Slashdot Mirror


Why Cell Phone Bans Don't Work

sciencehabit writes "You can take the driver away from the cell phone, but you can't take the risky behavior away from the driver. That's the conclusion of a new study, which finds that people who talk on their phones while driving may already be unsafe drivers who are nearly as prone to crash with or without the device. The findings may explain why laws banning cell phone use in motor vehicles have had little impact on accident rates."

5 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Mounting evidence - of hype. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

    Other countries use stricter limits: Sweden's 0.2 is actually technically close to good one (that's where changes occur); but most other countries at least use 0.5 (as opposed to use 0.8 or higher).

    It's possible you have your decimal off, but the US's legal limits are only 0.08, which is a damn sight lower than 0.2 (or 0.5)....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  2. Not terribly surprising by markdavis · · Score: 4, Informative

    >"new study, which finds that people who talk on their phones while driving may already be unsafe drivers who are nearly as prone to crash with or without the device."

    That partially doesn't surprise me. Typically, the same people that would allow themselves to be distracted by a phone or texting are going to be the same people that will allow themselves to be distracted by the radio, GPS, passenger, makeup, food, random thoughts, whatever. Conversely, there are people who tend to not allow distractions or are better able to ignore or cope with them. They might RELUCTANTLY use a phone while driving but don't allow the phone to be the primary focus and are FAR less distracted than others.

    Just my observation, but it certainly looks like younger generations are growing up with less and less ability to focus, almost like ADD is rampant. Could be a side effect of having instant everything in their life and have no tolerance for having to work at something, concentrate on something, or be "disconnected" from others.

    All that aside, I am not sure the methodology of the cited study is very scientific. For example- just ASKING people how often they use a phone while driving- yeah, that will be accurate. Anyway, there is no simple solution to the problem of distracted driving. Just banning phone use is not the answer. I don't know what the answer is, or if there is one... but it is certainly not going to be one thing.

  3. Re:Mounting evidence - of hype. by KiloByte · · Score: 5, Informative

    Most countries count alcohol content in blood in permilles, not percents.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  4. Oh, yes, and one more thing... by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

    In spite of this, in a fit of political correctness, the author feels compelled in the last paragraph of the story to print a quote from someone who has done no specific research on phoning while driving, but he still fees competent to weigh in suggesting bans be followed by stiffer enforcement.

    The person being quoted is D. L. Strayer, who a quick google scholar search reveals has done a proverbial shitload of distracted driving research, much of it focused on phone use.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Oh, yes, and one more thing... by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

      His work is mostly speculative, and artificial in nature, and his assertions haven't been born out on the road.

      Citations?

      In fact his studies are some of the exact ones proven to have defects that icebike mentioned in his first linked article.

      As far as I can see none of DL Strayer's papers are cited by Dr. Young's paper (doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31823b5efc -- perhaps I've got the wrong one), referred to in the link above.

      First there was icebike's claim that DL Strayer has never done any distracted driving studies. That about as wrong as wrong can be. Then there is your claim that the paper linked to by icebike specifically debunks several of DL Strayer's papers. I thought this was curious. If that were so, then why would icebike think that DL Strayer hasn't done any distracted driving studies? So I checked, and apparently Dr. Young's paper doesn't cite any of DL Strayer's publications. If that is so, then you must be mistaken.

      I'll assume for now you guys mixed different studies up and simply didn't bother to check, but you can see how it would be forgivable for someone to come away with the impression you guys are just making stuff up.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.