title: Comparing handheld and hands-free cell phone usage behaviors while driving.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  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.
  
  
  METHODS
  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.
  
  
  RESULTS
  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.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  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.
authors.affiliation: a Virginia Tech Transportation Institute , Blacksburg , Virginia.
authors.forename: Susan A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Soccolich
authors.forename: Gregory M
authors.initials: GM
authors.lastname: Fitch
authors.forename: Miguel A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Perez
authors.forename: Richard J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Hanowski
mesh_terms: D001334:Automobile Driving / Q000523:psychology* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D040421:Cell Phone / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D013060:Speech
keywords: cell phone; driver distraction; integrated hands-free; naturalistic driving