Ergonomics Society of the Human Factors and Human Factors
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society http://hfs.sagepub.com/ The Effects of Text Messaging on Young Drivers Simon G. Hosking, Kristie L. Young and Michael A. Regan Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 2009 51: 582 originally published online 19 August 2009 DOI: 10.1177/0018720809341575 The online version of this article can be found at: http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/51/4/582 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Additional services and information for Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society can be found at: Email Alerts: http://hfs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://hfs.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://hfs.sagepub.com/content/51/4/582.refs.html Downloaded from hfs.sagepub.com at SOUTH DAKOTA UNIVERSITY on October 18, 2010 The Effects of Text Messaging on Young Drivers Simon G. Hosking and Kristie L. Young, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia, and Michael A. Regan, French National Institute for Transport and Safety Research (INRETS), Lyon, France Objective: This study investigated the effects of using a cell phone to retrieve and send text messages on the driving performance of young novice drivers. Background: Young drivers are particularly susceptible to driver distraction and have an increased risk of distraction-related crashes. Distractions from in-vehicle devices, particularly, those that require manual input, are known to cause decrements in driving performance. Method: Twenty young novice drivers used a cell phone to retrieve and send text messages while driving a simulator. Results: The amount of time that drivers spent not looking at the road when text messaging was up to ~400% greater than that recorded in baseline (no- text-messaging) conditions. Furthermore, drivers’ variability in lane position increased up to ~50%, and missed lane changes increased 140%. There was also an increase of up to ~150% in drivers’ variability in following distances to lead vehicles. Conclusion: Previous research has shown that the risk of crashing while dialing a handheld device, such as when text messaging and driving, is more than double that of conversing on a cell phone. The present study has identified the detrimental effects of text messaging on driving performance that may underlie such increased crash risk. Application: More effective road safety measures are needed to prevent and mitigate the adverse effects on driving performance of using cell phones to retrieve and send text messages. INTRODUCTION (e.g., Chisholm, Caird, & Lockhart, 2008; Jamson, Westerman, Hockey, & Carsten, 2004; Driver distraction is a significant road safety Lee, Caven, Haake, & Brown, 2001; Tsimhoni, issue with up to one quarter of crashes estimated Smith, & Green, 2004). to be a result of drivers’ engaging in distracting The willingness of young drivers to engage activities (e.g., Klauer, Dingus, Neale, Sudweeks, in text messaging should be of particular con- & Ramsey, 2006; Stutts et al., 2005; Wang, cern to road safety authorities. Recent surveys Knipling, & Goodman, 1996). Distraction has have found that up to 58% of young drivers have negative effects on a range of interrelated per- used text messaging on their cell phone while formance dimensions, including visual process- driving (Telstra, 2004), and the proportion of ing of the road environment, motor control and younger drivers who text message while driving response, and higher-order (cognitive) pro- is significantly larger (31%) than that of more cessing (e.g., Lee & Strayer, 2004; McPhee, experienced drivers (McEvoy, Stevenson, & Scialfa, Dennis, Ho, & Caird, 2004; Strayer & Woodward, 2006). Such findings are consistent Drews, 2004, Strayer, Drews, & Crouch, 2006; with research showing that young drivers (a) are Strayer, Drews, & Johnston, 2003). Devices more likely than experienced drivers to engage that have been either designed or adapted for in distracting activities while driving (e.g., Gras use while driving, such as e-mail, MP3 play- et al., 2007; Lam, 2002; Poysti, Rajalin, & ers, and navigation systems, have been shown to Summala, 2005), (b) are not well calibrated to pose threats to driving safety that are at least as the effects of distraction on their driving perfor- great as those caused by talking on a cell phone mance (Horrey, Lesch, & Garabet, 2008), and Address correspondence to Simon Hosking, Defence Science and Technology Organisation, 506 Lorimer Street, Fishermans Bend, VIC, Australia, 3207; [email protected].. HUMAN FACTORS, Vol. 51, No. 4, August 2009, pp. 582-592. DOI: 10.1177/0018720809341575. Copyright © 2009, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Downloaded from hfs.sagepub.com at SOUTH DAKOTA UNIVERSITY on October 18, 2010 EFF E CTS OF TE XT ME SSAGING ON DRIVING 583 (c) have an increased risk of distraction-related the dual task without observable decrements in crashes (e.g., Lam, 2002; Neyens & Boyle, their driving performance. It should also be noted 2007). One of the reasons that young drivers are that Kircher et al. investigated only the effects of particularly vulnerable to distraction is that they retrieving text messages rather than those of both allocate most of their attentional resources to the retrieving and sending text messages. skills necessary for operating a vehicle (which There is evidence that manual input while may take years to fully develop and become driving leads to degraded driving performance, automatic), leaving fewer resources for engaging and these decrements have been found to be in secondary tasks (e.g., Shinar, Meir, & Ben- greater than those that occur when conversing Shoham, 1998). on a cell phone or using voice-activated devices. Driver distraction has been defined as the For example, comparisons between the effects “diversion of attention away from activities criti- of talking on a handheld cell phone while driv- cal for safe driving toward a competing activ- ing and of dialing a phone number while driving ity” (Lee, Young, & Regan, 2008). The extent have found that the latter resulted in greater devi- to which engaging in secondary tasks results in ation in drivers’ lateral position, larger reaction degradation of driving performance depends on times to peripheral stimuli, and a greater number several factors, including the demands of the of missed traffic signals (Brookhuis, de Vries, driving task, the demands of the secondary task, & de Waard, 1991; Tornros & Bolling, 2005). and the manner in which resources are allocated Tsimhoni et al. (2004) found that when drivers between the two tasks (e.g., Horrey & Wickens, entered addresses into a navigation system using 2004; Lee, Regan, & Young, 2008; Wickens, a keyboard, their lateral control, including lane 2002, 2008). A decomposition of text messag- position variation and number of lane departures, ing while driving would suggest that it involves was significantly worse than when addresses competition for visual, manual, and cognitive were entered using a voice-activated interface. resources. Indeed, the extent of competition for Results from a naturalistic driving study have drivers’ resources when text messaging and driv- shown that dialing handheld devices while driv- ing may be greater than that when conversing on ing increases the risk of a crash by 2.8 times a cell-phone and driving because the continuous and that this increased crash risk is significantly visual and manual demands of text messaging greater than that of conversing on a cell phone would appear to be more in conflict with the while driving (Klauer et al., 2006). driving task (however, see Atchley & Dressel, One possible explanation for why manual 2004, for findings on the effects of conversation input while driving elicits negative driving on drivers’ field of view). behaviors may be related to the overt attentional It has been claimed that text messaging while demands of button pressing. Increases in the driving could be even more distracting than talk- amount of time that drivers spend looking away ing on a cell phone while driving (Lee, 2007). from the road to interface with an in-vehicle However, there is surprisingly little empirical device can lead to degraded driving performance, data on the effects of text messaging on driv- such as increased steering wheel deviations (e.g., ing behavior. A simulator study for the Swedish Dukic, Hanson, & Falkmer, 2006), increases National Road and Transport Research Centre in the frequency of lane excursions and unde- (Kircher et al., 2004) found that when drivers tected hazards (Haigney & Westerman, 2001), were retrieving a text message, their braking and negative effects on drivers’ speed and lane reaction times were significantly slower than in position (Hildreth, Beusmans, Boer, & Royden, baseline conditions but only in response to one 2000). Klauer et al. (2006) have shown that off- of four simulated hazards (a turning motorcycle). road glances of duration longer than 2-s more There were no effects of text messaging on mean than doubles the risk of a crash. speeds. However, Kircher et al. (2004) noted that In summary, the negative effects of manual their study had some methodological limitations, input while driving are consistent with driver including a small sample size and the use of distraction as a process of diverting