Soccolich Susan A, Fitch Gregory M, Perez Miguel A, Hanowski Richard J
a Virginia Tech Transportation Institute , Blacksburg , Virginia.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2014;15 Suppl 1:S21-6. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2014.934958.
The goal of this study was to compare cell phone usage behaviors while driving across 3 types of cell phones: handheld (HH) cell phones, portable hands-free (PHF) cell phones, and integrated hands-free (IHF) cell phones. Naturalistic driving data were used to observe HH, PHF, and IHF usage behaviors in participants' own vehicles without any instructions or manipulations by researchers.
In addition to naturalistic driving data, drivers provided their personal cell phone call records. Calls during driving were sampled and observed in naturalistically collected video. Calls were reviewed to identify cell phone type used for, and duration of, cell phone subtasks, non-cell phone secondary tasks, and other use behaviors. Drivers in the study self-identified as HH, PHF, or IHF users if they reported using that cell phone type at least 50% of the time. However, each sampled call was classified as HH, PHF, or IHF if the talking/listening subtask was conducted using that cell phone type, without considering the driver's self-reported group.
Drivers with PHF or IHF systems also used HH cell phones (IHF group used HH cell phone in 53.2% of the interactions, PHF group used HH cell phone for 55.5% of interactions). Talking/listening on a PHF phone or an IHF phone was significantly longer than talking/listening on an HH phone (P <.05). HH dialing was significantly longer in duration than PHF or IHF begin/answer tasks. End phone call task for HH phones was significantly longer in duration than the end phone call task for PHF and IHF phones. Of all the non-cell phone-related secondary tasks, eating or drinking was found to occur significantly more often during IHF subtasks (0.58%) than in HH subtasks (0.15%). Drivers observed to reach for their cell phone mostly kept their cell phone in the cup holder (36.3%) or in their seat or lap (29.0% of interactions); however, some observed locations may have required drivers to move out of position.
Hands-free cell phone technologies reduce the duration of cell phone visual-manual tasks compared to handheld cell phones. However, drivers with hands-free cell phone technologies available to them still choose to use handheld cell phones to converse or complete cell phone visual-manual tasks for a noteworthy portion of interactions.
本研究的目的是比较使用三种类型手机时的驾驶过程中的手机使用行为：手持（HH）手机、便携式免提（PHF）手机和集成免提（IHF）手机。自然驾驶数据用于观察参与者在自己车辆中的HH、PHF和IHF使用行为，研究人员未进行任何指导或操作。
除自然驾驶数据外，驾驶员还提供了他们的个人手机通话记录。对驾驶过程中的通话进行采样，并在自然收集的视频中进行观察。对通话进行审查，以确定用于手机子任务、非手机次要任务和其他使用行为的手机类型以及持续时间。如果研究中的驾驶员报告至少50%的时间使用该手机类型，则自我识别为HH、PHF或IHF用户。然而，每个采样通话如果使用该手机类型进行了通话/收听子任务，则分类为HH、PHF或IHF，而不考虑驾驶员自我报告的组别。
配备PHF或IHF系统的驾驶员也使用HH手机（IHF组在53.2%的交互中使用HH手机，PHF组在55.5%的交互中使用HH手机）。在PHF手机或IHF手机上通话/收听的时间明显长于在HH手机上通话/收听的时间（P<.05）。HH拨号的持续时间明显长于PHF或IHF的开始/接听任务。HH手机的结束通话任务持续时间明显长于PHF和IHF手机的结束通话任务。在所有与手机无关的次要任务中，发现IHF子任务期间进食或饮水的发生率（0.58%）明显高于HH子任务期间（0.15%）。观察到伸手拿手机的驾驶员大多将手机放在杯架中（36.3%）或座位或腿上（29.0%的交互）；然而，一些观察到的放置位置可能要求驾驶员离开原来的位置。
与手持手机相比，免提手机技术减少了手机视觉手动任务的持续时间。然而，有免提手机技术可用的驾驶员在相当一部分交互中仍选择使用手持手机进行交谈或完成手机视觉手动任务。
