A UK road safety research report pointed out that the use of on-board touch screens while driving increases the risk of drinking and drug driving .
Touch screen may increase the danger. At first glance, it sounds like a well-known nonsense, but there is still no quantified result. Let us know how much it increases the danger. British charity road research organization IAM RoadSmart, in conjunction with the FIA, Rees Jeffreys Road Foundation, commissioned the British Transport Research Laboratory TRL to conduct this research.
Research results are very pessimistic. In-vehicle large-size touch screen, a new technology configuration that is being pushed by car manufacturers and technology giants, may not actually be safe with your mobile phone directly -although regulations usually only penalize mobile phones while driving , But it does not restrict the use of car touch screen devices.
The key data is the response time of the driver to sudden road conditions when he is performing various other operations while driving. For a normal driver, the typical reaction time is about 1 second. When the driver’s drinking reaches the British standard for drinking and driving (lower limit) , the reaction time will increase by 12%. Drivers who take marijuana need 21% longer response time than normal.
When using CarPlay and AndroidAuto with a touch screen, the driver ’s reaction time to road conditions, Up to 57% and 53%, respectively . Even using the voice interaction method (such as Siri) , CarPlay and AndroidAuto will increase the driver’s response time by 36% and 30%, respectively-still Higher than the effect after drinking and smoking cannabis.
In addition-if you are curious-using a Bluetooth device to talk will increase your response time by 27%; driving while texting and typing will increase the response time by 35%; using a mobile phone directly is the worst, The response time will increase by 46%. Of course, this is still more than touch screen operation CarPlay and AndroidAuto.
More importantly, the response delay caused by these touch-screen operations is actually more than the subjective expectations of the driver .
Testers were required to perform three operations simultaneously while driving: switching audio on Spotify and BBC radio, switching navigation paths between highways and a restaurant or gas station, reading text and entering text, and three Each operation will be tested through two operations: speech recognition and touch screen.
As a result, regardless of CarPlay or AndroidAuto, The total length of time that the driver ’s eyes have left the road during the completion of an operation exceeds 12 seconds , which has exceeded the NHTSA (US High Speed Traffic Safety Administration) Guidance for driving regulations. The driver’s subjective view is that his sight has been occupied for only 5 seconds. When using voice to operate both vehicle systems, the situation is better, and the total line of sight is within the NHTSA specification.
(Android Auto, currently not available in China)
The report ’s conclusion reads, “The test data clearly shows that driving AndroidAuto and CarPlay at the same time will increase the driver ’s attention and affect the attention resources required by the driver. Even if the driver decreases Speed to handle these increased demands for attention is not enough to make up for the loss of attention needed to drive.
“When interacting with these in-vehicle systems, especially when operating with a touch screen, the ability to control the vehicle’s ability to maintain the lane position and keep the distance ahead is significantly reduced.” Research data show that using AndroidAuto and CarPlay touchscreens When navigating, the lane will deviate by about 0.5 meters.
In addition, among the operations performed by the driver using the touch screen, the audio operation is the one that has the most negative impact on the road’s attention. At simulated highway speeds, the increased response time will result in an increase in stopping distance of 4 to 5 body lengths (18.7 to 24.9 meters) < / span>. The impact of touchscreen audio operations on driver’s attention is even more serious than texting while driving.
For the results of such a study, I AM RoadSmart calls on the industry and government to conduct public testing and certification of in-vehicle entertainment systems and develop a unified standard in an effort to make them useful to drivers Minimize attention disturbance.
Although this study by IAM RoadSmart only used Apple CarPlay and Google’s AndroidAuto, it is clear that the findings are not just applicable and targeted at both. In contrast, CarPlay and AndroidAuto have established a standardized operating interface and operating experience between different brands and models, and the system’s response speed and control sensitivity are relatively good. It is conceivable that the results of this study would only be magnified if it was the crappy, awkward, and difficult-to-use in-vehicle systems made by automakers themselves.
Since the 17-inch central touch screen that Tesla shocked the world many years ago, the large-sized and full-touch screen of the car’s central control screen has become a trend, especially for domestic new car brands and independent brands. On the updated Model 3, even functions such as seat adjustment are integrated in the center control screen. In the eyes of many people who admire electric vehicles, smart cars, and Internet cars, traditional car brands, especially German brands, have horizontal screens, limited large sizes, and retained physical buttons and knobs, just like Nokia ’s in 2007. Be conservative.
However, the safety of the touch screen during driving is obviously far less than the physical keys. Even if some people claim that they can proficiently operate large-size full-touch screens in vehicles after a long habit, they do not have an accurate and scientific understanding of the degree of their attention off the road.
In the beginning, as the size of on-board screens became larger—of course, today they have become smaller—automakers use traditional multi-button operations with occasional small knobs, such as volume knobs. Then, with the increase of the functions carried by the in-vehicle system, the interior of the car in the 1990s has gradually become like a cloud. BMW launched in the early 2000sThe epoch-making iDrive system, for the first time, uses a large knob with 7-way operation such as rotation, dialing, pressing, etc., and controls all functions through screen interaction. However, the original iDrive integration was too high after all, so BMW added more shortcut keys to the iDrive. Later the Audi MMI and Mercedes-Benz COMAND also experienced similar developments. The large knob is centered + a few shortcut keys are supplemented, which once became the most advanced vehicle interaction method.
When the full-touch screen led by Tesla came, many car brands that did n’t have any ideas about the interaction mode—new car companies, emerging electric car companies, some domestic independent brands, and some declining American car brands. Ground into the full touch screen camp. Extremely conspicuous selling points, a symbol of technology, and the meaning of the times, the large-size full-touch screen seems to be a springboard for these brands to step up in the automotive interior.
However, traditional forces represented by some German brands also have their own considerations. Because the driver’s eyes need to be focused on the road, the importance of speed and efficiency of a car’s on-board interaction system is much lower than the degree of distraction. In other words, are you willing to spend 5 minutes and 5 more steps to find a piece of music, or do you want to select music with a faster touch screen, but pay the risk of a traffic accident + 10%?
In the physical buttons and knobs, the main (Touch screen may be used as one of the operating methods, but not all) Interaction allows blind operation and blind search. The driver can choose to perform an operation with less attention, longer time, and more patience. In a full touch screen system, because of the touch screen operation, you can’t use your hand to find the appropriate control position-otherwise it will cause a false touch, and the driver will almost have to focus on the screen for a moment.
So when Audi turned its own knob system MMI into a full touch screen, a unique feature was added: Although the touch screen is called a touch screen, touching the screen with a finger does not cause the system to respond, but requires the finger to press hard. Only when you feel the strength will the system confirm the operation. This method is obviously cumbersome, inefficient and laborious, but it makes the driver no longer need to concentrate on the screen to prevent accidental touch during the process of positioning the touch screen controls with his fingers. As long as you are willing to spend more time and reduce the attention distracted to the screen, the safety of the operation will increase accordingly, or the negative impact of the operation on safety will not increase too much.
Of course, Tesla can say that due to the high penetration rate of its AutoPilot system and its highly distracting large-size full-touch screen, to some extent, it will not increase too much due to the driver assistance system and safety assistance system. risk. However, many other popular brands do not have this “bottom measure”, and they may not have considered the risk of distracting the large touch screen. At least until a truly reliable autonomous driving system becomes widespread, more caution should be given to large touchscreens with full touchscreen operation.
Large-size full-touch screens are an important tool for many auto makers to increase their premiums. However, when relatively reliable experimental data has been pointed out to its risks in terms of safety, it may be time to reflect on this: Since driving a mobile phone is illegal , Then zoom in and fix the full touch screen phone, isn’t it dangerous?