Slashdot Mirror
Bad Driving May Have Genetic Basis
Serenissima writes "Bad drivers may in part have their genes to blame, suggests a new study by UC Irvine neuroscientists. People with a particular gene variant performed more than 20 percent worse on a driving test than people without it — and a follow-up test a few days later yielded similar results. About 30 percent of Americans have the variant. 'These people make more errors from the get-go, and they forget more of what they learned after time away,' said Dr. Steven Cramer, neurology associate professor and senior author of the study published recently in the journal Cerebral Cortex."
We know that other tasks involving acquired skills are influenced by natural ability. Intelligence is partly inherited, athletic ability is partly inherited, etc. It should come as no surprise that a task requiring some cognitive skill (paying attention to the right things) and physical skill (good steering, etc) is also influenced by genetics.
Starting off with a poor hand genetically just means you have to work harder. Some athletes have to work harder than others to get peak performance. Some students have to work harder than others to ace their exams. And some drivers need to work harder than others to drive well.
Did any one catch the sample size?
"The driving test was taken by 29 people - 22 without the gene variant and seven with it."
Ummm... Sounds like interesting research, but until your sample size increases a bit, you don't got nothing.
They are testing the memory of the track. Take one of the failures out and put him in a real car with genuine feedback, real handling, g-forces, etc... then see how he performs. Or simply change the track every time its driven.
A good driver by their standards will know the turn is coming and compensate before they see it.
A good driver by my standards will know how to control their vehicle when presented with an unexpected turn or a kid on a bike shooting out between parked cars.
Essentially they created a test to see the effect of this gene on practiced behaviors... but it didn't test driving at all. Few accidents are the result of a driver forgetting how to drive, they are the result of a driver not knowing how to really drive in the first place (ie how to respond to the unexpected, or letting themselves be distracted and/or complacent).
They already knew this gene effected memory, all this test did is test memory by having them repeat the same course over and over again. Change the course regularly and the results may change, those with great memories may not be able to adapt to changes/suprises.
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
Some of the best drivers I know are the ones who can't obey speed limits, make illegal turns, and ultimately are deemed as "bad" drivers. However these same folks maintain superior control of their vehicles and never get into accidents unless they are caused by another driver's lack of control.
If you cannot maintain your speed at the posted limit, and have no respect for when a U-Turn is allowed or appropriate, than you are not maintaining "superior control" of your vehicle. You're just trying to justify your asshattery. (Yes, we all got that you're talking about youself.)
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Man, and I thought the main cause for concern with the upcoming revolution in genetic testing was losing my health insurance.
I hate to respond to this kind of stuff but I will.
To make an analogy, imagine that traffic laws are like government mandated school curriculum, they are designed to be of the most benefit to the majority, they are by no means designed to define driving ability.
There are people who shouldn't drive at all, and there are those who are capable of driving in much more extreme situations.
Well I agree that disregarding traffic laws is not a 'good' thing, a persons ability to conform to them will never dictate to me their ability to drive.
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
She gets it from her mother.
But I bet you taught her to drive.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Sure... but memorizing your route home from work does nothing to make you a good driver.
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
A good driver avoids most accidents even if they are caused by another driver's lack of control. I can't tell you how many times I've anticipated a dumbass move by some driver, pedestrian, or cyclist and preempted a collision.
You talk about "superior control" over the vehicle as if that's the hard part. That hard part is all the other people on the road. A good driver doesn't collide with things, period.
Some of the best drivers I know are the ones who can't obey speed limits, make illegal turns, and ultimately are deemed as "bad" drivers. However these same folks maintain superior control of their vehicles and never get into accidents unless they are caused by another driver's lack of control.
So, perhaps this gene is more of a "disrespect for authority" gene?
Well, I'm not certain that this study is actually testing driving ability... Seems more to be about their memory than their ability to drive...
But, regardless of how well you handle a vehicle, if you can't follow the speed limits and whatnot - you are a bad driver.
The speed limits, turn restrictions, signage, whatever is all there for a reason. It's to create a safe and predictable driving environment for everyone. Generally speaking, you aren't the only person on the road. A speed limit of 30 mph isn't there to make it take longer for you to get to work - it's there to ensure that everyone is traveling at roughly 30 mph. Which makes it possible, for example, to enter and exit the flow of traffic from parking lots relatively easily.
Sure, you may be able to handle your vehicle well... But if you're speeding up the road at 60 mph, in a 30 mph zone, somebody else may very well try to pull out in front of you and cause an accident.
Surprises cause accidents. Traffic laws and signage are there to reduce surprises. If you cannot follow the laws and signage, you are creating surprises. You may be able to deal with the surprises, or you may not - but that isn't the big problem. The big problem is how all the other drivers are going to deal with your surprises.
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
roads aren't a career. They aren't a place where some should excel at the expense of others. Since you are sharing the road with others, if your behavior isn't predictable then it is bad behavior. Say for example a champion race-car driver decided that, to prove how great a driver he was, he would drive on the wrong side of a freeway. Would that not be "bad driving?" I don't care how good your skill at steering and breaking might be, driving is a social contract to act within an established set of norms. A surgeon can have extreme skill at controlling how deeply they cut, and otherwise have perfect hand-eye coordination, but if that perfection is applied to cutting out part of your liver when you're supposed to be having a brain tumor removed, then completely independent of any amount of hand-eye coordination and grace - that person is a bad surgeon.
Same as a driver. If you aren't driving in a way that is predictable, and aren't driving the way you should be, then you are a bad driver. I don't care if you can do a controlled 360 on the road in front of your house - if you actually do it, then you are a bad driver. period.
And based on my own experience as a driver and a witness of others' driving, the level of comfort memorization encourages may be one of the more dangerous parts of driving.
You get into a habit of thinking things like:
There are never any cars around this corner
I never see kids on this street
Everybody drives 40mph on this street (posted speed of 25mph)
All my closest calls as a driver have happened when you get in autopilot mode when driving in familiar streets.
Contrast this to driving in a storm, in heavy traffic, in an unfamiliar area. Statistically I'm probably much more likely to get in an accident in the latter case, but I'm definitely paying much more attention and am being a much better driver.
A lot of comments (and tags) to that effect on this story.
Remember that story about sexism in the F/OSS world a few weeks back? Remember how many people denied that such a thing could exist? Here's your proof.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
I have the same problem. My wife has a serious problem with judging time and distance. She knows this and overcompensates by being way too careful. The end result is no accidents. But she does frequently piss of people behind her. My daughter (now 17, just had her first accident on friday) has the same time and distance judgment problem. Only she's an indestructible teenager who's personal life is so important, she needs red and blue lights on her car. After nearly two years of me trying to teach my daughter how to drive, i still don't like to be in the car with her. Her friends, sisters, and younger brother all refuse to ride with her. It's that scary. And she still isn't ready for the snow we'll get next month. :-/
Then why do you let her drive? I mean, really? You're her FATHER , and you won't tell her "no, you can't drive"? I think you're failing as a parent if you can't restrain her bad behavior.
If she is going to insist, and you're going to let her, make her pay for all her own expenses - insurance, maintenance, gas, etc.
antipaucity