Central Interference in Driving
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01690.x
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 whether the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect—a delay in responding to a second task when two tasks are performed in close temporal proximity—applies to real-world driving, specifically vehicle braking. While laboratory studies support the central-bottleneck model, which posits that certain central mental operations cannot be processed in parallel, it was unclear if this bottleneck affects highly practiced, naturalistic tasks like braking. The authors aimed to determine if braking, often considered a simple reaction time task, is subject to dual-task interference and if this interference persists despite extensive driver experience. The researchers conducted an experiment using a driving simulator with 40 participants who had at least two years of driving experience. Participants performed two concurrent tasks: a braking task, where they depressed the brake pedal in response to a lead car’s brake lights, and a choice task, where they indicated via manual or vocal response whether a visual or auditory stimulus occurred once or twice. The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the tasks varied across four levels (0, 150, 350, and 1,200 ms). A follow-up experiment without the driving component was also conducted to test the generalizability of the findings. The results demonstrated that braking reaction times (RTs) were significantly slowed by the concurrent choice task, exhibiting the characteristic PRP curve where RTs were slowest at the shortest SOA (0 ms) and decreased monotonically as SOA increased. This slowing amounted to a 174 ms delay, which translates to over 16 feet of travel distance at 65 mph. The interference was primarily attributed to delays in central processing rather than motor execution, as the delay occurred largely in the time required to release the gas pedal rather than in the foot movement to the brake. Crucially, the braking slowdown was not significantly affected by the modality of the choice task’s stimulus or response, indicating that the interference was not due to shared sensory or motor resources but rather a central processing bottleneck. The follow-up experiment replicated these findings, confirming that the effect is a general limit of human information processing. The study concludes that vehicle braking is not automatic and is subject to dual-task interference consistent with the central-bottleneck model. This finding has significant implications for traffic safety, suggesting that even trivial concurrent tasks can substantially impair braking responses. The results imply that freeing up hands or ears for secondary tasks does not guarantee reduced interference, as the bottleneck lies in central decision-making processes. This underscores the need for caution regarding in-vehicle distractions and highlights the limitations of human cognitive architecture in complex, real-world environments.
Key finding
Brake reaction times were significantly delayed when a secondary choice task was presented shortly before the braking stimulus, confirming that the psychological refractory period effect extends to the well-practiced task of vehicle braking.
Methodology
simulator
Sample size: 40
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 openalex_abstract on 2026-05-08.
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-07 |
| archive | success | canonical_url | — | — | 7 | 2026-06-06 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 3 | 2026-06-10 |
| clean | success | clean | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-04 |
| chunk | success | chunk | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-04 |
| embed | success | embed | Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B | — | 1 | 2026-06-04 |
| enrich | success | openalex | — | — | 2 | 2026-05-08 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-07 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 15 | 2026-06-11 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
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.
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: behavioral performance data
- Methodological Resource: measurement protocol
- Theoretical Contribution: theory or model