Cellphone Drivers Drive Like Drunks

TDavid writes "A University of Utah study claims that drivers who use a cell phone will be 'more impaired than drunken drivers with blood alcohol levels exceeding 0.08.' The study also says that use will turn a driver who is age 20 into age 70. Hands-free systems apparently don't help much either as they still require a driver to 'actively be part of a conversation.' What about in vehicle systems like OnStar?"

Comments

Old People

[AsnFkr]

If it is a proven scientific fact that old people drive like they are drunk, why are they allowd to drive?

Re:Old People

[kannibal_klown]

Then you should see what I've had to deal with.

My favorite one was on a "Bingo" night...

I was at an intersection that also happened to be a railroad crossing (the pattern was like an astrix; 2 streets crossing at a right angle, with a railroad going through at 45 degrees). The train was coming through, so obviously both streets had the red light. When the train finally passed, it was me one 1 street, and a cadillac on the other.

My light turns green (that street always turns green after the train, and I had a witness to back me up). So I go, and almost get T-Boned by the cadillac full of elderly men and women. They got all angry and rolled down the windows to yell at the "young-en." Meanwhile, I turn my head and see that I was correct, I had the green and they had the red. There was no arguing with them, so I said to hell with it and drove off.

Even the other person in the car said we had the green, and the lights are so long at that intersection it's sickening... so it's not like it could have changed while they were yelling at us.

I have great respect for the elderly; my grandparents lived with me for most of my life (until I was 20). And I'm not saying all elderly are bad drivers as I've driven with some that were good, but there are a lot out there that aren't great at all, and god forbid anyone tell them that maybe they shouldn't be driving. The worst part is, they don't realize it and nobody in their family has "the heart" to say that it's dangerous for others when they're on the road.

Things I often witness
- A granny will just drift to the other lane even if someone's next to her. No turn signal either.

- Running a stop sign (not a rolling stop, but just go through like it was nothing).

- Flying (fast) through a parking lot, while not using the lanes. Just going through the parking spaces the entire length of the lot at like 25 MPH.

- STOP in the middle of a busy street for no reason so they can put on their glasses.

Re:Old People

[Max Romantschuk]

Because the AARP is one of the most powerful lobbying groups there is, and they fight tooth and nail against anything that even resembles competency testing.

You don't have competency testing for the elderly in the states? It's standard practice here in Finland. If the doctor says you're not fit to drive your licence is taken away. There are periodic checkups, and they are mandatory.

Re:Old People

[sensate_mass]

No. The reason talking on cellphones is dangerous is that part of the act of communication involves visualizing the other person's body language, facial expressions, and surroundings. Doing that takes away cycles (for lack of a better term) from the visual-spatial aspects of driving.

When you talk to a passenger, you already know where they are and what they're doing, and body language and facial expression can be ascertained via a quick glance of a few tenths of a second. The radio doesn't require any visualizing at all, unless you're some kind of synesthesiac.

I scared the CRUD out of myself last night

[jhines0042]

Driving while talking on the cell I almost ran a red light.....

I'm usually a very good driver. On the cell phone though.... Ok... From now on, no more talking and driving.

Here is a practical test

[syntap]

I have always maintained that handsfree doesn't do squat... it's the split mental attention and not having both hands on the wheel.

Try this easy test... during the superbowl, call someone up on your phone (with headset or without, doesn't matter). During the conversation, after every play, write down the number of yards gained/lost and the number on the jersey of the player that gained/lost them. You'll probably experience "slave can't serve two masters" syndrome and have to dedicate more attention to one or the other, either by having to say "hold on" or "um, what was that?" to whoever you are talking to or missing play stats to keep up with the conversation. Unfortunately, priority in a car most often goes to the conversation.

Re:After almost getting hit this morning...

[cayenne8]

" Despite the fact that women are better drivers on average than men? Rate car insurance lately?"

You know? I've always wondered about that...especially growing up in the highest insurance category (young male, unmarried, 2 seat sports car)...I'd ride with women, and be scared to death by the time I got out of the car...they drove faster and more recklessly than I did...and I drove pretty fast....but, they'd take chances turning sharp and in front of people I'd never try...

That, and I've never figured why they drop your rates if you get married. Frankly, the ones I see are so pissed when they leave they house, they floor it to get away as fast as possible...

Why is this modded troll?

[ad0gg]

In many studies, it is shown that women make more errors than men in driving. Men on the otherhand are more risk takers and their accidents are usually associated with excess speed which has a higher percentage of fatalities. That is why men pay more for insurance.

"This supports the suggestion by Storie (1977) that men are more at risk from accidents involving high speed while women are at more likely to be involved in accidents resulting from perceptual judgement errors."

Social Research Centre Study

Re:Why is this modded troll?

[SoupGuru]

I'd like to see if there was any work done describing how gender affects the ability to drive and talk on the cell phone. I've heard that women are more adept at multitasking and it would be interesting to see if their reaction times are better while talking on the phone than men's.

Scientific Evidence

[glpierce]

Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telophone. Psychological Science, 12(6), 462-466.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9(1), 23-32.

These papers are generally accepted as showing that talking on a cell phone (hands-free or not) decreases driving ability, and that conversing with an occupant does not have nearly the same impact. I should note that I believe that there are major flaws in both studies.

Re:Pull 'em over!

[hawk]

I am a lawyer, but this is not legal advice. If you get legal advice on the web, you're not fit to drive with or without a cellphone.

The phrasing of the results suggested that the impairment is only slightly more than a .08 BAL.

While I was handling DUI cases, the BAL was .10. Very few of the people that were near that level were initially pulled over for the DUI, but instead for other offenses--the intoxication is noted due to attitude, slow response, fumbling for the registration, and the like.

The weavers that are pulled over for DUI are in the .20 range, suggesting that the officers wouldn't have the cues to pull these folks over in the first place.

hawk, esq.

Re:A bit of research and reason show it to be BS

[Idarubicin]

Is that Elderly are a helluva a lot more dangerous than drunk drivers and should really be taken off the road.

Dangerous drivers--be they drunk, elderly, or just distracted by their phones--should all be off the streets. I don't see any reason to privilege one group of dangerous drivers over another. The fact that drunk and dangerous elderly drivers still seem to be on the road doesn't support the notion that other dangerous drivers should be ignored.

Simply put...I see tons of people driving on the cell phones - and driving fine. Sometimes a momentary reaction issue...yes. But when I see a drunk driver they are all over 2 or three lanes. They nearly hit everyone. They often run off the road. Somehow it is hard for me to accept that I can see a 100+ cell phone users who are supposedly "more impaired" and they don't perform as poorly as drunk drivers.

As another poster has already asked--how do you know that you didn't pass hundreds of drunk drivers who were staying in their lanes, driving along, but with much slower reaction times? Unless they're actually holding up flasks, you can't measure blood alcohol remotely. As a frequent pedestrian in a large city, I will gladly submit my own (subjective and anecdotal) opinion that drivers on cell phones are less aware of their surroundings.

And I am sorry....a cell phone user is NOT more impaired than a drunk driver. It is political BS. I refuse to buy it and no statistic will prove it to me.

And I am sorry...tobacco use is NOT more likely to kill me than the local nuclear plant. It is political BS. I refuse to buy it and no statistic will prove it to me.

Seriously--people are really bad at assessing risks. This is the type of question that statistics are designed for. Relative risks, odds ratios, confidence intervals. Feel free to provide specific criticism of the study methodology, and note where errors or biases may have been introduced. Don't try to tell me that anecdotal evidence is inherently more reliable for risk assessment than large-scale statistical analysis.

"The numbers....come down to milliseconds"

If you pull the study (it's online here in PDF format) then the total difference is reaction time is on average 130 ms, or about 12 feet at 60 mph (3.5 m at 100 km/h).

The key? is to know if you can multi-task or not. If you can't multi-task than DON'T USE A CELL PHONE AND DRIVE AT THE SAME TIME unless it's an emergency. A little common sense, and a little less stupidity will bring the human race a long way!

The problem is that people tend to be very poor judges of their own abilities. Ask anybody--they will tell you that they are an above average driver, but that there sure are a lot of idiots out on the road. People don't notice their own bad habits, unless and until they actually hit somebody. That's the whole point of a distraction--it means that you don't notice when you're making mistakes. I'm not saying that the parent poster is a bad driver, but that I don't trust people in general to be able to make that assessment.