Potentially unsafe mental distractions can persist for as long as 27 seconds after dialing, changing music or sending a text using voice commands, according to research by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. The results raise concerns regarding the use of phones and vehicle information systems while driving. This research represents the third phase of the Foundation's 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.

Research assistants introduce study participants to special devices designed to gauge mental distraction during road tests. AAA photos

"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."

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 traveled 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.

"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 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 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 audiobook," continued Doney. "Given that the impairing effects of distraction may last much longer than people realize, AAA advises consumers to use caution when interacting with these technologies while behind the wheel."

Dr. David Strayer and Dr. Joel Cooper of the University of Utah conducted the research. A total of 257 drivers ages 21-70 participated in the study of 2015 model-year vehicles, while 65 additional drivers ages 21-68 tested the three phone systems.

More Articles

• November 1, 2023 Chair Jerome Powell’s Press Conference on Employment and Inflation
• Senator Ron Wyden's Office: On Health Care, Inflation Reduction Act Includes the Culmination of Wyden’s Work On the Finance Committee to Address the High Cost of Prescription Drugs
• Yale School of the Environment's Study of Environment Found "Total Indirect Emissions from Electric Vehicles Pale in Comparison to the Indirect Emissions from Fossil Fuel-powered Vehicles"
• Press Briefing by White House COVID19 Response Team and Public Health Officials; December 15, 2021
• Biden-Harris Administration Marks Anniversary of Americans with Disabilities Act and Announces Resources to Support Individuals with Long COVID, Increased Access to Democracy for Voters with Disabilities
• GAO: Transportation Safety: DOT Has Taken Steps to Verify and Publicize Drug and Alcohol Testing Data But Should Do More
• How are States Prioritizing Who Will Get the COVID-19 Vaccine First? CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Released an Interim Recommendation For the Highest Priority Group
• Once ADAS-trained, Older Adults Find It Easier to Access and Use Driver-assistance Technologies Without Compromising Their Attention to the Road
• Ferida's Wolff's Backyard: Is Nature Doing Social Distancing? The Town Where the Official State of New Jersey Was Declared
• Explore Presidential Papers From Hoover to Obama and Gov.info With Publications Such As 9-11 Report, Post JFK Assassination Audio & Nixon's Watergate Grand Jury Testimony