Skip to main content

New hands-free technologies pose hidden dangers for drivers

Potentially unsafe mental distractions can persist for as long as 27 seconds after dialling, changing music or sending a text using voice commands, according to surprising new research by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. The results raise new and unexpected concerns regarding the use of phones and vehicle information systems while driving. This research represents the third phase of the Foundation’s comprehensive investigation into cognitive distraction, which shows that new hands-free technologies ca
November 3, 2015 Read time: 4 mins
Potentially unsafe mental distractions can persist for as long as 27 seconds after dialling, changing music or sending a text using voice commands, according to surprising new research by the 477 AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.

The results raise new and unexpected concerns regarding the use of phones and vehicle information systems while driving. This research represents the third phase of the Foundation’s comprehensive investigation into cognitive distraction, which shows that new hands-free technologies can mentally distract drivers even if their eyes are on the road and their hands are on the wheel.

Researchers found that potentially unsafe levels of mental distraction can last for as long as 27 seconds after completing a distracting task in the worst-performing systems studied. At the 25 mph speed limit in the study, drivers travelled the length of nearly three football fields during this time. When using the least distracting systems, drivers remained impaired for more than 15 seconds after completing a task.

The researchers discovered the residual effects of mental distraction while comparing new hands-free technologies in ten 2015 vehicles and three types of smart phones. The analysis found that all systems studied increased mental distraction to potentially unsafe levels. The systems that performed best generally had fewer errors, required less time on task and were relatively easy to use.

The researchers rated mental distraction on a five-point scale. Category one represents a mild level of distraction and category five represents the maximum.  AAA considers a mental distraction rating of two and higher to be potentially dangerous while driving.

The best performing system was the Chevy Equinox with a cognitive distraction rating of 2.4, while the worst performing system was the Mazda 6 with a cognitive distraction rating of 4.6. Among phone systems, Google Now performed best with a distraction rating of 3.0, while Apple Siri and Microsoft Cortana earned ratings of 3.4 and 3.8. Using the phones to send texts significantly increased the level of mental distraction. While sending voice-activated texts, Google Now rated as a category 3.3 distraction, while Apple Siri and Microsoft Cortana rated as category 3.7 and category 4.1 distractions.

“The lasting effects of mental distraction pose a hidden and pervasive danger that would likely come as a surprise to most drivers,” said Peter Kissinger, president and CEO of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. “The results indicate that motorists could miss stop signs, pedestrians and other vehicles while the mind is readjusting to the task of driving.”

“Drivers should use caution while using voice-activated systems, even at seemingly safe moments when there is a lull in traffic or the car is stopped at an intersection,” said Marshall Doney, AAA’s president and CEO. “The reality is that mental distractions persist and can affect driver attention even after the light turns green.”

“The massive increase in voice-activated technologies in cars and phones represents a growing safety problem for drivers,” continued Doney. “We are concerned that these new systems may invite driver distraction, even as overwhelming scientific evidence concludes that hands-free is not risk free.”

Previous AAA Foundation research established that a category 1 mental distraction is about the same as listening to the radio or an audio book. A category 2 distraction is about the same as talking on the phone, while category 3 is equivalent to sending voice-activated texts on a perfect, error-free system. Category 4 is similar to updating social media while driving, while category 5 corresponds to a highly-challenging, scientific test designed to overload a driver’s attention.

“Developers should aim to reduce mental distractions by designing systems that are no more demanding than listening to the radio or an audio book,” continued Doney. “Given that the impairing effects of distraction may last much longer than people realise, AAA advises consumers to use caution when interacting with these technologies while behind the wheel.”

Related Content

  • March 16, 2016
    Observing driver behaviour in real traffic condition
    The EU’s UDRIVE project will investigate driver behaviour in terms of road safety and the decarbonisation of road transport, as Nicole van Nes and Silvia Curbelo explain. There were nearly 25,700 fatalities on European Union (EU) roads in 2014 or, to look it another way, roughly 70 people are killed in traffic accidents on European roads every day - and many more are injured. Around 22% of the fatalities are pedestrians, 15% will be motorcycle riders and 8% cyclists. So despite the improvements in road safe
  • July 23, 2019
    The rise and rise of robo-car
    When it comes to driverless cars, there are many variables – but one thing is for certain: autonomous driving will have a significant impact on vehicle design, says Andreas Herrmann The transition to autonomous vehicles (AVs) means that many of the factors which have shaped automotive design for the past 130 years no longer apply. At present, the design of a car is largely determined by the anticipated direction of travel: the car’s silhouette immediately shows where the front and back are. Driverless ve
  • January 31, 2012
    Intersection collision avoidance system trial
    Although much of the emphasis of research into intersection management has tended to concentrate on the needs of urban locations, there remain specific issues pertaining to rural intersections which need to be addressed. Here, Rebecca Szymkowski and Greg Helgeson, Wisconsin DOT, Todd Szymkowski, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and Craig Shankwitz and Arvind Menon, University of Minnesota detail progress on an intersection collision avoidance system for more remote locations.
  • July 20, 2015
    New App alerts emergency services after a collision
    Launched in time for the summer holiday season, Collision Call is a new app which automatically calls and alerts emergency services after a serious collision and sends an e-mail to family, work and friends, allowing them to take immediate action. The app measures G-forces which occur during a collision. If those forces exceed a certain level, dangerous to humans, the app automatically calls the alarm number in the relevant country and sends e-mails to programmed contacts. To prevent this from happening w