Table A1.
An overview of driving simulators characteristics and classification (n = 67).
| ID | Ref. | NP | Sample Characteristics a | Driving Simulator Class b | LSR (km) | TD | MT | Type of Device—Distraction Task | Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [70] | 35 | NR; 22.5; NR; 21–14 | B | 2,65 | V, C, M | TrVs, DM | HH—texting | Based on vehicle dynamics, it is possible to identify specific distraction tasks with a level of accuracy that is adequate. |
| 2 | [54] | 25 | 22–33; 25; 2.6; NR | A | NR | V, M, C | OMs | HF—destination entry | In comparison to the primary visual-manual interaction with the Samsung Touch interface, voice entry (from Google Glass and Samsung) resulted in lower subjective workload ratings, lower standard deviation of lateral lane position, shorter task durations, faster remote Detection Response Task (DRT) reaction times, lower DRT miss rates, and less time looking off-road. |
| 3 | [50] | 134 | 20–30, 65–75; 23.2, 70.0; 2.8, 3.0; 23–40, 39–22 | A | 25.7 | V, Au + A | DM | HF—typing a number into a keypad, conversation with a car passenger, memorizing | Braking responses are affected by distractions, and this effect can last for up to 11.5 s. |
| 4 | [78] | 31 | 18–47; 25.61; 6.24; 16–15 | A | NR | V, C, M | TrVs | HH—received and answered text messages | Any mobile gadget, like a smartwatch, smartphone, or voice assistant, could affect how well you drive, especially if you have to pay attention to it when your eyes are off the road. |
| 5 | [93] | 24 | NR; 33, 26.3; NR; 8–4, 8–4 | B | NR | V, C, Au | DM | HF—receives traffic information | The two other systems required the participants to glance away from the road (too) long, endangering their safety, and reading an SMS took longer than scanning a PDA. The auditory information provision system, however, provided for the best driving performance. |
| 6 | [83] | 39 | 19–32; 21.5; 2.6; 27–12 | A | NR | V, C, M | TrVs | HF—respond to a call, replay several WhatsApp messages, use Instagram | Young drivers who use mobile phones while operating a vehicle experience impairments that limit their ability to control the vehicle. |
| 7 | [108] | 53 | 22–34; 25.25; 3.08; 37–16 | B | 3 | V, C, M | RT | HH—speech-based texting and handheld texting (two difficulty levels in each task) | Drivers undertake risk-compensation behavior by extending time headway in order to offset the higher accident risk associated with using a mobile phone while driving. Drivers perceive a rise in accident risk during distracted driving. |
| 8 | [102] | 41 | <25, 26–40, >41; NR; NR; 30–11 | B | 20 | V, M + A | DM, OMs | HF—enter the application interface of 3, 4, or 6 icons | In the HMI design of in-vehicle information, there is a statistically significant difference in driver perception reaction time for varying numbers of icons (IVI). |
| 9 | [17] | 100 | <30, 30–50, >50; 24.14, 36.05; 54.67; 2.79, 5.43, 5.04; 87–13 | B | 3.5 | V, C | DM | HH—simple conversation, complex conversation, and simple-texting and complex-texting tasks | Both talking on the phone and texting while driving impair a driver’s ability to pay enough attention to the road ahead, to react appropriately to unexpected traffic situations, and to control the car within a lane and in relation to other vehicles. |
| 10 | [18] | 100 | <30, 30–50, >51; 24.14, 36.05, 54.68; 2.79, 5.43, 5.05; 87–13 | B | 3.5 | V, C + RC, T | RT | HH—simple conversation, complex conversation, and simple-texting and complex-texting tasks | Simple conversations, complicated conversations, basic texts, and complex texts all increased reaction times for pedestrian crossing events by 40%, 95%, 137%, and 204%, respectively. For parked car crossing events, the tasks increased reaction times by 48%, 65%, 121%, and 171%, respectively. |
| 11 | [19] | 100 | <30, 30–50, >52; 24.14, 36.05, 54.69; 2.79, 5.43, 5.06; 87–13 | B | 3.5 | V, C + A, G | DM, AP | HH—simple conversation, complex conversation, simple texting and complex texting tasks | When engaged in conversation or texting duties, the drivers significantly decreased their mean speed by 2.62 m/s and 5.29 m/s, respectively, to offset the increased strain. |
| 12 | [32] | 49 | 22.12, 37.62; 22.12, 37.62; 2.45, 7.22; 22–3, 25–0 | B | 3.5 | V, C + A, E | DM | HH—simple conversation, complex conversation, simple texting and complex texting tasks | Younger drivers are less able to compensate for distractions while driving and have poorer longitudinal control. |
| 13 | [71] | 90 | <30, 30–55; 25.31, 37.00; 2.74, 6.29; 83–7 | B | NR | V, M + A | DM, RT | HH—conversation, texting, eating, music player | Most of the drivers (72.06%) reported texting as an extremely risky task |
| 14 | [49] | 14 | 18–22; NR; NR; | B | NR | C, M | DM | HH—cell phone conversation, back seat conversation, text message, Ipod manipulation | The iPod task and all wireless communication tasks caused a noticeable increase in speed variability throughout the driving scenario. |
| 15 | [86] | 49 | 19–65; 35.63; 14.26; 32–17 | B | 50 | V, C + A, G | OMs | HH—reading and comprehension task (three types of display) | Warnings took longer to read and comprehend (4 s on average), compared to recommendations. |
| 16 | [66] | 40 | 19–23; 21; NR; 20–20 | B | 51.5 | V, M | DM, RT | HH—text messaging | Simulated driving performance suffers when texting while operating a vehicle. This detrimental effect seems to be more severe than the consequences of using a cell phone for conversations while driving. |
| 17 | [80] | 17 | NR; 25.88; 5.82; 14,3 | B | NR | V, M | TrVs, DM | HH—accessing social network on the smartphone | Even when the driver is distracted, using an in-vehicle smartphone ADAS application has enhanced driving performance in a simulator.. |
| 18 | [56] | 101 | 18–57; 27.8; 8.3; 68,33 | A | NR | C, V, M | DM | HH—using a handheld cell phone; texting; eating | Regardless of their prior experience, multitasking while driving and distracting activities have a negative influence on driving performance for both genders and all age groups. The main factor that negatively affected driving performance was texting. |
| 19 | [109] | 56 | 21–30; 25.13; 2.57; 41–15 | B | 3 | V, C, M | RT | HF, HH—speech-based and handheld texting | Compared to the baseline, handheld texting tasks caused a delayed reaction to the unexpected braking occurrences. |
| 20 | [36] | 26 | 22–31, 22–29; 25.5, 23.9; 3.33, 2.27; 3–3, 20–0 | B | NR | V, M + A | RT, DM | HH—receive notification | The use of smartwatches could affect traffic safety. There may be a discrepancy between drivers’ actual performance and their views regarding using a wristwatch while driving, given that participants generally believed that smartwatch use resulted in similar or fewer traffic fines than smartphone use. |
| 21 | [55] | 48 | 20–79, 19–66; 34.8, 35.3; 16.0, 13.9; 17–7, 16–8 | C | NR | V | OMs | HH—email reading, view-switching, song searching, email replying | Compared to using standard smartphone apps, an automotive-specific application reduced the visual demand and visual distraction potential of in-car duties. |
| 22 | [72] | 63 | 25–66, 8–18; NR; NR; 32–31 | D | NR | V, M + A | DM | HH, HF—answer incoming calls, dialing, retrieve a voicemail message from a specific person using either the handheld or hands-free phone | Teenagers were shown to adopt risky following distances, to drive poorly, and to be more easily distracted by handheld phone tasks than adults. |
| 23 | [20] | 36 | NR; 20.95; 2.36; 16,10 | C | 6.8 | V, C, M | RT, DM | HH—social media browsing | Performance is impacted by both texting and using social media, but texting while driving is more harmful. |
| 24 | [90] | 20 | 18–21; NR; NR; 12,8 | C | 8 | V, M | DM, HA | HH—retrieve and send text messages | Text messaging has negative consequences on driving ability, which could explain the higher crash risks. |
| 25 | [99] | 24 | 18–64; 32.1; 12.5; 10,14 | A | 3.55 | V, M | DM | HH—manual dialing, voice-dialing | When participants utilized voice-activated dialing as opposed to manual dialing, there were 22% fewer lane-keeping mistakes and 56% fewer looks away from the road scene. |
| 26 | [69] | 40 | 20–52; 32.5; NR; 11,29 | B | NR | V, C | OMs | HH—touching the touch-screen telephone menu to a certain song, talking with laboratory assistant, answering a telephone via Bluetooth headset, and finding the navigation system from Ipad4 compute | The attention of the driver is substantially diverted from the road when engaging in secondary tasks while driving, and the evaluation model used in this study could accurately predict driving safety under various driving circumstances. |
| 27 | [61] | 24 | 20–45; 33.43; 6.32; 22–2 | A | NR | V | DM, RT | HF—ordering, route check, destination search | Usability and driving safety were higher when the phone was placed on the left side of the steering wheel as opposed to the right. |
| 28 | [33] | 29 | NR; 56.6, 55.9; 4.1, 3.0; 16, 13 | A | NR | V, M, N | RT, OMs | HH—sending a text message, searching navigation | When driving while sending a text message or using navigation, the jerk-cost function, medial-lateral coefficient of variation, and braking time were all higher than when driving alone. |
| 29 | [58] | 20 | 27–59; 37.65; 9.75; 14,6 | B | 10 + 9 | V, M, C | DM, OMs | HH—conversation, texting, destination entry, following route guidance | Only when individuals engaged in visual-manual tasks, such as texting and entering a location, when they frequently glanced away from the forward road, did lateral performance decline. |
| 30 | [64] | 30 | 18–30; 22.7; 3.51; 15,15 | A | 13 | C, M | DM, TrVs | HH—“temptation to text” | The “Temptation to Text” condition revealed noticeably more workload. Similarly, it was discovered that texting while driving drastically reduced vehicle performance. |
| 31 | [85] | 20 | 23–30; 26.20; 2.58; 10,10 | A | NR | C, M | TrVs, DM, ALs, RT | HF—conversation, HF cognitive demanding conversation, texting | Comparatively to legal BAC limits, very basic mobile phone conversations may not pose a substantial risk to driving, but cognitively taxing hands-free talks and, most notably, texting, do pose significant dangers. |
| 32 | [88] | 41 | 18-61; 31; 9.7; 23,18 | B | 5 | C + G | ALs | HF, HH—conversation | Drivers’ decisions regarding accepting gaps were unaffected by the distraction task, although the crossing’s completion time increased by over 10% in comparison to the baseline. Also, when using a phone at an intersection, drivers exhibited conservative behavior, slowing down more quickly, waiting longer, and keeping a greater distance from the vehicle in front of them. |
| 33 | [101] | 29 | 22–49; 30; 6; 15,14 | A | 1 | V, M | DM | HH—help, browse, filter task | The filtering task’s slider widget was overly demanding and hindered performance, whereas kinetic scrolling produced an equal amount of visual distraction although requiring less precise finger pointing. |
| 34 | [59] | 15 | NR; 28; 4.08; 12,3 | A | NR | C, V, M | OMs | HH—button, slider, Insert data, dropdown, radio buttons | When evaluating the mental workload related to wide differences in task complexity in terms of the amount of information to be processed, a commercial BCI device may be helpful. |
| 35 | [75] | 60 | 16–17; 16.8; 0.4; 20, 40 | B | NR | V, M + G | OMs | HH—looking at the phone, picking up the phone, taking a picture, sending the picture, hand manipulation of phone (mimicking writing a text), answering a call, and looking at a picture on the phone | Self-reported distracted driving habits grew with time, with a significant effect of visit on self-report outcomes. |
| 36 | [67] | 28 | 18–28; 21.0, 2.4; _; 16,12 | B | 1.1–1.5 | V, M | DM | HH—type and send a text message vs,. tunning car radio | Even in the simplest of driving situations, multitasking while operating a motor vehicle can have a negative impact on performance and increase risk. Comparing text messaging to other in-car activities like changing the radio, text messaging may present a “perfect storm” of risks. |
| 37 | [82] | 18 | 18–22; 20.4; NR; NR | C | NR | V, M | RT | HH—text messaging, reading Facebook posts (text/self-paced), exchanging photos via Snapchat, and viewing updates on Instagram | When compared to the image-based scenario (mean = 0.92 s) and the baseline, the brake reaction times (BRTs) in the text-based scenarios were substantially longer (mean = 1.16 s) (0.88 s). Both the task-pacing impact and the difference between BRTs in the image-based and baseline conditions were not statistically significant. |
| 38 | [63] | 64 | 22–60; 33; 10; 34, 30 | D | NR | V, C | RT | HH—reading, texting, video, social media, gaming, phoning, music | Reaction times did decrease when performing non-driving related tasks (NDRTs), suggesting that the NDRT assisted the drivers in keeping their focus during the partially automated drive. Drowsiness and the NDRT’s motivational appeal thus raised situation criticality, whereas the NDRT’s cognitive load decreased it. |
| 39 | [89] | 35 | 18–29; 22.9; 4.0; 22, 13 | D | 10 | V, M, C + RC | DM | HF, HH—calling, texting vs. road environment | Compared to distraction from a cell phone or other road elements like pedestrians and approaching vehicles, road geometry has a greater impact on driver behavior. |
| 40 | [76] | 35 | 18–29; 22.9; 4.0; 22, 13 | D | NR | V, M, C | OMs | HH—ring a doctor and cancel an appointment, text a friend and tell him/her that the participant will be arriving 10 min late, share the doctor’s phone number with a friend, and take a ‘selfie | The three types of self-regulation that distracted drivers use most frequently are tactical, operational, and strategic. |
| 41 | [30] | 50 | 27–55; 36.8; 5.8; 50,0 | D | NR | V, M, C | DM | HH—driving while having a conversation on the mobile phone, driving while reading out loud text messages and driving while texting | The “reading of text messages” and “texting” had a big impact on the “change of the steering position per second. For all three cell phone assignments, a substantial main effect was seen in terms of “following distance per second” and “change of the lateral lane position per second”. |
| 42 | [29] | 90 | NR; NR; NR; 73,17 | A | 3.6 | C, V | DM, RT, TrVs | HH—using the mobile phone, drinking and text messaging | The disruptive variables have a negative impact on road safety due to cognitive distraction and mobility limitation (e.g., longer response times and more errors), on the one hand, and have a bad impact on the environment and the economy (e.g., increased fuel consumption), on the other. |
| 43 | [105] | 36 | 21–54; 33.3; 8.6; 21–15 | B | 4.8 | V, Au | DM, RT | HF—features presented via a mobile phone mounted near the line of sight | The findings indicated that new features with the greatest levels of urgency and criticality, such as Emergency Vehicle Warning (EVW) and Emergency Electronic Brake Lights (EEBL), would improve safety and make it easier for emergency vehicles to reach their intervention site. |
| 44 | [68] | 36 | NR; NR; NR; 18,18 | A | NR | V, C, M, Au | RT, DM, OMs | HH—smartwatch vs. smartphone calling | By using a phone instead of just driving, participants shown increased off-road visual attention. |
| 45 | [73] | 32 | 17–21; 19.0, 19.3; NR; 7,9 | B | NR | V, M | DM, TrVs, RT | HH—manipulating controls of a radio/tape deck and dialing a handheld cellular phone | The time spent on tasks was marginally longer for participants who anticipated dangers compared to those who did not, but the difference was stable across tasks. |
| 46 | [87] | 45 | NR; 62.8, 24.3; 7.2, 4.8; 30–0, 11–4 | B | NR | V, P | DM, OMs | HH—texting on a smartphone and while sitting on a stable or unstable surface | When drivers were texting, the perceived workload increased, but balancing training decreased it. While seated on the unsteady surface, perceived workload was higher; however, it decreased after balance training. |
| 47 | [35] | 40 | NR; 20.47; 4.76; 24, 16 | B | 8.04 | V, M | DM, RT | HH—use Google Glass or a smartphone-based messaging interface | Glass-delivered messages served to reduce distracting cognitive demands, but they did not completely remove them. Comparatively speaking to driving when not multitasking, messaging while using either gadget impairs driving. |
| 48 | [81] | 37 | 18–33; 24.7; 3.6; 20–17 | B | NR | V | DM, RT, AP | HF—navigating on the Facebook newsfeed, reading and sending text messages in Facebook Messenger, searching for a location in Google Maps | Web browsing and texting-related distraction raise the likelihood of an accident, the headway, and the lateral distance deviation by 32%, 27%, and 6%, respectively. |
| 49 | [84] | 123 | 18–64; 34.46; 13.04; 62,61 | B | 26.4 | V, Au | DM, OMs | HH—audio warning, flashing display | There was no difference in the number of vehicles overtaken between the groups, and the existence of the speed warnings had no effect on overtaking. |
| 50 | [51] | 34 | 16–18; 17.25, 17.09; 0.99, 0.89; 12–4, 14–4 | B | 8.04 | C, M | DM, RT, TrVs | HH—conversing on a cell phone, text messaging | Compared to the no task and the cell-phone task, the lane position varied significantly more while texting. Teens with ADHD spent noticeably less time to finish the scenario while texting in particular. There were no discernible group-wide major effects detected. |
| 51 | [77] | 50 | 24–54; 39.8; 8.4; 49, 1 | B | 36.2 | C, M, V | TrVs, DM, OMs | HH—cell phone conversation, text message interaction, emailing interaction | Poorer driving performance was associated with more visually demanding jobs. Yet, using a cell phone caused fewer off-road eye looks. Drivers who described themselves as “extremely skilled” drove less well than those who described themselves as “talented.” |
| 52 | [94] | 75 | 16–18, 19–25; 17.67, 23.39; 1.18, 1.81; 11–19, 23–22 | B | 38,6 | C, M + T | TrVs, DM | HH—cell phone, texting | Texting generally resulted in more lane deviations and collisions. Text messaging was the most common form of distraction, which had a major negative influence on traffic flow. As a result, participants’ speeds fluctuated more, changed lanes less frequently, and took longer to finish the scenario. |
| 53 | [60] | 32 | 18–25; 20.6; 2.1; 32–0 | D | 13 | V | DM, TrVs | HH—gamified boredom intervention | The gamified boredom intervention promoted anticipatory driving while reducing risky coping strategies like speeding. |
| 54 | [132] | 36 | NR; 28.44; 9.26; 30,6 | A | NR | C, V, M | DM | HH—conversation, texting | Driver performance in the longitudinal and lateral control of the vehicle for the texting event significantly declined during the texting task. |
| 55 | [113] | 37 | NR; 21; 3.63; 11,26 | B | NR | C, Au | DM, OMs | HH—text-message distractions | For at least 10 s but no more than 30 s following the text message alert, situation awareness is negatively impacted. Participants’ mean speed increased during periods of distraction in the 10 s after receiving a mobile phone notification, which also resulted in a decrease in context awareness. |
| 56 | [100] | 27 | 24–59; 42.4; 9.1; 11, 16 | B | 4.4 | V, M + A, E | DM, OMs | HH vs. dashboard—texting with the smartphone in one hand (handheld drive) and texting while the phone is placed in a dashboard mount | Texting while driving when using a dashboard-mounted device impairs driving safety at least as much as texting while using a handheld device. |
| 57 | [98] | 40 | NR; 28; 12.6; 10,30 | A | NR | V, M + E | DM | HH—texting | Mobile phone texting dramatically reduced the ability to drive. Driving experience had no bearing on the results, however highly skilled phone users’ texting use had a noticeably reduced negative impact. |
| 58 | [95] | 40 | NR; 18.6; 1.8; 11–29 | B | NR | V, M, C | DM, OMs | HF, HH—conversation, texting, selecting a song | Although the amount of interference varied depending on the task, hands-free smartphone call created substantially less interference than texting and listening to music on an MP3 player. |
| 59 | [65] | 60 | NR; 19.74; 2.4; 30,3 | A | 8.04 | C, M | OMs | HF—conversation, texting | Driving while texting was similar to driving while not doing anything. The results of this study highlight the need for further investigation into the long-term effects of secondary task use while driving on cardiovascular reactivity as well as the dangers of secondary task use while driving on the risk of cardiovascular disease or stroke. |
| 60 | [110] | 36 | 18–56; 26.95; 5.076; 23,13 | A | 2.5 | M | DM, RT | HH—cell-phone texting | Driver groups with phone-texting distractions exhibited larger speed variability, longer average following HWDs, considerably slower reaction times, and longer distances needed for quick recovery in response to front-car braking events than driver groups without such distractions. |
| 61 | [91] | 34 | 18–28; NR; NR; 19,15 | A | NR | V, M + RC, W | DM, RT, AP | HH—texting | In both urban and rural road contexts, texting results in a statistically significant decrease in mean speed and an increase in mean reaction time. Due to driver distraction and delayed response at the time of the incident, it also increases the likelihood of an accident. |
| 62 | [92] | 34 | 18–24; NR; NR; 19,15 | B | 3 | V, M + W | DM, AP | HH—navigation, tuning the radio, replying to a text message, replying to a voice message, and making a phone call | On highways, texting appears to cause drivers to exhibit compensatory behavior, which statistically significantly reduces the mean speed and increases headway in both normal and particular traffic and weather conditions. |
| 63 | [74] | 34 | NR; 47.6, 23.05; NR; 23, 11 | A | NR | V, M + A | OMs | HF—normal conversation (non-emotional cellular conversation), and seven-level mathematical calculations | Making a call, returning a voicemail, and responding to texts are high-visual-load secondary chores that drivers shouldn’t engage in while operating a vehicle. |
| 64 | [62] | 43 | NR; 24.09; 3.27; 25–18 | B | 4.1 | V, C | DM, OMs | HF—texting, talking | For basic road portions, texting considerably raised the SDLP, although conversational tasks showed less lateral variance than when there was no distraction. |
| 65 | [31] | 28 | 18–55; 29.4; 11.3; 16, 12 | B | 9 | V, M, Au | RT, DM, OMs | HH—text messaging | Although Glass enables drivers to better maintain their visual attention on the front scene, they are still unable to efficiently divide their cognitive attention between the Glass display and the road environment, which impairs their ability to drive. |
| 66 | [79] | 20 | 22–47; 32.2; 6.3; 16, 4 | A | 3 | V, C | DM, OMs | HH—reading text on Glass and on a smartphone | When approaching active urban rail level crossings (RLXs), texting had a negative effect on how well the driver performed. |
| 67 | [57] | 101 | 18–57; 27.8; 8.3; 68, 33 | A | 6 | V, C, M | DM | HH—texting, talking on the phone, or eating | According to the simulation results, texting and, to a lesser extent, talking on the phone cause traffic to move more slowly on average and with higher coefficients of variation. |
Note: TD—type of distraction: C—cognitive, V—visual, M—manual, Au—auditory; MT—measure type: AL—attention lapses, AP—accident probability, DM—driving maintenance, HA- hazard anticipation, RT—response time, TrV—traffic violations, OM—other measures; HH—hand-held, HF—hands-free, NP—number of participants; LSR—length of simulated route; NR—not reported. a Values include age, mean, standard deviation, and gender (M, F). b Driving Simulator Classification: A—fixed-based, basic visual capability, FOV minimum H:40 and V:30; B—fixed-based, FOV minimum H:40, and V:30; C—motion platform, FOV minimum H:120 and V:30; D—minimum 6 DOF motion platform, FOV minimum H:180 and V:40 [40].