. APPLICATION: These findings can be used to help inform scientifically based policies on driver distraction, particularly as they relate to cognitive distraction stemming from the diversion of attention to other concurrent activities in the vehicle.
Authors: Karlye A M Damaso; Spencer C Castro; Juanita Todd; David L Strayer; Alexander Provost; Dora Matzke; Andrew Heathcote Journal: Mem Cognit Date: 2021-12-23
Authors: Elizabeth A Walshe; Chelsea Ward McIntosh; Daniel Romer; Flaura K Winston Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-10-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Yanli Ma; Shouming Qi; Yaping Zhang; Guan Lian; Weixin Lu; Ching-Yao Chan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-07-25 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Joseph M Baker; Jennifer L Bruno; Aaron Piccirilli; Andrew Gundran; Lene K Harbott; David M Sirkin; Matthew Marzelli; S M Hadi Hosseini; Allan L Reiss Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Udo Boehm; Dora Matzke; Matthew Gretton; Spencer Castro; Joel Cooper; Michael Skinner; David Strayer; Andrew Heathcote Journal: Cogn Res Princ Implic Date: 2021-04-09