Effects of In-Vehicle Distracter Complexity on Driving and Emergency Response Performance

Manser, Michael P.; Even, Dana M. · 2002 · ROSA P / Southwest Region University Transportation Center (U.S.)

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

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

Summary

This study investigates how varying levels of complexity in in-vehicle distracters affect general driving performance and emergency response capabilities. While previous research established that singular distracters, such as cell phone use, degrade driving performance, there was a lack of data regarding how the specific complexity of a single distracter influences behavior. The authors aimed to determine if increasing distracter complexity differentially impacts driver performance and whether this complexity alters a driver’s ability to react to emergency events, such as an oncoming vehicle in their lane. The research comprised two experiments involving a total of 60 drivers using a driving simulator. Experiment One examined the influence of an auditory distracter, while Experiment Two examined a visual distracter. In both studies, participants performed general driving tasks on a generic suburban roadway and encountered an emergency scenario involving a motorcycle approaching in their lane. The distracters varied in complexity, ranging from no task to simple and complex cognitive tasks (math problems). The study measured general driving metrics, such as lane position stability, and emergency response behaviors, specifically braking and steering reactions. The results indicated that driver performance degraded with the introduction of any distracter. Crucially, when the distracter was presented via the visual mode, performance degradation was differentially influenced by the level of complexity; higher complexity led to greater impairment. Regarding emergency responses, the primary reaction to the approaching motorcycle was braking. However, the presence of a distracter increased the number of participants who braked, and this behavior was differentially influenced by the distracter's complexity. The findings support the contention that driver performance is negatively influenced by both the inclusion of a distracter and increasing levels of complexity, likely due to the capture of increasing amounts of attentional resources. The significance of these findings lies in their support for information processing capacity theory, which posits that limited attentional resources lead to performance degradation when task demands exceed availability. The study highlights that visual distracters with higher complexity pose a greater risk to driving safety than auditory ones or simpler tasks. Furthermore, the alteration of emergency response behaviors—specifically the increased tendency to brake rather than steer—suggests that distraction not only impairs routine driving but also compromises critical safety maneuvers during high-risk events. This underscores the need to minimize high-complexity visual distractions in vehicle design and usage to preserve driver attention for emergency situations.

Key finding

Driver performance degraded with the introduction of distracters and emergency braking responses were differentially influenced by the level of distracter complexity.

Methodology

simulator

Sample size: 60

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.

• manual
• visual
• visual manual
• auditory
• cognitive
• external distraction

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
• Theoretical Contribution: theory or model, conceptual framework