On Jul 7, 7:44 am, Mark Shroyer <
[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2007-07-06, Neil Brooks <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 13:40:44 -0400, Marlene Blanshay
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070706.ROADS06/TPS...
>
> >>as a cyclist in montreal...i have no complaints. I can't tell you how
> >>many near misses I've had just from idiots blabbing on their cells while
> >>driving....
>
> > Am I reading this right, though?
>
> > Is this another "hand-free only" law?
>
> > If so, then ... as always ... what's the point? I'm not worried about
> > distracted hands. I'm worried about distracted minds.
>
> > Studies consistently show that drivers using hands-free technology are
> > equally dangerous to those using hand-helds (roughly similar to
> > legally intoxicated drivers).
>
> > Maybe it's a step, but....
>
> I've always wondered about this... it makes sense that it would be
> the conversation itself and not the physical telephone which is a
> dangerous distraction to drivers, but has anyone shown that the
> distraction of talking to someone over a hands-free phone while
> driving is significantly greater than the distraction of carrying on
> a conversation with somebody in the passenger seat? And if that is
> the case, then why?
>
> --
> Mark Shroyerhttp://markshroyer.com/
Yes there a quite a number out there. The evidence is pretty
convincing. Some studies suggest that you're better off driving drunk
(well not blind drunk but impaired) than driving while talking on a
cell phone. I don't remember seeing any significant difference
between hand-held and hand-free.
The reason seems to be that there is a much higher cognitive demand in
speaking on a phone. My guess is that we must concentrate much more
on the phone conversation because we lack other visual or auditory
cues about the other person's behaviour.
It may also be that the driver more willing to break off talking to a
passenger since the driver and passenger share a space and it is clear
to the passenger that when the driver stops talking they are not
leaving the phone or getting bored but rather dodging a semi or
passing another vehicle.
As for studies here are a few. There are lots more
Strayer, D. L.; Drews, F. A. & Crouch, D. J. A comparison of the cell
phone driver and the drunk driver. Hum Factors, 2006, 48, 381-391
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research was to determine
the relative impairment associated with conversing on a cellular
telephone while driving. BACKGROUND: Epidemiological evidence suggests
that the relative risk of being in a traffic accident while using a
cell phone is similar to the hazard associated with driving with a
blood alcohol level at the legal limit. The purpose of this research
was to provide a direct comparison of the driving performance of a
cell phone driver and a drunk driver in a controlled laboratory
setting. METHOD: We used a high-fidelity driving simulator to compare
the performance of cell phone drivers with drivers who were
intoxicated from ethanol (i.e., blood alcohol concentration at 0.08
weight/volume). RESULTS: When drivers were conversing on either a
handheld or hands-free cell phone, their braking reactions were
delayed and they were involved in more traffic accidents than when
they were not conversing on a cell phone. By contrast, when drivers
were intoxicated from ethanol they exhibited a more aggressive driving
style, following closer to the vehicle immediately in front of them
and applying more force while braking. CONCLUSION: When driving
conditions and time on task were controlled for, the impairments
associated with using a cell phone while driving can be as profound as
those associated with driving while drunk. APPLICATION: This research
may help to provide guidance for regulation addressing driver
distraction caused by cell phone conversations.
A quick overview
http://www.distracteddriving.ca/english/documents/WardVanlaar_002.pdf
and a reference taken from it
Direct Line Motor Insurance, 2002. The Mobile Phone Report. Direct
Line Insurance, Croydon.
The Direct Line report is on the web if you're interested.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada