New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

"Textalyzer" Aims at Deadly Distracted Driving

A new device promises to tell police when a driver has been sending messages while behind the wheel, but is it legal? Larry Greenemeier reports.

PhotoDisc/Getty Images

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Fifty years ago, British inventors made and marketed the first electronic “breathalyzer”. The alcohol gauge has become standard issue for U.S. law enforcement cracking down on drunk driving.

In a sign of the times, U.S. police are now hoping to enlist the so-called “Textalyzer.”  The device, in development by a company called Cellebrite, plugs into a driver’s smartphone and can tell police whether that person sent a text, e-mail or some other type of electronic message. Much of this information could be found by checking the device’s call log and messaging apps, but the Textalyzer aggregates all of that information in one place.

Sending or reading a text typically takes a driver’s eyes off the road for about five seconds. At 55 miles per hour, that's like driving the length of an entire football field with your eyes closed, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The NHTSA reports that in 2015 nearly 3,500 people were killed, and 391,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving drivers who were talking on the phone or texting.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But several open questions remain related to the Textalyzer. For one, it’s not clear how officers will access a device if it’s password protected. Textalyzer’s legality is also up for debate. In 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police officers cannot legally search a mobile phone for content created within the past 180 days without a warrant. Regardless, several states plan to test the device.

Over the years all sorts of bad advice has been given to help people “beat” Breathalyzer tests. Let’s hope the only way people beat the Textalyzer is by keeping their hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road.

—Larry Greenemeier

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe