Cited by 145Human-Automation Interaction and SafetyTraffic and Road SafetyNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The emotional side of cognitive distraction: Implications for road safety

Chan, Michelle, Singhal, Anthony·2013·Accident Analysis & Prevention

Abstract

Driver distraction is estimated to be one of the leading causes of motor vehicle accidents. However, little is known about the role of emotional distraction on driving, despite evidence that attention is highly biased toward emotion. In the present study, we used a dual-task paradigm to examine the potential for driver distraction from emotional information presented on roadside billboards. This purpose was achieved using a driving simulator and three different types of emotional information: neutral words, negative emotional words, and positive emotional words. Participants also responded to target words while driving and completed a surprise free recall task of all the words at the end of the study. The findings suggest that driving performance is differentially affected by the valence (negative versus positive) of the emotional content. Drivers had lower mean speeds when there were emotional words compared to neutral words, and this slowing effect lasted longer when there were positive words. This may be due to distraction effects on driving behavior, which are greater for positive arousing stimuli. Moreover, when required to process non-emotional target stimuli, drivers had faster mean speeds in conditions where the targets were interspersed with emotional words compared to neutral words, and again, these effects lasted longer when there were positive words. On the other hand, negative information led to better memory recall. These unique effects may be due to separate processes in the human attention system, particularly related to arousal mechanisms and their interaction with emotion. We conclude that distraction that is emotion-based can modulate attention and decision-making abilities and have adverse impacts on driving behavior for several reasons.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aap.2012.04.004

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chan, M., & Singhal, A.
Affiliations
University of Alberta (CA)
Corresponding author
Chan, Michelle
Venue
Accident Analysis & Prevention
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
50
Pages
147-154
ISSN
0001-4575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2123440107
Cited by
145
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
8.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Accident Analysis & Prevention (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada
  • NSERC
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Traffic and Road Safety
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
emotional distraction, driver distraction, road safety, emotional words, valence, attentional bias, driving performance, speed, memory retrieval, arousal, dual-task paradigm, roadside billboards, driving simulator
MeSH terms
Accidents, Traffic, Adolescent, Adult, Advertising, Analysis of Variance, Attention, Automobile Driving, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Risk Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review