Swedish Tests Show Human-Machine Interface Design Significantly Affects Driver Focus—Physical Buttons Not Necessarily Better Than Touchscreens

A driver distraction test conducted in Sweden has revealed that modern vehicles now take longer to complete common in-car tasks compared to four years ago, suggesting that human-machine interface (HMI) design may have a greater impact on driver focus than whether touchscreens or physical buttons are used. The test was repeated in 2026 by Swedish automotive media near Uppsala at Lunda Airport, simulating drivers performing multiple routine operations while traveling at 110 km/h on a closed track. Tasks included activating seat heating, increasing cabin temperature, turning on the front windshield defroster, switching radio stations, resetting the trip computer, dimming the instrument cluster, and turning off the central infotainment screen. In the 2022 test, vehicles averaged 756 meters to complete all tasks; by 2026, this increased to 813 meters—an additional 57 meters, equivalent to roughly two extra seconds of driving time. All drivers familiarized themselves with each vehicle’s controls beforehand. Any lane deviation or loss of speed control required a retest. Timing for each task began when both hands returned to the steering wheel and ended upon task completion, with two drivers testing each vehicle. Voice control systems were excluded due to significant variation across brands. The evaluation covered 10 vehicle models and also assessed smartphone integration, touchscreen usability while wearing gloves, screen-to-eye distance, and first impressions among users of different ages. Results showed that interaction logic—not input method—was the key factor affecting efficiency: the Volvo XC60 performed best, completing all tasks in just 485 meters. In contrast, the Mazda CX-60, equipped with 50 physical buttons but disabling its touchscreen while driving, relied solely on buttons and took 37 seconds—covering 1,137 meters—the worst result. Even the 2016 Volvo V60, which heavily used physical buttons, required 863 meters. The Tesla Model Y, which relies almost entirely on a touchscreen, showed improvement over the previous round thanks to its fast system response (waking instantly when the door opens). Conversely, the Mercedes-Benz CLA regressed significantly, taking 35 seconds overall—including a 19-second wait just for the system to boot up. The Škoda, combining a rotary knob with a touchscreen, completed tasks in under 18 seconds, covering 542 meters. The Toyota Corolla Cross featured a well-positioned screen, but its instrument brightness adjustment was buried deep in menus, leading to longer completion times. The study also noted improvements in recent screen layouts: the XC60’s display required only a 35-degree downward glance, compared to the MG Marvel R tested in 2022, which demanded a 56-degree head tilt. The Nissan Qashqai upgraded its center screen from 9 inches to 12.3 inches. The test has limitations, including a small sample size of only 10 vehicles, with results potentially influenced by driver familiarity, interior layout, steering wheel shortcut keys, and feature complexity. Nevertheless, findings collectively indicate that the rationality of HMI design in vehicle infotainment systems matters more for operational efficiency and driving safety than the choice between touchscreens or physical buttons.