Visual and cognitive demands of using in-vehicle infotainment systems

Strayer, DL; Cooper, JM; Goethe, RM; McCarty, MM; Getty, D; Biondi, F · 2017 · publications_jsonl

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (search — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study addresses the critical safety concern regarding driver distraction caused by In-Vehicle Information Systems (IVIS). As modern automobiles increasingly offer complex multimodal interactions for secondary tasks, there is a significant knowledge gap concerning how these systems impact driver workload. The research was motivated by the need to determine which task types are most distracting, how different interaction modes (e.g., touch vs. voice) affect workload, and whether specific vehicle manufacturers impose significantly different cognitive and visual demands on drivers. The researchers conducted an on-road study involving 30 different 2017 model-year vehicles from various manufacturers. For each vehicle, 24 participants performed a series of tasks while driving on a residential road with a 25 mph speed limit. The study assessed four primary task types: audio entertainment, calling and dialing, text messaging, and navigation. These tasks were performed using up to three interaction modes: center stack (visual/manual), auditory vocal, and center console. To establish objective benchmarks for workload, the study utilized two referent tasks: an N-back task to measure high cognitive demand without visual interference, and a Surrogate Reference Task (SuRT) to measure high visual/manual demand. Data collection included primary driving performance metrics, secondary task performance via the Detection Response Task (DRT), subjective workload ratings using the NASA Task Load Index, and task completion times. These metrics were standardized against the referent tasks to create an overall demand score. The findings revealed significant variations in demand across task types, interaction modes, and vehicles. Regarding task types, audio entertainment and calling/dialing were the least demanding, while text messaging imposed significantly higher demand. Navigation destination entry was the most demanding task, with an overall demand score more than twice that of the high-demand cognitive referent. In terms of interaction modes, center stack interactions were less demanding than auditory vocal interactions, which were less demanding than center console interactions. Although voice commands reduced visual demand compared to the SuRT, they required significantly longer interaction times, averaging 30 seconds. Furthermore, substantial differences existed between vehicles: seven vehicles had moderate demand, eleven had high demand, and twelve had very high demand, with the latter group exhibiting higher cognitive, visual, and subjective workload scores alongside longer interaction times. The study concludes that many IVIS features currently enabled while driving are too distracting to be considered safe. The authors argue that the presence of a feature in a moving vehicle often leads drivers to incorrectly assume it is safe to use. The results suggest that automakers and policymakers should restrict access to high-demand interactions, particularly navigation entry and text messaging, while the vehicle is in motion. The research provides empirical evidence that workload varies systematically based on task, mode, and vehicle design, urging a shift in focus from what features *can* be available to what interactions *should* be permitted during driving to mitigate crash risk.

Key finding

Across 30 model-year-2017 vehicles, navigation entry was the most demanding IVIS task type and 12 of 30 vehicles scored above the N-back/SuRT high-demand referent, with voice modes trading visual demand for longer interaction times.

Methodology

on_road

Sample size: 720

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via tag_papers on 2026-05-30 (4 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-nvidia on 2026-08-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• mental demand
• infotainment
• visual manual
• temporal
• auditory
• visual

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Applied Guidance: design guidelines
• Methodological Resource: measurement protocol
• Theoretical Contribution: conceptual framework