Testing Agency: Driver Attention Monitors Are Terrible
By Sean Tucker 03/13/2024 8:16am
The systems that ensure a driver is paying attention to the road don’t work very well, according to a new study. An insurance industry lab tested 14 such systems, giving one an “Acceptable” score. The other 13 fell below even acceptable levels.
Insurance Companies Have Their Own Safety Lab
The federal government’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration handles most car safety regulations in the U.S. It crash tests nearly every car for sale.
But, as a federal bureaucracy subject to Congressional oversight, it can move slowly.
The insurance industry has a financial reason to prevent car accidents. So, a group of insurance companies funds a separate lab, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). The institute conducts crash tests and studies new safety technologies.
Related: Car Safety Agency Makes Harder Tests; More Cars Ace Them
Auto industry insiders consider the IIHS the stricter grader. It regularly makes its tests harder and studies new safety systems faster than the government agency because it isn’t subject to government red tape.
Many 2024 Cars Have Some Automation
This year, the IIHS has used that speed to introduce a new round of ratings — examining driver attention monitors.
Many 2024 cars have driver assistance systems like smart cruise control that keep a safe distance from the car ahead in traffic even as it speeds up and slows down. Lane-keeping technologies can keep a car centered in its lane even as the highway twists and turns.
But they all require the driver to pay careful attention and stay ready to take over at all times. Most even require the driver to keep their hands on the wheel, even if the car is helping with the steering.
With the systems engaged, drivers sometimes let their attention drift — often to a phone.
“Some drivers may feel that partial automation makes long drives easier, but there is little evidence it makes driving safer,” explains IIHS President David Harkey.
So many of today’s cars also watch the driver, prompting them with warnings when their attention drifts.
Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Poor
The IIHS isn’t evaluating how well partial automation systems work. Instead, it’s testing the attention monitors.
The institute tested “what happens when the lens of the driver monitoring camera is blocked, the driver’s face is obscured, the driver is looking down, and the driver’s hands are not on the steering wheel.” They performed most tests on a closed track. “For certain tests that must be conducted on public roads, a second IIHS employee sits in the front passenger seat to monitor the driving environment and the vehicle systems,” the institute says.
Researchers gave the systems scores of Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Poor.
Mostly Marginal, Poor
No system earned a Good score. Lexus earned an Acceptable with its most advanced system, which is optional on most Lexus cars. The standard system Lexus offers at no charge earned a Poor rating.
“The shortcomings vary from system to system,” said IIHS Senior Research Scientist Alexandra Mueller, who led the development of the new program. “Many vehicles don’t adequately monitor whether the driver is looking at the road or prepared to take control. Many lack attention reminders that come soon enough and are forceful enough to rouse a driver whose mind is wandering. Many can be used despite occupants being unbelted or when other vital safety features are switched off.”
The Scores
| System Name | Test Vehicle | Rating |
| Lexus Teammate with Advanced Drive | 2022-2024 Lexus LS | Acceptable |
| General Motors Super Cruise | 2023-2024 GMC Sierra | Marginal |
| Nissan ProPilot Assist with Navi-link | 2023-2024 Nissan Ariya | Marginal |
| BMW Active Driving Assistant Pro | 2023-2024 BMW X1 | Poor |
| Ford BlueCruise | 2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E | Poor |
| Ford Adaptive Cruise Control with Stop-and-Go and Lane Centering Assist | 2021-2024 Ford Mustang Mach-E | Poor |
| Genesis Highway Driving Assist 2 | 2023-2024 Genesis G90 | Poor |
| Genesis Smart Cruise Control/Lane Following Assist | 2023-2024 Genesis G90 | Poor |
| Lexus All-Speed Dynamic Radar Cruise Control with Lane Tracing Assist | 2022-2024 Lexus LS | Poor |
| Mercedes-Benz Active Distance Assist Distronic with Active Steering Assist | 2022-23 Mercedes-Benz C-Class | Poor |
| Nissan ProPilot Assist 2.0 | 2023-2024 Nissan Ariya | Poor |
| Tesla Autopilot, Version 2023.7.10 | 2021-2023 Tesla Model 3 | Poor |
| Tesla Full Self-Driving (Beta), Version 2023.7.10 | 2021-2023 Tesla Model 3 | Poor |
| Volvo Pilot Assist | 2022-2024 Volvo S90 | Poor |
Hope For Improvement
Though the results are discouraging, IIHS researchers believe that automakers could get better at this quickly. Automakers could fix many of the problems, the researchers say, without installing expensive hardware.
“In some cases, manufacturers are already making changes to their systems through software updates, which may result in adjustments to these ratings.”
“There’s a silver lining if you look at the performance of the group as a whole. No single system did well across the board, but in each category, at least one system performed well,” Harkey explains. That’s good news because “the fixes are readily available and, in some cases, may be accomplished with nothing more than a simple software update.”