a b s t r a c tIt is now well established that driving performance deteriorates during a mobile phone conversation, but the precise conditions under which interference occurs warrant further research. The present study examined the effects of varying the participants' level of emotional involvement in the conversation, while keeping the conversation similar in content for all participants. Twenty-six participants, half of whom were spider-phobics, completed a simulated driving task, either while undistracted or while conversing on the subject of spiders. The individuals who were spider-phobic, and hence more emotionally involved in the conversation, demonstrated significantly higher cognitive workload (as indexed by heart rate), made more driving errors, and demonstrated a significant decline in the range of their visual fixations, showing a pattern of visual tunnelling. The type of conversation engaged in has a significant effect on driver performance: the more emotionally involving the conversation, the greater its potential for distraction.

Research comparing continuous assessment (e.g. coursework) with examinations generally reveals a student preference for the former. The perceived increased use of continuous assessment periodically captures media attention, with claims of greater numbers of higher degree classifications being awarded. This paper takes a case-study approach to investigate the extent to which different types of assessment allow students to effectively demonstrate and apply their learning. By considering data gathered from second-level, undergraduate students completing 60 point, online psychology modules, this paper investigates assessment effectiveness in terms of student satisfaction, pass rate and level of pass rate. Findings reveal that modules with an end of module assessment (EMA), rather than an examination, have higher completion and pass rates. Whilst students who took a seen exam also performed well, those who completed an unseen exam recorded the lowest overall pass and completion rates, despite high ratings of student satisfaction. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for improved pedagogy and student experience.

The effects of imagery-induced distraction on hazard perception and eye movements were investigated in 2 simulated driving experiments. Experiment 1: sixty participants viewed and responded to 2 driving films containing hazards. Group 1 completed the task without distraction; group 2 completed a concurrent imagery inducing telephone task; group 3 completed a non imagery inducing telephone task. Experiment 2: eye-tracking data were collected from forty-six participants while they reacted to hazards presented in 16 films of driving scenes. 8 films contained hazards presented in either central or peripheral vision and 8 contained no hazards. Half of the participants performed a concurrent imagery-inducing task. Compared to undistracted participants, dual-taskers were slower to respond to hazards; detected fewer hazards; committed more "looked but failed to see" errors; and demonstrated "visual tunnelling". Telephone conversations may interfere with driving performance because the two tasks compete for similar processing resources, due to the imagery-evoking aspects of phone use.

Dual taskers use enduring attentional sets when resources are shared between tasks Reliance on attentional set contributes to decreased detection of unexpected events. Distraction leads to longer reaction times for unexpected events, even when they are congruent with driving 2 The impact of attentional set and situation awareness on dual tasking driving performance

Evidence for how phone-use impacts driving is clear: phone-using drivers are four times more likely to crash; demonstrate poor hazard detection ability; take longer to react to any hazards they notice; and can look yet fail to see. However, drivers are often resistant to research findings and, despite it being an enforceable offence, many still admit to using their phones. This paper combines what is known about the dangers of distracted driving with what research tells us about how drivers think about themselves, the law, and their risk of both crashing and being prosecuted. These blended insights explain why evidence may be resisted both by drivers and policymakers, highlighting the inconvenient truth of the distraction caused by mobile phone-use.