Multitasking additional-to-driving: Prevalence, structure, and associated risk in SHRP2 naturalistic driving data
This paper 1) analyzes the extent to which drivers engage in multitasking additional-to-driving (MAD) under various conditions, 2) specifies odds ratios (ORs) of crashing associated with MAD compared to no task engagement, and 3) explores the structure of MAD, based on data from the Second Strategic Highway Research Program Naturalistic Driving Study (SHRP2 NDS). Sensitivity analysis in which secondary tasks were re-defined by grouping similar tasks was performed to investigate the extent to which ORs are affected by the specific task definitions in SHRP2. A novel visual representation of multitasking was developed to show which secondary tasks co-occur frequently and which ones do not. MAD occurs in 11% of control driving segments, 22% of crashes and near-crashes (CNC), 26% of Level 1-3 crashes and 39% of rear-end striking crashes, and 9%, 16%, 17% and 28% respectively for the same event types if MAD is defined in terms of general task groups. The most common co-occurrences of secondary tasks vary substantially among event types; for example, 'Passenger in adjacent seat - interaction' and 'Other non-specific internal eye glance' tend to co-occur in CNC but tend not to co-occur in control driving segments. The odds ratios of MAD compared to driving without any secondary task and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals are 2.38 (2.17-2.61) for CNC, 3.72 (3.11-4.45) for Level 1-3 crashes and 8.48 (5.11-14.07) for rear-end striking crashes. The corresponding ORs using general task groups to define MAD are slightly lower at 2.00 (1.80-2.21) for CNC, 3.03 (2.48-3.69) for Level 1-3 crashes and 6.94 (4.04-11.94) for rear-end striking crashes. The results confirm that independently of whether secondary tasks are defined according to SHRP2 or general task groups, the reduction of driving performance from MAD observed in simulator studies is manifested in real-world crashes as well.