Slashdot Mirror
Studies Conclude Hands-Free-calling and Apple Siri Distract Drivers
New submitter operator_error writes with a story at the L.A. Times that echoes some previous research on the relative risks of hand-held vs. hands-free phones by drivers, and comes to an even grimmer conclusion: In many cars, making a hands-free phone call can be more distracting than picking up your phone, according to a new study from AAA and the University of Utah. In-dash phone systems are overly complicated and prone to errors, the study found, and the same is true for voice-activated functions for music and navigation. A companion study also found that trying to use Siri — the voice control system on Apple phones — while driving was dangerously distracting. Two participants in the study had virtual crashes in an automotive simulator while attempting to use Siri, the study's authors reported. In response, Toyota said the study did not show a link between cognitive distraction and car crashes. "The results actually tell us very little about the relative benefits of in-vehicle versus hand-held systems; or about the relationship between cognitive load and crash risks," said Mike Michels, a Toyota spokesman.
Meanwhile, many states treat hand-held devices very differently from hands-free ones; in New York, for instance, both texting and talking on a hand-held mobile phone are put in the same category, while talking on a hands-free device is covered only by more general distracted driving laws. If the Utah study is correct, maybe that's backwards. (And some evidence suggests that phone use in cars is not quite the straightforward danger that it's sometimes presented as, despite the correlation of phone use with accidents.)
It's pretty funny that this article is right on top of the driverless city they're building in Michigan.
Please make autonomous cars a reality so we can finally stop having careless drivers on the road killing 40 000 in the USA alone every year.
....who has been on the receiving end of a crash with a phone involved driver....hang up and drive.
There is nothing so important that you cannot pull over and call/text. Nothing. Period.
In my case, she had a full 10 seconds of red light before impact. 10 seconds at 60mph = almost 3 football fields of not looking out the window.
Hanging upside down from the seatbelt, covered in broken glass, was not how I expected to spend my lunch hour.
Drive the damn car. Talk later.
I've not gone back to the actual test report, and its not stated in the article, but I wonder if the test subjects were already familiar with the technologies before being tested. If you get in an unfamiliar vehicle, even finding the windshield wiper can be a big distraction. If these subjects are first time or inexperienced users, you can bet they are distracted. Do a test with folks that regularly use the technology and have developed as ease with the interfaces, and then see what the differences are.
Screw you.
Drive the car. No one cares if you have to go back out and pick up that special thing from the grocery store. Coordinate that before you get in the car..
Drive the goddamn car.
But, no...you're a special snowflake that can do all of it at once, perfectly and all the time.
Hint...no, you can't. You're just a flake.
Killing someone is already illegal, and Im of the school of thought that says having redundant laws is always a bad thing. Never have 2 laws where one will do; if killing someone through negligence is illegal, killing someone because of your cellphone doesnt need to be differently illegal.
fiddeling with the radio is distracting too. smoking is potentially more dangerous (had one episode, never smoked again in the car, no need for a law)
Except, making it illegal to do the thing which could potentially lead to you killing someone isn't redundant.
Otherwise, drunk driving, seat belts, helmets and speed limits wouldn't be necessary until you killed someone.
Distracted driving laws are intended to stop the problem in the first place, instead of waiting until people actually get killed. They allow you to fine people for doing stupid and dangerous things before someone dies.
And, judging by the number of people I see still texting and driving (badly), the only way I see this changing is through a mechanism like this. Because without fines (and hopefully demerit points), people will just keep doing it ... right up until they do kill someone.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I've had two "love taps" from behind, one by a tailgater in dense traffic, one by a lady putting on makeup while driving.
Then I got rear-ended by some punk teen in his hopped-up Tacoma with a big tacky add-on tach, gauges on the a-pillar, etc. That impact lifted the rear of my Miata and twisted her lengthwise. Instant kill. I was ok, the car died protecting me. It was a fun 10 years that I had that car, and I still miss her.
So now, whenever I stop at a light or stopsign, or when in traffic which is slowing down, I keep an eye on the rear view mirror. If I see an approaching car and I think they're not stopping -- or if I actually *see* them working the phone, I flash my brakelights and honk the horn lots. Saved me already once, for-sure. Guy looks up and the nose went down, he was hard on the brakes. Then he looks up, as if saying "What?!"
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
On a related note, it's been shown again and again that you can't really do more than one higher-level brain task at once. So even the people that are very very good at switching rapidly between operating a cell phone and driving are still not really doing both at the same time.
So they aren't actually performing the task of driving while they are preoccupied with their cell phone. They may as well be asleep during those periods.
The answer is clear, then. Ban A/C controls, radio, passengers and kids!
You are totally skirting around the correct solution. In 100% of crashes, the common element among all of them is the driver. Ban the driver and you solve the problem of driver distracted crashes.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?