Skip to main content

Distraction danger rises with in-car tech, says TRL

The increasing sophistication of in-car technology is creating new dangers in terms of driver distraction, a new study finds.
By Mike Woof April 2, 2020 Read time: 2 mins
Driver concentration is an issue with systems such as Apple CarPlay, TRL finds (© Allard1 | Dreamstime.com)

The study, undertaken by TRL on behalf of IAM RoadSmart, the FIA and the Rees Jeffreys Road Fund, aimed to evaluate the impact on driving performance of using in-vehicle infotainment systems such as Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. 

The research explored both voice and touch control, with both found to distract drivers – though touch control proved the more distracting of the two, making driver reactions even worse than when texting while driving.

Reaction times at motorway speeds increased average stopping distances to between four and five car lengths - and drivers took their eyes off the road for as long as 16 seconds while driving, the study found.

The results revealed that participants’ reaction times when engaging with either system were over 50% slower than normal. Stopping distances, lane control and response to external stimuli were all impaired.

Significantly, the participants’ reaction times were slower than someone who had used cannabis and five times worse than someone driving at the legal limit of alcohol consumption.

Neil Greig, IAM RoadSmart's policy and research director, says: “While previous research indicates that Apple CarPlay and Android Auto perform better than more traditional buttons and controls, the results from this latest study raise some serious concerns about the development and use of the latest in-vehicle infotainment systems."

"Anything that distracts a driver’s eyes or mind from the road is bad news for road safety. We’re now calling on industry and government to openly test and approve such systems and develop consistent standards that genuinely help minimise driver distraction.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • The red light camera choice: 60 killed or save US$231 million a year
    June 5, 2015
    David Crawford investigates new cost-benefit analysis of red light cameras. US states can now realistically calculate the economic benefits of using red light safety cameras, alone or in combination with other measures, to cut road traffic accident levels. The results could be of material value in making the case for the cameras as a number of state legislatures continue to debate their acceptability.
  • US road safety continues to improve
    February 7, 2012
    Road safety continues to improve according to the latest figures from the US Department of Transportation. The recorded data shows that in 2009 the US had the lowest level of traffic fatalities since 1954.
  • Zendrive: lunchtime driving in San Francisco riskier than rush hour
    January 23, 2018
    Lunch-hour driving across the San Francisco Bay Area between 11.00am and 2.00pm is riskier than morning and evening rush hour commutes with more than 50% of routes presenting a greater risk to drivers during lunch hour. These latest findings come from Zendrive’s Bay Area Commute Safety Snapshot which also revealed that the San Mateo Bridge is overall more dangerous during morning commutes between 6.00am to 11.00am.
  • ITS homes in on cycling safety
    April 9, 2014
    A new generation of ITS equipment is helping road authorities get to grips with cycle safety – and not a moment too soon as Colin Sowman discovers. Cyclists - remember them? Apparently not. At least not according to the OECD 2013 report Cycling, Health and Safety which contains the statement: ‘Cyclists are often forgotten in the design of the road traffic system’. Looking through the statistics that exist (each country appears to compile them differently) it is not difficult to see how such a conclusion cou