Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving

Drews, Frank A.; Drews, Frank A.; Strayer, D.L. · 2004 · ROSA P / Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

DOI: 10.1177/154193120404801901

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

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

Summary

This study investigates the differential impact of conversing with a passenger versus using a cell phone on driving performance, addressing a gap in previous research that primarily compared cell phone use to driving alone. The authors tested two competing hypotheses: one suggesting no difference between the two conversation types, and another proposing that passengers, by sharing the driving environment, can support the driver’s situation awareness through traffic-related dialogue, whereas cell phone partners lack this contextual awareness. To ensure naturalistic interaction, participants engaged in "close-call" storytelling rather than artificial tasks. The experiment utilized a high-fidelity driving simulator featuring a 24-mile multi-lane beltway with irregular traffic flow. Ninety-six adult participants, recruited in friend dyads, were assigned to one of three conditions: driving only (control), driving while conversing with a passenger, or driving while conversing on a cell phone. The primary performance metric was task completion, specifically whether drivers successfully exited the highway at a designated rest area. Additionally, conversation transcripts were analyzed for references to surrounding traffic and the number of conversational turns following such references, serving as indicators of shared situation awareness. Results indicated that driving errors were highest in the cell phone condition. Drivers in the cell phone group were four times more likely to miss the designated exit compared to those in the passenger condition. Statistical analysis confirmed a significant difference between the cell phone and passenger groups, as well as between the cell phone and control groups. In contrast, performance in the passenger condition did not significantly differ from the driving-only control. Analysis of conversation content revealed that passenger conversations contained significantly more references to traffic (mean 3.8 vs. 2.1) and more subsequent conversational turns focused on traffic (mean 19.2 vs. 8.6) than cell phone conversations. The findings suggest that passenger conversations mitigate the negative effects of distraction on driving because the passenger shares the driver’s visual field and can direct attention toward traffic hazards. This collaboration fosters shared situation awareness, allowing the dyad to adjust conversational flow based on driving demands. Conversely, cell phone conversations impair performance because the remote partner cannot monitor the environment or support the driver’s attentional needs. The authors conclude that the safety risk of cell phone use is distinct from that of passenger conversation due to this lack of shared situational context, though they note that future research should validate these simulator-based findings in real-world driving conditions.

Key finding

Drivers conversing on a cell phone were four times more likely to miss the highway exit than those conversing with a passenger, who performed similarly to drivers driving alone.

Methodology

simulator

Sample size: 96

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 bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

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

• mobile phones
• passenger effects
• cognitive
• auditory
• situational awareness
• visual manual

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).

• Empirical Findings: observational prevalence
• Methodological Resource: validation psychometrics
• Theoretical Contribution: theory or model