I have difficulty accepting these findings as presented. The fact is I can accept that when people are dialing or tying to text message there is an increase in potential for accidents, however just talking on the phone does not present any more probability than talking to someone in the car. I think this is all about acertaining the activity, specifically at the time of accident.
How many times do you see drivers with cell phone in one hand, coffee or cigarette in the other, or mothers looking/talking to children in the back seat. I am all for safer drivers, but let’s be certain we understand the facts.
I agree with Tom.
I am surprised that some of these individuals that have been in accidents haven’t tried to sue (or maybe they have) the cell phone companies for “causing them to wreck”. Kind of like the people that sue because the coffee that was sold to them was hot and burnt them….etc.
Although cell phones are a distraction…more importantly, the driver is unable to put both hands on the wheel. There should be a ban on hand-held cell phone driving. I think hands-free headsets are kind of acceptable, afterall, they are much of a distraction as playing with the stereo or dealing with crying kids in the backseat (unless we ban them too).
Hmmm- thanks for the idea to sue the cell phone makers: where is my attorney’s number- just kidding.
Really though, I could see how cell phone use is different from other distractions in the car, aside from just the dialing. For instance, I find myself concentrating more on a cell phone conversation, one because I cannot see the person I am talking with and two because it is so hard to hear on my phone (car background noise, plus I don’t have Verizon) versus someone sitting next to me in a car.
Maybe my experience is the outlier. Or maybe the conversations I am having are not that exciting.
I would love to see a study of the crash rates between hands-free cell phones versus onstar, which is truly hands-free. I think half the problem is as mentioned below, dialing and text msging. Once I am on the phone, I have no problem paying attention to my driving. Dialing or looking up a number on my cell, is definitely something I should not be doing while I am driving…..
As a pedestrian, I have become increasingly aware of drivers on cell phones when I am crossing an intersection. It is truly astonishing to see how many are absent-mindedly making turns while talking and holding onto the cell phone. Something has to give — I don’t believe they can keep track of the call, the car and pedestrians all at the same time.
I am not suprised by the findings – I have had numerous near misses with people driving and talking on cell phones, even hands free. These people are concentrating on their conversation not on what is going on around them. Not everyone is good at multi-tasking as evident by the study.
While Steve mentioned a good point (you concentrate more on a phone call), he missed some others.
When having a conversaation in a car, the passenger will usually stop talking when the drive is changing lanes, negotiating an intersection, etc. Even on a highway, the risk isn’t evenly distributed across time, but is focussed rather tightly on a few events.
Moreover, when talking to a passenger, there are usually two pairs of eyes on the road. Even without direct warnings from the passenger (“watch out for that car”), there’s subliminal information. When they slow their conversation because they are watching the road, you automatically follow suit, even if you hadn’ noticed anything particularly threatening.
The math doesn’t work. We have way more cars on the road than we did in 1980. We have a lot fewer traffic fatalities now than in 1980.
Almost no one had a mobile phone in 1980 (cell or otherwise). Today at least a third of drivers have a cell phone.
It’s a huge disconnect.
The reason we have fewer fatalities than in 1980 is because highways are safer and, thanks to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, cars are *way* safer than they were then.
More to the point, the cell-phone attributed accidents weren’t normalized against 1980s statistics: they were normalized against the same drivers for the wek earlier period. Read the article. It very clearly states, “The increased risk was estimated by comparing phone use within 10 minutes before an actual crash occurred with use by the same driver during the prior week.”
There’s already been some good explanations of why the psychological effects of being in a phone conversation (hands-free or not) can, and apparently does, increase the rates of crash. I think what’s important now is to acknowledge that in insurance, we have a tendency to accept our previous assumptions about the impact of a risk factor, rather than the actual statistics regarding the risk itself. I see that same trend applying with cell phone use, and I think it’s time we let our old assumptions on this one go, so we can adequately address the increase in risk.
Though it is true we can’t outlaw people shouting at their kids in the back seat while driving, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t address the risk factors that can be influenced. Banning hand-held phone use while driving may be somewhat of a start, but perhaps it’s time we looked at all non-emergency phone use while driving. For a homeowners example, just because we can’t keep inept people from starting BBQ fires next to their home, we can certainly outlaw taking a match to their wood siding in hopes of making a claim.
Anyone who drives very much will experience the “focus” on the phone conversation diminishing the “focus” on the traffic. Making more unenforceable laws will only help to provide more revenue for the local police, with a non measurable change in phone use. After all, if one has a hands free phone, how could a cop tell whether you were talking to a passenger, singing with the radio, or something else? You cannot legislate responsibility. You can, however, keep calls very short when in traffic, or let the voice mail get it until you can safely use the phone.
Sounds like another reason to pass laws for people who have no common sense in the first place. Laws generate more revenue for munincipalities for more ridiculous studies like this one.
Way to go. Whatever happened to the buttered movie popcorn study? Is it healthy to eat it again yet?
There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
— Ayn Rand
I am always amaized at the finding of these type of surveys. What I have come to realize is that figures don’t lie, just that liers figure. With the rise in cell phone use I really don’t hear about the rise in the number of accidents. If 25% of accidents today involve cell phones, why is there not an over all 25% increase in the number of accident. What we hear is that the
total number of accidents are down. To me this makes such a study bogus. The result was decided before the study began. There fore, why spend money on the study.
I do not disagree that drivers can be distracted talking on a phone and that is both hand held and hands free. I do wonder how distracting it is for drivers to have their pets walking free in the car or sitting on their laps. I would think this could be more dangerous and I don’t see anyone stirring over that.
I have difficulty accepting these findings as presented. The fact is I can accept that when people are dialing or tying to text message there is an increase in potential for accidents, however just talking on the phone does not present any more probability than talking to someone in the car. I think this is all about acertaining the activity, specifically at the time of accident.
How many times do you see drivers with cell phone in one hand, coffee or cigarette in the other, or mothers looking/talking to children in the back seat. I am all for safer drivers, but let’s be certain we understand the facts.
I agree with Tom.
I am surprised that some of these individuals that have been in accidents haven’t tried to sue (or maybe they have) the cell phone companies for “causing them to wreck”. Kind of like the people that sue because the coffee that was sold to them was hot and burnt them….etc.
Some people can’t drive…period!!!
Although cell phones are a distraction…more importantly, the driver is unable to put both hands on the wheel. There should be a ban on hand-held cell phone driving. I think hands-free headsets are kind of acceptable, afterall, they are much of a distraction as playing with the stereo or dealing with crying kids in the backseat (unless we ban them too).
Hmmm- thanks for the idea to sue the cell phone makers: where is my attorney’s number- just kidding.
Really though, I could see how cell phone use is different from other distractions in the car, aside from just the dialing. For instance, I find myself concentrating more on a cell phone conversation, one because I cannot see the person I am talking with and two because it is so hard to hear on my phone (car background noise, plus I don’t have Verizon) versus someone sitting next to me in a car.
Maybe my experience is the outlier. Or maybe the conversations I am having are not that exciting.
I would love to see a study of the crash rates between hands-free cell phones versus onstar, which is truly hands-free. I think half the problem is as mentioned below, dialing and text msging. Once I am on the phone, I have no problem paying attention to my driving. Dialing or looking up a number on my cell, is definitely something I should not be doing while I am driving…..
As a pedestrian, I have become increasingly aware of drivers on cell phones when I am crossing an intersection. It is truly astonishing to see how many are absent-mindedly making turns while talking and holding onto the cell phone. Something has to give — I don’t believe they can keep track of the call, the car and pedestrians all at the same time.
I am not suprised by the findings – I have had numerous near misses with people driving and talking on cell phones, even hands free. These people are concentrating on their conversation not on what is going on around them. Not everyone is good at multi-tasking as evident by the study.
It’s time that our legislatures get responsible and prohibit cell phone use while driving.
While Steve mentioned a good point (you concentrate more on a phone call), he missed some others.
When having a conversaation in a car, the passenger will usually stop talking when the drive is changing lanes, negotiating an intersection, etc. Even on a highway, the risk isn’t evenly distributed across time, but is focussed rather tightly on a few events.
Moreover, when talking to a passenger, there are usually two pairs of eyes on the road. Even without direct warnings from the passenger (“watch out for that car”), there’s subliminal information. When they slow their conversation because they are watching the road, you automatically follow suit, even if you hadn’ noticed anything particularly threatening.
The math doesn’t work. We have way more cars on the road than we did in 1980. We have a lot fewer traffic fatalities now than in 1980.
Almost no one had a mobile phone in 1980 (cell or otherwise). Today at least a third of drivers have a cell phone.
It’s a huge disconnect.
The reason we have fewer fatalities than in 1980 is because highways are safer and, thanks to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, cars are *way* safer than they were then.
Like it or not, it *is* the cell phones.
More to the point, the cell-phone attributed accidents weren’t normalized against 1980s statistics: they were normalized against the same drivers for the wek earlier period. Read the article. It very clearly states, “The increased risk was estimated by comparing phone use within 10 minutes before an actual crash occurred with use by the same driver during the prior week.”
There’s already been some good explanations of why the psychological effects of being in a phone conversation (hands-free or not) can, and apparently does, increase the rates of crash. I think what’s important now is to acknowledge that in insurance, we have a tendency to accept our previous assumptions about the impact of a risk factor, rather than the actual statistics regarding the risk itself. I see that same trend applying with cell phone use, and I think it’s time we let our old assumptions on this one go, so we can adequately address the increase in risk.
Though it is true we can’t outlaw people shouting at their kids in the back seat while driving, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t address the risk factors that can be influenced. Banning hand-held phone use while driving may be somewhat of a start, but perhaps it’s time we looked at all non-emergency phone use while driving. For a homeowners example, just because we can’t keep inept people from starting BBQ fires next to their home, we can certainly outlaw taking a match to their wood siding in hopes of making a claim.
Anyone who drives very much will experience the “focus” on the phone conversation diminishing the “focus” on the traffic. Making more unenforceable laws will only help to provide more revenue for the local police, with a non measurable change in phone use. After all, if one has a hands free phone, how could a cop tell whether you were talking to a passenger, singing with the radio, or something else? You cannot legislate responsibility. You can, however, keep calls very short when in traffic, or let the voice mail get it until you can safely use the phone.
Sounds like another reason to pass laws for people who have no common sense in the first place. Laws generate more revenue for munincipalities for more ridiculous studies like this one.
Way to go. Whatever happened to the buttered movie popcorn study? Is it healthy to eat it again yet?
Sorry, just ranting
There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
— Ayn Rand
I am always amaized at the finding of these type of surveys. What I have come to realize is that figures don’t lie, just that liers figure. With the rise in cell phone use I really don’t hear about the rise in the number of accidents. If 25% of accidents today involve cell phones, why is there not an over all 25% increase in the number of accident. What we hear is that the
total number of accidents are down. To me this makes such a study bogus. The result was decided before the study began. There fore, why spend money on the study.
Amen Hal
Not true!! OOPS!
While I was text messaging this, I rear ended someone. Anyone know a good products attorney?
I do not disagree that drivers can be distracted talking on a phone and that is both hand held and hands free. I do wonder how distracting it is for drivers to have their pets walking free in the car or sitting on their laps. I would think this could be more dangerous and I don’t see anyone stirring over that.