Slashdot Mirror
Another Study Confirms Hands-Free Texting While Driving Is Unsafe
schwit1 writes with a followup to a story we discussed in April about how using voice-activated texting while driving was no safer than using your hands. Now, a study by AAA has found that using voice commands to send texts is more dangerous than simply talking on your cellphone.
"Texting a friend verbally while behind the wheel caused a 'large' amount of mental distraction compared with 'moderate/significant' for holding a phone conversation or talking with a passenger and 'small' when listening to music or an audio book, the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found in a report released today. Automakers have promoted voice-based messaging as a safer alternative to taking hands off the wheel to place a call and talk on a handheld phone. About 9 million infotainment systems will be shipped this year in cars sold worldwide, with that number projected to rise to more than 62 million by 2018, according to a March report by London-based ABI Research. 'As we push towards these hands-free systems, we may be solving one problem while creating another,' said Joel Cooper, a University of Utah assistant research professor who worked on the study. 'Tread lightly. There's a lot of rush to develop these systems.' The findings from the largest U.S. motorist group bolster National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Deborah Hersman's call to ban all phone conversations behind the wheel, even with hands-free devices."
Autocorrect.
And other research shows that the sky is blue when It's daytime and there are no clouds. What does it take to convince people? Especially people stupid enough to text while driving?
Look, folks, a text isn't like a phone call. It's like email. That goddamned text will wait until you're stopped.
Free Martian Whores!
Well if you are Talking in the car with a passenger, he can tell you, Dude you need to stop your car. Vs talking to some one who doesn't have a stake in your driving safety (and can't know if he does).
I just recently got in an accident. I have a hands free unit. The phone rang, and the split second it took me to read who it was on the dashboard was long enough for me not to keep my eyes on the road to see the car in front of me doing a quick stop.
I didn't even pick up the phone, I was just wondering who it was, and it showed right on the dashboard.
If I am driving and someone is with me, and I get too distracted, or when I am riding with someone and see that they are about to do something dangerious. I can say, Hey the car is stopping!.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
What is more dangerous is having stupid people driving..... period. Whether they are texting, juggling, talking on the phone, or playing PS3. Especially when they try to merge onto a 65 MPH freeway going 30 MPH.
sudo make me a sandwich
Are we talking vapid pop music, idiot morning DJ's, or "stimulating" discussions on Public Radio? My gut tells me that these aren't equally distracting. Additionally, what qualifies as "listening" to radio. There are some people who sing along to songs on the radio, or switch stations constantly. Is this what the experiment simulated, or did people just drive while passively listening?
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Remember last time when Texas A&M did this? They asked people to LOOK AT THE PHONES AND MAKE SURE THE TEXT WAS CORRECT. Of course it's more distracting. I don't know the details of this study, TFA is light on details and direction (though it mentions the A&M study).
In case no one here was aware - doing anything other than driving, when you're driving, means you aren't driving at 100%/
And yet, I could stand at almost any intersection with a camera, and I bet at least 25% of all drivers are in the middle of talking or texting despite it being illegal. Some days, it seems like more.
As long as people still believe that they are so highly evolved they can do this without problem, it will continue to be one. Not unlike people who believe they're still good drivers when they're half hammered.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
One of 2 reasons for your accident.
1. You took longer than you think to read the name.
2. You were following too closely.
Answer is most likely 2. People follow MUCH too closely nowadays.
Slashdot is like Playboy: I read it for the articles
Several ways. First, looking at the clock, radio, speedometer, etc is done at a time convenient for and chosen by the driver. There is no sense of urgency about it - it is not an interrupt. Most drivers are not going to be looking at those things except for when it is relatively safe to do so. On the other hand, many (most?) people treat an incoming phone call or text as something that must be dealt with RIGHT NOW.
Secondly, looking at those other things takes very little thought, and thus causes very little distraction. Reading a phone number or name takes a lot more thought, and distracts you for a longer period of time.
How do you get that practice?
Like drunk driving, I would like to see that laws punish those that actually cause damage, not just arbitrarily set rules and regulation. If someone is driving recklessly, I don't care if they are distracted or just don't know how to drive, they should be ticketed. Why should a attentive reckless driver be treated better than a distracted driver. If someone gets into an auto incident because they are drunk or because they are texting, then assign the blame completely on them. Sure the other party might have done something wrong, but in most situations it is two way street. Both drivers have to be aware so that when mistakes are made, which we all do, everyone is aware enough to avoid the incident. If someone dies as a result, and it is not the distracted driver, then manslaughter charges and prison time should be the norm. Not wasting cops time setting up roadblocks to punish drivers that are otherwise safe.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
And yet, I could stand at almost any intersection with a camera, and I bet at least 25% of all drivers are in the middle of talking or texting despite it being illegal.
Illegal's not the problem. If it were safe yet illegal it would only be their problem. Since it's so dangerous it's everybody's problem.
Perhaps part of the problem is that there are laws that impact no one but the person breaking the law. That leads to disrespect for law in general.
Free Martian Whores!
So then why aren't the same people trying to banning dashboard gauges, clocks and radios?
Because they aren't new fangled technology and trying to blame them won't work because they're not new and scary.
More Twoson than Cupertino
It's completely logical.
Your passenger, like you, has a significant interest in surviving your trip, and will tend to react by quieting down when you're in a tough spot, or help you out with a "Watch out!" if you're about to, say, pull into an occupied lane next to you.
The person on the other end of the phone, by contrast, isn't there with you and has no understanding of your current situation.
The basic thing to understand, though, about why hands-free makes no significant difference is that it's not the driver's hands or eyes that are the limiting factor, it's the driver's brain.
I am officially gone from
I don't know about you, but whenever I use the voice-to-text capabilities in android there are multiple wrong words. Given that, I'd be willing to be that the vast majority of people would in fact check to make sure the text was correct before sending.
Because they aren't distracting. You probably check the gauges, etc dozens of times during a trip, and never even realize it. If I asked you what the gauge said a few seconds after you looked at it you could probably not even tell me. However, if you got a text or phone call, I bet I could ask you 10 minutes later and you would know exactly who it was from. In the case of gauges no real 'processing' or memory is involved - you are just looking for a quick confirmation of something, and as soon as you have that you can forget about it. Not so with texts and phone calls.
Perhaps part of the problem is that there are laws that impact no one but the person breaking the law. That leads to disrespect for law in general.
So you want your driver's license taken away because one of your neighbors killed someone while texting behind the wheel?
If you were texting while driving... yes.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Stop tailgating and leave a safe distance between yourself and the car in front of you and that won't happen.
Texting, or talking, while driving is not the problem. Bad drivers are the problem. Texting and talking while driving makes bad drivers worse.
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
Perhaps part of the problem is that there are laws that impact no one but the person breaking the law. That leads to disrespect for law in general.
So you want your driver's license taken away because one of your neighbors killed someone while texting behind the wheel?
No, no, no... I want your driver's license taken away until you can prove that you're not a selfish fuckhead who is incapable of operating 2 tons of Rolling Steel Death without endangering everyone around you.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
And really this is the major problem. I can't just say
"Siri, text wife, pickup milk on your way home".
Its NEVER that easy, and if it was it would be pretty safe to use while driving.
Just bad driving. If he knew that he needed to look he should have made sure he had a proper braking distance for the time it takes to check the screen. That's part of driving. Analyzing the environment and accounting for problems before they happen. My wife constantly got on me about slowing down for green lights ( I watch cross traffic and slow if it looks dangerous). One day we are driving late and I started slowing for a green light to watch cross traffic, I hit the brakes hard and a truck full on blew the light at 70 miles an hour. If I had not checked the cross traffic we would have been t-boned and our car would have taken out four drunks crossing the road. As it was the driver barely missed the drunks. Situational awareness is very important in driving.
Yes, because OTHER IMPROVEMENTS to safety are ongoing. The point which you can't seem to grasp is that they would be declining at a STEEPER RATE if people were not talking on their phones or texting.
The problem is many people are dangerous even without the cell phone or texting. Removing those things doesn't make them safe.
BUT, most people are more dangerous when driving while texting or using a cell phone. Adding that makes them less safe.
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
Concentration and alertness are not the same thing. The radio certainly interferes with concentration, and when you are looking for an address you are concentrating. Normal driving does not require concentration, it requires alterness. In fact, concentration interferes with alterness. One reason that beginning drivers are so bad is that they are concentrating so much on the mechanics of driving that they are not alert. There is no indication that the radio interferes with alertness.
Perhaps part of the problem is that there are laws that impact no one but the person breaking the law.
Nice. So how about we amend TWD laws so that if you provide proof that a driver was TWDing (photo, video, etc... NOT while you are driving yourself, and not with automated equipment) then the $50 fine the person gets hammered with goes right into your pocket instead (minus some administrative overhead).
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
But if people stopped using their mobile while operating a vehicle, they would decline even more! That is the issue here!
This is blinging
So then why aren't the same people trying to banning dashboard gauges, clocks and radios?
Because they aren't new fangled technology and trying to blame them won't work because they're not new and scary.
Plus, the gauges/clock/radio in my car don't scream at me through the sound system until I give them my attention. Nor do they require me to enter a 4 digit PIN (on a touchscreen, no less) in order to access the information they provide.
Unlike a cell phone.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
And how is that situation any different than looking down at the clock on your dashboard? Or the radio? Or the fuel gauge or speedometwr?
Several ways. First, looking at the clock, radio, speedometer, etc is done at a time convenient for and chosen by the driver. There is no sense of urgency about it - it is not an interrupt. Most drivers are not going to be looking at those things except for when it is relatively safe to do so. On the other hand, many (most?) people treat an incoming phone call or text as something that must be dealt with RIGHT NOW.
Secondly, looking at those other things takes very little thought, and thus causes very little distraction. Reading a phone number or name takes a lot more thought, and distracts you for a longer period of time.
Does not compute.
It doesn't sound like jellomizer felt he was in an unsafe driving situation, so he went ahead and to checked out the incoming caller information. He could as easily have been glancing at the satellite radio to see what artist / song name is playing now, or switching the dash display to see what his instantaneous gas mileage is at the moment. As far as he knew, this was a convenient time, so he chose to do so.
Any of these tasks would require at least as much thought as would reading a phone number/name off of a display...should they be prohibited as well? Perhaps every display in the vehicle except the speedometer and odometer should go black as soon as the wheels are rolling?
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
The theory is those people are weeded out through a driving test prior to receiving their license. Problem is often the tests are difficult enough, or the person jumps through the hoops of the test despite having poor driving skills and practices in the real world. Where I am re-testing is rare and generally reserved to the elderly. I'd personally like to see it as a more frequently used tool in policing. Driving recklessly? In addition to a fine you need to pass a re-examination within x weeks or your license is suspended. caught texting and driving? You have to take a re-examination at your own cost. Basically drive it into peoples' skulls that driving is a privilege not a right.
Anything distracting is going to make someone a worse driver than they already are. Removing those distractions reduces the risks. It may not make them "safe", but they'll be further on the spectrum towards safe than if they were texting and driving (mediocre is better than horrid, and horrid is better than guaranteed manslaughter). Anecdotal, but in my experience it's those idiots that think they are the best drivers and can text and call with no problems (completely oblivious to how they are drifting in their own lane). I've confronted people about drifting due to distractions.. all claim they weren't drifting in their lane! "No, I was driving fine!"
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
/sighs
They haven't stopped declining SINCE cellphones became a big thing, either.
... and safety technology hasn't stopped increasing during that time period, either.
Here's my question to you: you say that traffic fatalities have been declining... what about overall accident rates? Unless they've been on the decline as well, and in similar or better numbers than the fatalities, you're really only helping me prove my point.
FWIW, according to this document from the census bureau, overall accident rates have remained fairly steady over the last few decades, with fatalities and serious injuries seeing a slightly higher decrease; in other words, we have about the same amount of wrecks, but less deaths because cars are safer than they used to be.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I wasn't talking about "traffic fatalities fell from 1980 to 2000, then stopped declining". I'm talking "they started declining way back, and ARE STILL DECLINING!
In spite of all the people talking on their cellphones.
And you somehow think that measuring fatalities is the metric?
That would imply that any unsafe act would result in only fatalities, no simple accidents, no injuries or property damage only accidents.
before we go on too far, not everything is declining. 2012 saw an increase in teen vehicle fatalities. Even so, there is an improper fixation on only fatalities.
http://ghsa.org/html/publications/pdf/spotlights/spotlight_teens12.pdf
A friends daughter has been involved in 2 TWD accidents. First time she clipped a mailbox, the second time a street sign. In the first accident, damage was minor. In th esecond, she totaled the car. She was not injured in either accident, in the second, the airbags deployed.
Using the fatality metric, her texting was not a bad thing. Using an injury metric, it was not a bad thing. Property damage? well, maybe. But she thankfully wasn't killed, so TWD is safe in some people's eyes.
But replace the mail box and the street sign with pedestrians, and they would have almost certainly been dead. Would that make her texting a bad thing? Then again, those pedestrians weren't driving, so texting and driving is still safe. Not so much for the pedestrians who were hit.
For further entertainment
http://www.missouricaraccident.com/blog/cell-phone-texting-issues/distracted-driver-hits-pedestrians-i-70/
http://www.wcax.com/story/15251324/police-driver-who-hit-colchester-pedestrian-was-texting
http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=168456&fm=newsmain%2Cnarts
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
For many people driving is a necessity. Therefore it is not seen as a privilege but as a right... "I have a job, pay on time for my car and insurance - I deserve to drive. "
If we had adequate mass transit or designed our communities for local living then it would be seen as a special privilege.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
You sound like some of the morons I see driving -- which includes weaving, tailgating 1 car length back at 45MPH, blowing through stop signs and red lights, and more -- while taking a "really important" phone call.
BTW, one of the best clues that someone is distracted is them driving up so close that they almost hit you, then back off and do it again. It you let them ahead of you, they will drop back if there is no one else to do this to.
The distracted driver is using other vehicles as reference points - probably using a lot of peripheral vision - on where they should drive, and how fast to go. But it isn't a very good system, seeing their nuisance factor.
And yes, I've seen all of those things happen within the last two weeks and had to take extreme measures to avoid accidents in two instances.
Driving while texting or talking on a phone should be treated exactly the same as DUI.
I'm personally in favor of cellphones being disabled while driving. This is not a difficult thing. People cannot use thes things responsibly, so they need to be squelched
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I was thinking more along the lines of how Germany handles driving licenses* - you have to be first aid certified, take (and pass) required training courses, pass both written and practical exams... all at your own expense.
Now, most people would balk at extending those kind of requirements stateside (I presume because they fear they won't be able to pass), but regardless of opinion there is a strong correlation between "advanced" driver training (and by "advanced" I mean more than the none that many US states require) and lower accident rates.
* For their own citizens; recent reciprocity changes make it a lot easier for some foreigners to trade their home licenses for German ones.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I live in actual reality.
In actual reality people modify their behaviors based on risk. Airbags, seat belts, crumple zones, more resilient car frames, etc. do nothing to prevent accidents.
Sure they do - they make the car safer to drive.
If you don't believe me, try this: take your daily driver around a fairly perilous corner as fast as you're able to without losing control. Then, go get your hands on an older car of similar make, say pre-1980's, and take the same corner at the same speed. According to your hypothesis, they will both take the corner similarly, because, as you say, things like "more resilient car frames... do nothing to prevent accidents."
PS you may want to have the paramedics on hand for when your second run in the 40-year-old auto ends badly... because it will.
When accidents are safer people are more willing to risk them.
Bull-fucking-shit. Case in point, my wife drives a brand new TDI Jetta, one of the safest cars a person can buy; yet she still does everything in her power to avoid getting creamed on the interstate. SO, hypotheses #2 shot out of the water.
Seriously, who have you ever met that said, "hey, this car (I just spent 1/3 of my annual income on) is super safe to drive, so now I have free license to drive like a total fucktard!"?
I'm going to go out on a limb and say Zero.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
From previous Slashdot discussions I've come to learn that:
Safe distance following Inviting an unsafe maneuver by creating a gap that fellow drivers will want to move into - keep gap short Creating safe distance following (e.g. as a result of the above Creating an unsafe situations for cars behind you - quit worrying about safe driving distance you pansy Driving less than 7 miles over the speed limit Not going along with the flow of traffic, creating unsafe situations for all - get off the road, grandpa! Stopping at a stop sign Freaking out the car behind you - practice a rolling stop instead Stopping for a yellow when it's safe to do so Dancing with the whiplash devil - just floor it man, you can make it! Passing cyclists with a wide berth while staying in your own lane Freaking out everybody from the opposite direction anyway, creating unsafe situations for all - try to hit the cyclists with your passenger side mirror, bonus points if they don't fall, even though they don't belong on the road anyway Signaling your turn in advance of the turn Confusing other traffic, leading them to believe you're trying to crash into a mailbox - turn the wheel, and at the same time turn on your blinker, saves energy tooI wish this was post was a lot less serious, but you can check previous stories on people's driving behavior. There's plenty people partaking in traffic who honestly believe that 'technically safe driving' is what causes unsafe situations, and you really should err on the technically unsafe side to be safe.
Then you are quite unimaginative.
I could go to an intersection close to my house and stand there with a camera, and I would be able to pick off people either texting or holding their phone while driving. Because every time I'm at that intersection I can see people doing exactly that.
If there was a bounty of $50 for photos like that, I could pay off my house in a few weeks. And I bet you can go to an awful lot of places and do the exact same thing.
Finding people doing this is far too easy.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
One of the non-obvious things they discovered was that it was dangerous to use a cell phone even if you don't take your eyes off the road.
When drivers approached an intersection, they would normally check for pedestrians with their eyes. when they approached an intersection listening to a digital device, they didn't check for pedestrians.
That wasn't obvious. Many people maintained that it would be safe to use digital devices if you didn't take your eyes off the road. For example, many legislatures passed laws that made it legal to use a hands-off phone with earpieces. Many automobile manufacturers made cars with hands-off digital devices that you can operate without taking your eyes off the road. But this research shows that even when you keep your eyes on the road, you still make more mistakes when you're operating a digital device.
I expect that the first time somebody is seriously injured by a driver operating a digital device, they'll sue the car manufacturer for installing these devices even though they knew it would cause more accidents.
And I expect them to win. The law has always held manufacturers responsible for manufacturing products in an unsafe manner.
Juries tend to slam manufacturers with big judgments, when they hear that the manufacturer knew the product was unsafe, and sold it anyhow, and now someone in front of them has been predictably injured as a result.
Nope. Radios didn't have the stigma of causing accidents that cell phones have, because they're generally operated by truck drivers, police and other emergency vehicles, pilots, racecar drivers, that sort of thing. They tend to not gossip. Wait, no, truck drivers will sometimes ramble over a CB, but there's a difference...
Most people give their conversation their primary attention. Their eyes will move with what they're saying, that's just wrong and bad. If your sentence trails off mid-word because you noticed something off the side of the road and lost your train of thought while you were paying attention to driving over talking, well so what?
When you're driving, driving is the Primary Thing You're Doing. All other things must immediately yield to the needs of driving. You can talk while driving safely, and most people either can't or won't, but it is a Thing That Can Be Done. Proof: It's a thing that has been done by many people for a long time, even in some pretty extreme situations.
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
If losing your license means losing your job then perhaps you should drive more carefully?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Well gee golly, isn't talking on the cell phone supposed to be worse than drinking and driving. If you're seeing 25% of the drivers on their phone. And those studies were actually legitimate. Well, there must be hundreds dead on those corners.
Or perhaps those studies were aiming for a certain desired result... and talking on a cell phone is no where near as bad as drunk driving.