Study: Distracted Drivers Stay Distracted, Even After They've Sent Super Clever Text

Aaron Cole
by Aaron Cole

Drivers may take nearly 30 seconds to regain their focus back on the road after using a car’s infotainment or hands-free smartphone systems, researchers announced Wednesday.

The two studies, which were conducted by the University of Utah ( Go Utes!) for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, concluded that even modern assist programs could dangerously distract drivers for up to 27 seconds after they’re done using them. Researchers noted that vehicles traveled more than 300 yards for 27 seconds at 25 mph.

“Just because these systems are in the car doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to use them while you are driving,” University of Utah psychology professor David Strayer, senior author of the two new studies, said in a statement. “They are very distracting, very error prone and very frustrating to use. Far too many people are dying because of distraction on the roadway, and putting another source of distraction at the fingertips of drivers is not a good idea. It’s better not to use them when you are driving.”

Researchers found that Chevrolet’s MyLink (Equinox), Buick’s IntelliLink (Lacrosse) and Toyota’s Entune (4Runner) were the least distracting models among the systems tested, although all three still ranked as “moderately distracting” to drivers. Researchers said the Sync MyFord Touch (Taurus), Volkswagen Car-Net (Passat) Nissan Connect (Altima), Chrysler Uconnect (200C) and Hyundai Blue Link (Sonata) all ranked “highly distracting.” Mazda’s Connect (Mazda6) rated as “very highly distracting.”

Similar systems in different cars, such as Chevrolet’s MyLink ranked differently, which researchers said could be attributed to varying road noise from the cars.

Researchers also found that voice-activated systems from Google, Apple and Microsoft all rated as “highly distracting” when given voice commands for navigation. Microsoft’s Cortana rated “very highly distracting” when trying to send a text.

“The voice-command technology isn’t ready,” Joel Cooper, a University of Utah research assistant professor of psychology and a co-author of the new studies, said in a statement. “It’s in the cars and is billed as a safe alternative to manual interactions with your car, but the voice systems simply don’t work well enough.”

Researchers tested the systems with 257 drivers for the infotainment and 65 people for the smartphone study. Participants were asked to respond when an LED light flashed and researchers measured drivers’ attentions to how quickly they responded to the lights.

Or you could just give up trying to Facebook in the car.

“These systems are often very difficult to use, especially if you’re just trying to entertain yourself. … The vast majority of people we tested ended up being frustrated by the complexity and error-prone nature of the systems,” Strayer said.

(H/T to David)

Aaron Cole
Aaron Cole

More by Aaron Cole

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 33 comments
  • Nick_515 Nick_515 on Oct 22, 2015

    The phone s/he is holding is the one i currently use! Can't say i like it, but if you want Verizon, and don't need data, you are condemned to it.

  • 05lgt 05lgt on Oct 23, 2015

    I see lot's of studies ranking distraction levels and reaction times, but relatively few (if any) correlating distraction level with safety/danger. It's intuitively obvious, so I don't trust it unless it's proven. There may be mitigating factors like not engaging in risk adding maneuvers as often while knowingly distracted. How does not jockeying for position and changing lanes as often balance out the distraction level? Is it measured by anyone, or is it too issue money neutral to be funded?

    • Pch101 Pch101 on Oct 23, 2015

      The results of a different U of Utah study that introduced variability into the test: Results indicated that, when drivers conversed on the cell phone, they made fewer lane changes, had a lower overall mean speed, and a significant increase in travel time in the medium and high density driving conditions. Drivers on the cell phone were also much more likely to remain behind a slower moving lead vehicle than drivers in single-task condition. http://www.psych.utah.edu/AppliedCognitionLab/LC.pdf This could explain why crash rates of phone users have been below average. Distracted driving may be preferable to the alternative of higher speeds, more lane changes, and more tailgating. The typical simulator study controls for all variables but braking. That's fine for showing reduced reaction time, but that sort of testing misses that drivers in the real world will also vary in their choices of speeds, lane changes and following distances. I suspect that the phone ends up serving as a sort of pacifier for a fair share of drivers, which means that they actually improve things to some degree.

  • 3-On-The-Tree 4cyl as well.
  • Luke42 I want more information about Ford’s Project T3.The Silverado EV needs some competition beyond just the Rivian truck. The Cybertruck has missed the mark.The Cybertruck is special in that it’s the first time Tesla has introduced an uncompetitive EV. I hope the company learns from their mistakes. While Tesla is learning what they did wrong, I’ll be shopping to replace my GMC Sierra Hybrid with a Chevy, a Ford, or a Rivian — all while happily driving my Model Y.
  • 3-On-The-Tree I wished they wouldn’t go to the twin turbo V6. That’s why I bought a 2021 Tundra V8.
  • Oberkanone My grid hurts!Good luck with installing charger locations at leased locations with aging infrastructure. Perhaps USPS would have better start modernizing it's Post offices to meet future needs. Of course, USPS has no money for anything.
  • Dukeisduke If it's going to be a turbo 4-cylinder like the new Tacoma, I'll pass.BTW, I see lots of Tacomas on the road (mine is a 2013), but I haven't seen any 4th-gen trucks yet.
Next