Well, if hand free phone calls are distracting because you're holding a conversation, we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right? Even driving with passengers should be banned just in case, and all vehicles be single-seaters or have soundproof glass between the driver and passengers.
Music is pretty distracting to some people. Car stereos should definitely be banned too.
To be fair, both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving. Yes, it might also produce cognitive overload, but in my case it's definitely better than cognitive underload (boredom).
You know what's by far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer. In some areas I do it constantly, out of fear of getting a speeding ticket. I don't even want to speed!
This argument fails repeated testing. It turns out that human-human conversation involves both parties paying attention to the environment and co-operating to insert pauses and situational awareness. In essence, h-h communication in a car requires much less cognitive load on the driver because a large part of it becomes shared.
We've all seen this fail at times too. That's when the driver has to tell the passenger to stop talking so they can concentrate on directions or signage, etc.
> In contrast, the University of Illinois meta-analysis concluded that passenger conversations were just as costly to driving performance as cell phone ones.
> AAA ranks passengers as the third most reported cause of distraction-related accidents at 11 percent, compared to 1.5 percent for cellular telephones.
> A simulation study funded by the American Transportation Research Board concluded that driving events that require urgent responses may be influenced by in-vehicle conversations, and that there is little practical evidence that passengers adjusted their conversations to changes in the traffic.
May I recommend that instead of relying on someone's third-hand interpretation in Wikipedia, you prefer to refer to the underlying source, or better yet since that source is itself only a meta-analysis in this case, to the original primary research?
For example, what the meta-analysis paper actually says is:
"From our analyses, in-vehicle (passenger) conversations were just as costly to driving performance as were remote (cell phone) conversations. This suggests that passengers, at least in those studies explored here, did not moderate their conversation in such a way as to alleviate the costs (as compared with remote conversers). These results must be interpreted with caution, however, given that relatively few studies directly examined the impact of passenger conversations."
If you look at their table of the original research they are working from, you can clearly see why they included that cautionary note.
Alternatively, a few minutes with Google Scholar will get you numerous primary sources that show a clear distinction between the effects of remote conversation and the effects of passenger interaction. Some studies suggest that passengers who don't moderate their conversation still have a negative effect, but hardly anyone has data that implies an effect as bad as cell phone conversations. Other studies found evidence that passengers can also be a benefit, for example warning an insufficiently attentive driver of a hazard they had failed to recognise themselves.
There is unfortunately not very much research into more specific conditions when passengers may prove to be a particularly serious distraction. For example, we know that young and inexperienced drivers are disproportionately likely to have accidents, but we don't yet know for sure whether passengers of a similar age are disproportionately likely to be a significant distraction. There is some evidence to suggest that this is at least a plausible theory, and in some places young and inexperienced drivers are now limited in the passengers they can take when they first start driving unsupervised.
both of the studies referenced there were from a decade ago - 2004 and 2006. I wonder what the numbers would be today, given that there's so many more cellphones on the road.
Haven't seen any actual numbers yet, but the 'human conversation' thing - 11% - how many of those involved children in the back seats distracting the driver?
not only are there more phones on the road. they're almost all touch screen (no tactile response = more likely to look at it to use it) and they're almost all smart phones, so morons like the one in the video can "compose tweets" while driving.
>>That's when the driver has to tell the passenger to stop talking so they can concentrate on directions or signage, etc.
When I do it to my mother she gets cross and starts talking even more, which is even more distracting. There is no good way out of this situation I am afraid. Some people have absolutely no situational awareness and are actively distracting as passengers.
From The Wikipedia entry on mobile phones and driving: "The NHTSA considers distracted driving to include some of the following as distractions: other occupants in the car, eating, drinking, smoking, adjusting radio, adjusting environmental control, reaching for object in car, and cell phone use."
When I was a kid and my dad was driving and had to make a left turn or perform some other maneuver that required his full attention, he'd ask everyone in the car to be quiet. This was a man that raced automobiles as a hobby and worked in professional racing at the highest levels his entire life.
You are being disingenuous. Of course some of your points make sense in certain circumstances.
> we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right
That genie is already out of the bottle and would be impractical to implement. In any case it far less distracting talking to a passenger than trying to reply to a text or conducting what may be a serious conversation on a phone. Additionally the passenger can shut up instantly if (s)he sees a situation developing or even help bring your attention to it.
> both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving
On a long, boring trip, with very little to concentrate on, it can make sense to have the radio playing and someone talking to you. However on a rainy evening, in fast moving traffic, that same radio and passenger could get you killed and others with you. It is easy to turn off and ignore the radio and to ask your passenger, who can see the danger to please keep quiet for a while. It is a lot more difficult to ignore your phone when expecting that important call under these conditions.
> far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer
Seriously? Glancing at your speedometer is more distracting than a phone? Besides, glancing at your speedometer for a second carries far less risk than answering a text and having a fight with your girlfriend on the phone.
>>Additionally the passenger can shut up instantly if (s)he sees a situation developing or even help bring your attention to it.
If they know what to look for. Doesn't work with children, people who don't drive themselves so they have no idea what to look out for, or even worse, it can work the other way around, when someone yells "WATCH OUT" at the top of their lungs because they perceive danger, even though you were not in any(saying hi to all my elderly relatives here).
I've had more near misses in my car caused by distractions from other people physically inside the car than when I'm physically alone - that includes all forms of social interaction via a mobile device. To count the accidents I've been involved in or had near misses, virtually all of them have been caused by someone in my vehicle causing me take my eyes off the road at just the wrong moment - because instinct can cause you to react badly at just the wrong time and boom! However, a cell phone ringing or an email/text coming in has never caused me to think "Holy shit, I must check who that is right now this second, forget that the guy 25 feet in front of me just hit his brakes hard. I'll figure that out in a minute!"
Of course, I do realize that there are accidents caused by texting/emailing and driving at the same time, and as such, I do think it should be banned everywhere. When you're driving, your one and only concern should be what's going on around your vehicle.
Should we ban talking to your passengers in your car too? Perhaps. While we're at it, could we also ban our kids from fighting in the back seat and bothering us with "Daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy, daddy! Can I have a cookie?" Would such a ban be realistic? No, of course it wouldn't. If you could, would it significantly reduce the number of accidents on our roads? If my own experience is anything to go by, it most certainly would.
All we can do is assess crash statistics, ban those activities that can reasonably be banned where it would reduce in a reduction in those statistics.
Is it reasonable to ban the use of cell phones and all forms of mobile communication while driving? Absolutely. We used to drive all the time without phones in the car. We used to leave our houses without the ability to communicate at all until we got back to a land line. I think in extenuating circumstances, it can be overlooked, but if the statistics show that mobile device usage behind the wheel of a car results in accidents, we can easily go back to not using them when we're behind the wheel of the car. Will we? I'd say it's unlikely given the number of drivers I passed this morning, still holding their cell phones to their ears - despite this behaviour being banned in this province since 2010, with fines as heavy as $1,000 and 3 demerit points.
It's easy to say "You know what the most distracting thing is...?" but honestly, you can't remove all distracting things. All you can do is remove as many of them as you can reasonably remove and do your best to mitigate the risk of the remainder.
I do think that having my nav and my speedometer on the HUD would be far better though.
> we should ban talking to your passengers on a car too, right
You may be on to something. You've seen the number of people out there who actually turn to face their passengers full on while driving, right?
Actually it's pretty odd. I don't look at the passenger when I'm driving, though of course we'll converse. Even at stop lights, I spend more time checking the light and my rear view mirror than I do looking at my passenger. My responsibility as a driver requires me to do so when I'm driving, whether it's slow, fast or stopped.
This makes a lot of people noticeably uncomfortable.
I've taken to actually turning my face slightly towards people periodically, while keeping eyes ahead -- just to avoid creating a sense of awkwardness.
This. I can't look at the passenger ether when I'm driving, even on very familiar roads. I never thought this is awkward - but if the passenger is not a friend/ close acquaintance, I mention it casually that I am in fact listening to them even if I'm not looking at them.
The best I could do is keep nodding or make agreeing sounds.
In my opinion passengers are far better than phone calls because the passenger has contextual awareness of what's happening while you're driving. He or she will pause a sentence while you're trying to merge onto the freeway, for example.
You're assuming they a: notice and pay attention to the road, and b: they're familiar with how to drive, so know that is a trickier maneuver, and c: that they know how well you drive, so can contextualize a pause based on your ability.
Music is pretty distracting to some people. Car stereos should definitely be banned too.
To be fair, both having a conversation and listening to music keep me alert when driving. Yes, it might also produce cognitive overload, but in my case it's definitely better than cognitive underload (boredom).
You know what's by far the most distracting thing to me while driving? Constantly checking my speedometer. In some areas I do it constantly, out of fear of getting a speeding ticket. I don't even want to speed!