Dividing Attention in Everyday Life
Driving is a complex task, requiring the concurrent execution of various cognitive, physical sensory and psychomotor skills, and divided attention plays an important role in our lives. Most automobile accidents are caused by failures in divided attention because of mobile phones, loud radios and DVD players in vehicles during traffic. Research by the National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that driver inattention, in its various forms, contributes to approximately 25 percent of police reported crashes. Driver distraction is one form of driver inattention and is claimed to be a contributing factor in over half of in attention crashes. However, as more and more mobile gadgets are being installed in vehicles, and vehicles having television, and websites on the vehicle dashboards, state of the art entertainment and driver assistance systems proliferate the vehicle market, it is like that the rate of distraction-related crashes will escalate.
When driving, drivers must continually allocate their attention resources to both driving and non-driving tasks. Because many aspects of the driving task become automated with experience, drivers are often capable of dividing performance or safety. Drivers can, however, be distracted by an activity or event to the extent that they no longer allocate sufficient attention to the driving task and their driving performance is compromised. In this sense, driver distraction results when drivers’ normal cognitive processes (i.e., attention-sharing) and adaptive strategies fail and drivers are no longer able to adequately divide their attention between the driving and secondary tasks and maintain driving performance at a satisfactory level.
Prior research has established that the manual manipulation of equipment (e.g., dialing the phone, answering the phone, adjusting the radio and DVD/CD player) has a negative impact on driving. In recent research, the focused is on the cell phone conversation, because it comprises the bulk of the time engaged in dual task pairing. In 2001 the American Psychological Society conducted a study designed to contrast the effects of handheld and hands-free cell phone conversation. The control group listened to the radio while performing the simulated driving task. Forty-eight undergraduate (24 male, 24 female) from the University of Utah participated in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to the three groups: radio control, handheld phone, and hands free phone.
The study consisted of three phases. The first phase was a warm up interval that last 7 minutes and was used to acquaint participants with the tracking task. The second phase was the single task portion of the study and comprised the 7.5 minute segments immediately preceding and immediately following the dual task port of the study. The third phase was the dual task portion of the study, lasting 15 minutes. Participants in the phone conversation groups were asked to discuss either the then going Clinton presidential impeachment or the Salt Lake City Olympic Committee bribery scandal (conversations were counterbalanced a cross participants).
Figure 1 Dual-task Performance during Driving.
Top panel: Dual task performance significantly increased the probability of a miss in the cellphone condition but not in the radio-control condition.
Bottom panel: Reaction time increases significantly for a dual task in the cell-phone condition but not in the radio-control condition.
Reference
Strayer, D. L., & Johnson, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telephone. Psychological Science, 12, 463. Retrieved from http://www.utah.edu/ September 21, 2011.
Young, Kristie & Regan, Michael, Regan. (2007). Driver distraction: a review of the literature. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Monash University. Retrieved from http://www.acrs.org.au/ September 21, 2011





