Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Keeping Older Drivers Behind the Wheel

Posted by timothy on from the my-dad-should-just-not-drive-ever dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "A new study shows the key role technology can play in extending the age at which people can drive safely and highlights the important psychological role that driving plays in older people's lives in contributing to feelings of independence and freedom and maintaining their quality of life. The study identified ideas for in-car information systems to help compensate for the reduction in reaction time that affects many older drivers. Specific recommendations included a head-up display on the windshield that displays road sign information based on GPS position so the driver doesn't have to keep watching the road side for information and a system to provide the driver with audible feedback on their current speed so the driver doesn't have to look at the dashboard so often. 'Our research highlights issues that have been overlooked by car designers and those advising older people on lifestyles,' says Dr Charles Musselwhite, who led the study. 'The current emphasis on developing technologies which take over part of the driving task may actually end up deterring older drivers. By contrast, better in-car information systems could help them drive safely and ensure they want to keep driving.'"

10 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. Please no! by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Interesting
    FTFA:

    Specific ideas generated include:
    A system that unobtrusively displays road sign information through a head-up display on the windscreen. This is a see-through display that shows information without impeding the user's view. Harnessing Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, this would track a car's position and identify approaching signs. Exactly the same information contained in the signs would then appear on the windscreen at the right moment. The driver would therefore not have to keep scouring the road side for information.
    A system providing the driver with audible feedback on their current speed, again harnessing GPS technology. For example, one short, non-distracting bleep could indicate the car is approaching the local speed limit; a longer bleep could indicate the speed limit has been reached. The driver would therefore not have to look at the dashboard so often.
    The systems have the potential to minimise the amount of time drivers divert their attention from the road ahead, cutting the chance of an accident.

    You kow, I just don't see how this will help much with people who have severely reduced reaction times/cognitive abilities in dealing with traffic.
    My mom uses the sweet public transit deals that exist exclusively for seniors. We need to have those everywhere, they work great. They pick her up right at her door with a handicapped-style van with a lift, and she goes wherever she wants. Her church, her local senior center, and her medical clinic all have similar setups which she also uses. There's even a similar deal that takes her the whole 300 miles to Atlantic City when she's in the mood. Costs her way less than keeping a car, and it's a lot safer for her, as well as for the rest of us. I think it's a far better solution than encouraging her to drive, which she really cannot competently do. Until real available cars can reliably drive themselves , I say please, keep the seniors off the roads for everyone's safety. Besides, we seriously need to reduce the number of drivers on the road, not find new ways to let everyone drive!
    All this just strikes me as something sponsored by the auto industry in the hopes of opening "new" markets.

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
    1. Re:Please no! by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exactly. How can a person who ignores their turn signal indicator for 30 miles be expected to look through a transparent heads-up display and see the road, or recognize which beep is beeping?

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    2. Re:Please no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "The driver would therefore not have to keep scouring the road side for information."

      Ugh. When I learned to drive, the booklet specifically said you're supposed to have an idea of what's all around your car that's at most 5 or 6 seconds old -- that means right & left shoulder checks to monitor the blind spots, etc.

      Scouring the road side is part of safe driving -- for this system to be as safe as that, you'd need to affix GPS transponders to ever kid, deer, dog, soccer ball, and car so that warnings about hazards moving in from the side could also be displayed on the HUD. There would be so much information in the same visual space that it'd be a complete jumble.

  2. We Need Self-Driving Vehicles by Louis+Savain · · Score: 5, Insightful

    According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis, in 2005, over 43,000 people were killed in traffic accidents in the U.S. alone. I don't know what the number is for the entire world but it must be in the six digits. Most of them are not caused by older drivers. Traffic fatalities and injuries are a much bigger threat to the nation than terrorism. All the money being spent on terrorism should be thrown into developping a 100% automated transit system. And no, we don't need AI to do it.

  3. I work with the elderly... by hedgemage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And the problem with driving is complicated by many, many factors. First off, you have vision problems, hearing problems, problems placing objects in space (as much cognitive as visual), memory (even short term things like cancelling a turn signal), reaction speed, fine motor skills, and the list goes on. The folks I deal with are not computer users, and their unfamiliarity with them would make the addition of GPS, warning lights, vocal instructions simply more confusing than helpful. The real solution shouldn't be keeping elderly drivers driving, but rather giving them more safe and accessible public transportation options.

  4. No no no. by Zwicky · · Score: 5, Funny

    Always upgrade to the newest stable drivers. Have we learned nothing?

    --
    "Three eyes are better than one" -- Lieutenant Columbo
    1. Re:No no no. by ArsonSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      don't go with the 1.6 version though it's known to crash more often. Risk analysis has shown that 2.5 version seems to be much better judging by the insurance costs. Version 6.5+ varies in quality depending on the install and how well it has been maintained.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  5. Wrong Goals by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When they place the comfort of seniors above the safety of everyone, we have already lost.

    --
    Learn to love Alaska
  6. Open source them, dummit! by snikulin · · Score: 5, Funny

    At this site I have leaned that open-sourcing the drivers will solve all drivers' problems.
    Without any doubt, OSS community will fix all these drivers in no time.

  7. This is not the answer by shaitand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real answer is to get those older drivers off the roadways. Forget the grey panthers and require drivers over 65 to re-qualify to keep their license every 2 yrs and include a driven and reflex test as well as the usual vision test.

    Old drivers aren't often in accidents, they often cause accidents. They will obliviously run a red light and cause a collision behind them while they blissfully continue on to park with their wheel up on the curb at the grocery store.