A comparison of the cell-phone driver and the drunk driver

Strayer, D. L.; Drews, F. A.; Crouch, D. J. · 2006 · ROSA P / Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

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 the relative impairment of driving performance caused by conversing on a cellular telephone compared to driving with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at the legal limit of 0.08%. Motivated by epidemiological evidence suggesting that cell phone use carries a similar accident risk to drunk driving, the researchers aimed to establish a causal link and a clear benchmark for driver distraction in a controlled laboratory setting. The study sought to determine whether the impairments associated with cell phone use are comparable in magnitude to those caused by alcohol intoxication. The experiment utilized a high-fidelity driving simulator with a within-subjects design involving 40 adult participants. Each participant completed three counterbalanced conditions: baseline single-task driving, driving while conversing on either a handheld or hands-free cell phone, and driving while intoxicated (BAC 0.08%). The task involved a car-following paradigm where participants drove behind a pace car that braked intermittently. Performance metrics included brake reaction time, maximum braking force, following distance, speed recovery, and collision frequency. Blood alcohol levels were verified via breath analysis, and cell phone conversations were naturalistic dialogues initiated before driving to minimize manual interference. The results revealed distinct patterns of impairment for each condition. Drivers using cell phones exhibited delayed brake reactions (9% slower than baseline), increased variability in following distance, and a 19% longer time to recover speed after braking. Crucially, cell phone users were involved in significantly more rear-end collisions than both baseline and intoxicated drivers. In contrast, intoxicated drivers displayed a more aggressive style: they followed closer to the pace car, applied 23% more braking force, and had twice as many trials with dangerous time-to-collision values, though their reaction times and accident rates did not significantly differ from baseline. No significant difference in impairment was found between handheld and hands-free cell phone use. The study concludes that while both cell phone use and alcohol intoxication impair driving, the mechanisms differ qualitatively. Cell phone impairment is attributed to attentional diversion, leading to slower reactions and higher immediate collision risk. Alcohol impairment manifests as aggressive driving behaviors that increase long-term risk. The findings support the claim that cell phone use can be as profoundly impairing as drunk driving, challenging regulations that permit hands-free devices while banning handheld ones. The authors suggest that legislative and educational interventions should address the cognitive distraction of phone conversations, as practice does not mitigate these effects and drivers often remain unaware of their impaired performance.

Key finding

Drivers conversing on a cell phone had significantly higher accident rates and slower brake reaction times than baseline, whereas intoxicated drivers followed closer and braked harder but did not differ significantly from baseline in accident rates or reaction times.

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 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
• distraction laws
• alcohol
• manual
• auditory
• temporal

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: policy recommendations
• Empirical Findings: observational prevalence, behavioral performance data