Driver Compensation
- 3 November 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Vol. 57 (8) , 1334-1338
Abstract
Strayer et al.’s conclusion that their “cognitive distraction scale” for auditory-vocal tasks indicates “significant impairments to driving” is not supported by their data. Additional analysis demonstrates that slower brake reaction times during auditory-vocal tasks were fully compensated for by longer following distances to the lead car. Naturalistic driving data demonstrate that cellular conversation decreases crash risk, the opposite of the article’s assumption. Hence, the scale’s internal and external validities for indicating driving impairment are highly questionable.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Bicyclists’ speed adaptation strategies when conducting self-paced vs. system-paced smartphone tasks in trafficTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2015
- Analysis of compensative behavior in demanding driving situationsTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2014
- Towards Operationalizing Driver Distraction2013
- Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2008
- A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk DriverHuman Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2006
- Driver Workload Metrics Task 2 Final Report2006
- Role of mobile phones in motor vehicle crashes resulting in hospital attendance: a case-crossover studyBMJ, 2005
- Profiles in Driver Distraction: Effects of Cell Phone Conversations on Younger and Older DriversHuman Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2004
- Association between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor Vehicle CollisionsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1997
- Do accident-involved drivers exhibit riskier everyday driving behavior?Accident Analysis & Prevention, 1982