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

  • September 25, 2017
    Truck safety technology can prevent 63,000 crashes each year, says AAA
    Equipping large trucks with advanced safety technologies has the potential to prevent up to 63,000 truck-related crashes each year, according to new research from the US AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. In 2015, large trucks were involved in more than 400,000 crashes that resulted in more than 4,000 deaths and 116,000 injuries -- a four percent increase from 2014.
  • October 28, 2021
    CV app boosts school zone safety, says study
    Drivers operated in Stealth/Off, Audio On and Audio/Visual On conditions 
  • August 15, 2013
    New Zealand woman sends texts while ‘sleep-driving’
    A New Zealand woman, who drove for hundreds of kilometres while asleep at the wheel, sending texts from her mobile phone along the way, is to be forbidden to drive, according to police. Police received an emergency call from a friend concerned the woman had gone out in her car after taking sleeping medication. Told that the woman had been sleep-driving ten months previously and had a fondness for the beach, police ordered patrol cars to keep a lookout for her silver hatchback and began tracking her via her
  • August 6, 2013
    Monitoring, detection and control systems inside tunnels can do much to improve traveller safety
    ITS technology can do a great deal to improve tunnel safety, as Colin Sowman discovers. It was back in April 2004 that the European Parliament adopted the EU Directive which lays down the Minimum Safety Requirements for Tunnels in the Trans-European Road Network (2004/54/EC). This was the first unitary legislation setting minimum safety standards for European road tunnels and was designed to harmonise the management of tunnel safety at a national level. Operators of existing tunnels have until 30 April 201