IE 486 Work Analysis & Design II

Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a braking response

Esteban RobertsShakul SharmaIE 486 - Instructor: Vincent Duffy, Ph.D.Fri. Feb. 9, 2007

10 ways to look at a research paper systematically for critical analysis1. Research ideas/question - what is the purpose?

2. What is the background support? - literature review

3. Theoretical basis for analyzing question/hypothesis?

4. Applicability - practical contribution?

5. Theoretical contribution?

6. Appropriate techniques for carrying out study which include

determining variables, data collection, method used to test

hypotheses, validity of measures and reliability?

7. Appropriate statistical analyses and assumptions?

8. Presentation of results: what do they really mean?

9. Conclusions drawn: are they reasonable?

10. Future work/research directions: any possibilities?

1. Research ideas/question - what is the purpose?

To determine the effect of cellular phone

conversations and other potential interference on

reaction time (RT) in a braking response

How does this effect compare with effects

generated by other secondary tasks?

2.What background support? -

literature reviewStudies showing that cellular phones increase

collision risks (Tibshirani, 1997) and can impair

aspects of driving performance (Alm and Nilsson,

1995; Brookhuis, 1991; Brown, 1969, McKnight,

1993).

Hands-free vs. to hand-held phones

(Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997).

3. Theoretical basis for analyzing

question/hypothesis? To what extent does the use of cellular phones

affect the ability of a person to drive? How does

this compare to other tasks?

Hypothesis is that cellular phone use would

increase braking time, and that hands-free models

would not significantly provide an advantage over

regular phones.

They also predict that listening to radio would not

affect braking response time greatly.

4. Applicability-practical

contribution?

Awareness of the possible dangers that using a

cellular phone while driving can provoke.

Laws can be modified to ban the use of cellular

phones while driving

Hands-free phones: are they really that much safer

than regular ones?

5. Theoretical contribution?

Re-design of cellular phones to try to make

talking-while-driving safer.

Possibly car makers might re-think some of their

alert designs

6. Appropriate methodologies for carrying out

study? (determining variables, data

collection, method used to test hypotheses,

validity of measures and reliability)

A sample size of 22

Eliminate gender variables

Special apparatus used. Simulated foot activity

to measure response time

Five different trials under five different scenarios

were used for each participant. 1. Driving without any distractions

2. Participants listened to radio

3. Driving while talking to the passenger

4. Participants engaged over a hand held phone

5. Participants engaged in a conversation via a hands-free

phone

Scenarios randomly assigned

7. Appropriate statistical analyses

and assumptions? An alpha value of 0.05, for results within 95%

C.I.

Different summary graphs. ANOVA was

performed, p values < alpha.

F tests were significant as well along with Turkey

pair wise comparisons.

8. Presentation of results: what do

they really mean? Slower response time while talking over the

phone (16-19%).

Listening to radio (4%).

Response time same when having conversations.

Men and Women- same response time.

Table 1. Mean reaction times

9. Conclusions drawn: are they

reasonable? Reasonable conclusions.

The sample taken cannot be generalized.

Implications for real world driving are hard to test.

Other aspects to be considered – paced

conversations, voice commands in phones.

10. Future work/research directions:

any possibilities? Experimenting under real driving conditions and

with larger sample sizes.

In-depth research's on impairments by other tasks.

Consider other aspects of using cellular phones

while driving that were not considered in this

research