You never drink and drive, always wear a seatbelt, and as of Friday, September 1st, the mobile phone is definitely switched off when you're in the car. You're a safe driver, right?
Perhaps, but concerns about mobile phone use may have diverted our attention from the real dangers posed by our car radios. In fact, researchers at Monash University in Australia recently declared that "using the car music system may have the greatest impact on driving performance".
Dr Charles Spence, a psychologist at Oxford University, is investigating how the radio interferes with driving performance. The issue seems to be how much mental energy is devoted to engaging with the sounds around us, and therefore diverted from the road.
"In this sense, radio is not as bad as generating or engaging in conversation on a mobile phone," Spence says.
However, like conversation, the type of radio makes a big difference. "The more emotionally charged and demanding talk radio is, the more likely it is to distract the driver," Spence reports.
In other words, listening to John Humphreys may be more dangerous than a relaxing session of Classic FM.
In general, research has shown that listening to music has no adverse effects on driving. However, there is some indication that listening to music can interfere with detecting hazards in the periphery, such as a child stepping out into the road.
Music, particularly the number of beats per minute, may also be implicated in speeding. "Increased tempo makes you drive faster," Spence cautions.
This is particularly concerning as the National Safety Council reports that "speed is the single largest factor contributing to road deaths in Ireland".
In the future, music volume may also be problematic. Spence points out that new car designs seek to help drivers by alerting them to dangers in the road. For example, cars that send increasingly urgent beeps when a driver is reversing are becoming more and more common.
But this advanced technology may prove pointless if no one can hear the beeps. "Loud music could definitely interfere with the ability to perceive warning signals," Spence adds. Surprisingly, no one has investigated the effect of radio on the efficacy of warning signals.
To fill this research gap, Spence is currently conducting a study in collaboration with the National Transport Laboratories in England to test the effects of radio on two types of warning signal.
In a driving simulator, volunteers will see a car in front of them brake suddenly. In one condition a beep will sound as a warning when the car brakes. In another condition, the driver's seatbelt will vibrate. The time it takes for the driver to brake will be compared when the driver is listening to the radio or when there is silence.
"In silence, we expect both warning signals to be effective. However, we expect the vibrating seatbelt to be more effective when drivers are listening to the radio," Spence predicts.
So would it be safer to ban car radios?
Not necessarily, Spence says. "Radio can be good for drivers. Noise can arouse you and keep you alert." On long car journeys, the radio can help keep drivers awake, though drivers should still take frequent breaks.
But if you want to listen to Pat Kenny or Ray D'Arcy, it may be best to install speakers in the front of the car. Research has consistently demonstrated a "frontal speech advantage", such that we hear better if the sound is coming from the same direction we are looking.
"Because of the way our brains are organised, we find it very difficult to listen to speech coming from one direction while we are looking somewhere else," Spence reports.
However, this frontal advantage may be less important for music.
Dr Courtenay Norbury is an experimental psychologist at Oxford University and is a participant in the British Association for the Advancement of Science Media Fellow scheme