Skip to main content

Apple defends safety of Siri use while driving after university study rated it highly distracting

 

carplay

Apple has responded to a University of Utah study which criticized the safety of using Siri while driving, stating that it didn’t test the company’s in-car versions, Siri Eyes Free and CarPlay.

Of the six speech-recognition systems tested by researchers, Siri was found to be the worst for driver distraction. The study hooked up drivers to heart-rate monitors and other equipment designed to measure the degree of stress experienced by drivers while carrying out a range of voice-command tasks, giving each system a distraction rating from 1 (best) to 5 (worst) … 

The WSJ reported last month that Siri had the worst score, with a distraction rating of 4.

Even the best of the tested systems, Toyota’s Entune, scored a 1.7 “cognitive distraction ranking,” the study found, compared to a 1 level for listening to the radio.

The worst of the tested in-dash systems,  Chevy’s MyLink, scored a 3.7.

Worst of all, the researchers concluded, was Apple’s Siri, which came in at a frustration/distraction level of 4.

Apple has now responded, stating that while the study examined dedicated in-car systems from most manufacturers, it did not test the car-specific versions of Siri.

CarPlay and Siri Eyes Free intuitively use your vehicle’s native controls so you don’t need to pick-up and look at your phone while driving. These experiences are tailored so you only have access to iPhone apps that are optimized for the car and make sense for an in-vehicle experience.

A range of studies cited in the latest WSJ piece do, however, conclude that while using voice commands for things like controlling infotainment systems is safer than operating controls manually, that only reduces, rather than eliminates, the risk of distraction.

Our own review of CarPlay based on the first after-market solution concluded that it has promise, but has some way yet to go. Apple and its car manufacturer partners appear to agree, earlier promises of 2014 availability having been quietly removed from its CarPlay microsite.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. beyondthetech - 9 years ago

    It’s only been genuinely frustrating when Siri misinterprets what I’m asking for, which is about a whopping third of the time, and because of its incompetent Maps system, often gives me businesses and results hundreds of miles away. I end up having to use the Google app, which is strikingly accurate enough to make me want an Android smartphone at times.

    • thinkman12345 - 9 years ago

      Weird conclusion since Google Maps is available on iPhones as well.

      • Google Maps and Google Now are not as readily available when you hold down the Home button and you only get Apple Maps and Siri.

      • Kraft - 9 years ago

        Home screen “Okay Google, navigate to a gas station closest to my current location” does make me feel like I’m in the future. Siri and I broke up. She never understood me.

  2. standardpull - 9 years ago

    Studies not published in a peer reviewed journal aren’t worth much at all. They are often sponsored by some firm or lobbying group looking to manipulate public mindshare via press release.

    I’m not sure about this study, but my wager is that it hasnt been reviewed by anyone and that some corporation or lobby group funded it and then started to push it around via a press release.

    • PMZanetti - 9 years ago

      I read the study, and if I had paid for it to be created, upon reading it I would have sued for my money back. It is atrociously bad, and not just because of its fraudulent assessment of Siri.

    • thinkman12345 - 9 years ago

      On the internet, anyone can say virtually anything about anything! Peer reviewed studies, just as in medicine, are the only ones that should be taken seriously. With the number of articles I’ve read (however not peer reviewed) speak to the issue of Samsung, in particular, writing their own negative Apple articles, as well as paying trolls to be trolls. The reason I believe this, is that Samsung is a nefarious company who has zero respect for intellectual property, and has paid billions to Apple as a result. I guess a court case is as good an indicator as a peer reviewed article!

  3. monty72 - 9 years ago

    I’d like to see a comparison against, changing a CD, rolling a cigarette or opening a pre-packed sandwich. Said in jest, but I’ve seen all these things done by drivers and suspect they would score much higher than asking Siri to send a text (or any other voice controlled device). I had a women go past me on the A3 into London at about 80mph whilst applying eyeliner in the sunshade mirror!

  4. The silly thing is, is that using Siri, even in the UK requires you to break the law, as you must be holding it to work, and that is illegal…!!! However, how many people actually knew that siri works without pressing any buttons, you can set it, that if plugged into a power source, you can simply say “Hey Siri” and whatever you want, meaning you don’t need to press any button, on the steering wheel, on the phone, nothing…! And seeing as most people put there phone on charge when they get in the car, i certainly do, using a dock, meaning i can see and charge at eye level with no issue…! So as far as this supposed report goes, crock of s*%t i think…!!!

    • capdorf - 9 years ago

      Kevin, reading your note, I don’t think you understand that it is about the permanent in car version of Siri, not the version on your iPhone. :-)

      • Leonson Stapleton - 9 years ago

        “Apple has now responded, stating that while the study examined dedicated in-car systems from most manufacturers, it did not test the car-specific versions of Siri.”

        so if they didn’t test the in car versions what other version of Siri did they test? only other version i know is my iPhone.

      • And with the permanent version do you mean with dedicated button on the steering wheel….? You don’t need that if plugged in to a charger, you just say hey siri the same way as when at home on charge… What did i say that is wrong? When using in a car, that is very simple, and they didn’t test the car version did they, not in what i read…

  5. Aaron Jarvi - 9 years ago

    “However the university also mentioned anything of technological interest was a distraction in Utah.”

  6. Mike Knopp (@mknopp) - 9 years ago

    Did anybody, even Apple, even bother to read this study?

    I find Apple’s response to be more embarrassing than the study even came close to being. “CarPlay and Siri Eyes Free intuitively use your vehicle’s native controls so you don’t need to pick-up and look at your phone while driving.” If they had bothered to read the study they would have seen that the study didn’t have the driver picking up nor looking at their phone while driving.

    This wasn’t a study of Siri versus Cortana or Google Now, which is what too many commenters seem to think. Siri was a stand in for all “natural language” interfaces.

    So, for those of you who didn’t bother to read the study, including apparently Apple, let me inform you of what the study actually did find. Limited functionality voice interfaces, ones that will only respond to specific voice commands, are less distracting than an imperfect natural language interface.

    This was not a slam against Apple. It was a finding that voice interfaces with a predefined limited set of commands is less distracting then what is available now in natural language. Within the limited voice interfaces the biggest differences seemed to come from the menu setup.

    And honestly, I would have to agree with them. When I use Siri while driving I have started using it like it is a limited voice control. I don’t even try and speak to it naturally.

    • PMZanetti - 9 years ago

      You obviously didn’t read the study. Either that, or you have a tendency to agree with insanity made to sound sane.

      The study is completely bogus. The mere suggestion that inferior, poorly executed in car voice control systems are better or less dangerous than a naturally speaking and accurate system is absurd.

      It is a fraudulent conclusion. It has to be. Firstly, no evidentiary points are ever cited, just conclusions. Secondly, difficult is never less dangerous than easy, and you will never convince me or anyone that it is.

      • sircheese69 - 9 years ago

        Rush to Apple defense like a good little sheep. Bahhh Bahhh!

      • myke2241 - 9 years ago

        have you used carpay before sircheese69?

  7. myke2241 - 9 years ago

    so i have been using siri (5 months) / carplay (2 months or so) off and on in my NEX unit for awhile. i like the idea of carpay but i also think it needs improvements. it can be distracting but it is far less dangerous then texting or holding my phone while driving which isn’t legal here in CA. i don’t think there is a system on the road that comes even close to this at the moment. at most it is about as dangerous as changing a CD!

    I also find it funny that this is a thing and were talking distraction when tesla drivers can surf the web while driving! haters gonna hate!

  8. howardbrittain - 9 years ago

    These ‘distraction’ studies are nothing but JUNK Science.If you read their papers you immediately see this. They don’t compare ‘distraction’ levels with having a passenger sitting beside you, or with having a nice song on the radio, or with having a baby in the back seat crying or laughing.
    ALL of this research is politically/grant motivated and nothing more.

Author

Avatar for Ben Lovejoy Ben Lovejoy

Ben Lovejoy is a British technology writer and EU Editor for 9to5Mac. He’s known for his op-eds and diary pieces, exploring his experience of Apple products over time, for a more rounded review. He also writes fiction, with two technothriller novels, a couple of SF shorts and a rom-com!


Ben Lovejoy's favorite gear