The Proof: Texting While Driving is Idiotic

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/technology/28texting.html?_r=3' target='_blank'>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/t...xting.html?_r=3</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"The first study of drivers texting inside their vehicles shows that the risk sharply exceeds previous estimates based on laboratory research - and far surpasses the dangers of other driving distractions. The new study, which entailed outfitting the cabs of long-haul trucks with video cameras over 18 months, found that when the drivers texted, their collision risk was 23 times greater than when not texting."</em></p><p><span><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/dht/auto/1248744932.usr1.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></span></p><p><span>While common sense tells us that texting while driving is a bad idea, I frankly didn't realize what a stratospheric jump in the chances of having an accident texting incurs. This is a sobering article that I'd urge everyone to read and pass on to their friends - there's absolutely nothing cool about endangering the lives of those around you. Don't send or read texts, or emails, while driving. Nothing you're getting send to you is important enough to warrant endangering the lives of those around you.</span></p>

[Rob Alexander]

Let's see... I'm going to watch tiny letters on a tiny screen instead of watching the road ahead of me as I careen down the highway in 2,000 pounds of steel, and I'm going to use both hands to press tiny keys instead of using at least one of them to steer the vehicle... how could that be dangerous? The amazing thing is that we even need to have this conversation, and that we needed to spend $6 million to prove what any moron ought to be able to figure out with a moment's thought. If you are smart enough to press the keys, you should be smart enough to know that texting while driving is just plain stupid. :mad:

[Janak Parekh]

Let's see... I'm going to watch tiny letters on a tiny screen instead of watching the road ahead of me as I careen down the highway in 2,000 pounds of steel, and I'm going to use both hands to press tiny keys instead of using at least one of them to steer the vehicle... how could that be dangerous? The amazing thing is that we even need to have this conversation, and that we needed to spend $6 million to prove what any moron ought to be able to figure out with a moment's thought. If you are smart enough to press the keys, you should be smart enough to know that texting while driving is just plain stupid. :mad: Exactly my thoughts. Seems blatantly obvious to me. I've never texted while driving; I mostly avoid using cell phones at all while driving, unless I'm coordinating to pick up someone at the airport, etc.

--janak

[Fritzly]

It is as dangerous as:

Reading books
Reading newspapers
Reading documents in a folder
Fixing make-up
Filing nails
Etc. etc.

And yes I have seen people doing all the above while driving.

It does not surprise me that, here in the US in spite of those pathetic speed limits, there are as many fatalities as in Germany where Autobahn have long segments that do not have any and you can drive at 150 Mph and more.

Instead of spending millions in useless studies like this teach people how to drive and improve quality of the roads; things will change.

[burtcom]

It is as dangerous as:...

Indeed -- its stupid to OMG BAN TEXTING!!11! when anything can be a distraction while driving. Even talking hands-free can be a dangerous distraction.

If there's a law, it should be a blanket THOU SHALT NOT DO ANYTHING BUT DRIVE THE DAMN CAR.

/I'm as guilty as anyone -- I never text because I just don't text, but I have talked on the phone hands-free while driving, and subsequently missed a turn, or had to do a sudden stop. Now I just let the phone ring, and when I can pull over I'll check and see if I have to call back.

Hands free is not mind-free

[Janak Parekh]

It is as dangerous as: I'd argue it's actually much worse than all of the things you cited. Those don't involve navigation through a UI which involves the coordination of looking for small buttons, hitting them, and looking at the screen to see what happened.

(Not that I support any of the other activities, mind you.)

It does not surprise me that, here in the US in spite of those pathetic speed limits, there are as many fatalities as in Germany where Autobahn have long segments that do not have any and you can drive at 150 Mph and more. And what does this have to do with the conversation at hand?

Instead of spending millions in useless studies like this teach people how to drive and improve quality of the roads; things will change. How do you propose to teach people how to drive better? Most road tests (certainly the ones in NY) aren't a free pass. You're making a big assumption that people care. They don't. They take driving for granted.

Road quality is a different issue; the roads here are terrible. But the amount of money spent on this study is a microscopic drop in the bucket compared to the cost of repairing roads, especially in a place like NYC where the roads are torn up by huge trucks every single day. If you're arguing that it is blatantly obvious, perhaps. But the study points out that texting, in particular, has significantly higher risk than other forms of car multitasking.

--janak

[burtcom]

But the study points out that texting, in particular, has significantly higher risk than other forms of car multitasking.

Thats fine -- but I certainly hope it doesn't lead to people thinking its OK to talk on the phone instead of texting because it's "less dangerous"

As for education -- I think we should have to repeat a driving test, written and behind-the-wheel, everytime we go for a renewal.

[Jorj Bauer]

As for education -- I think we should have to repeat a driving test, written and behind-the-wheel, everytime we go for a renewal.

I don't think that actually solves the problem; it means more bureaucracy, which would probably lead to a dumbed-down test (or dumbed-down application of the test) in order to shuffle people in and out faster. I think you'd wind up with the exact opposite of what you were trying to achieve.

I think a better solution is to adopt what Europe already has: mandatory classes in order to get your license in the first place. These classes are serious and *expensive* (thousands of dollars). They teach you things like how to handle your car skidding in the rain... by forcing you to drive *your* car on a (closed) wet track on which a piece of the road actively slides sideways to force your car into a spin. If you can't control the spin, you don't pass the class and aren't allowed to take the test.

I have no doubt that your average 19-year-old in Germany has a much better idea of how to drive than your average 40-year-old in the US.

(I'll step off my soapbox now.)

[Janak Parekh]

I think a better solution is to adopt what Europe already has: mandatory classes in order to get your license in the first place. These classes are serious and *expensive* (thousands of dollars). They teach you things like how to handle your car skidding in the rain... by forcing you to drive *your* car on a (closed) wet track on which a piece of the road actively slides sideways to force your car into a spin. If you can't control the spin, you don't pass the class and aren't allowed to take the test. Ah, interesting. I have also heard that it is fiendishly difficult to get your license in some European countries. A few of my Romanian friends here told me that the driving inspectors actually try to trick you (like, "turn here" when it is an illegal turn) and you have to repeatedly put your foot down and refuse, else you'll fail. I'm not sure that's "fair", but it certainly makes you comprehend the driving regulations a bit more carefully. ;)

--janak

[jgrnt1]

I will admit to driving with an installed hands free device. I know studies have shown that it makes me less safe on the road, but I spend a lot of time on the road and, out of necessity, my car becomes a virtual office. I don't do anything which requires me to use the phone itself. I rarely make calls, but will take them when somebody calls me.

It's interesting that this study calls out texting as being more dangerous. It's amazing what people will do behind the wheel. The most egregious example I've ever seen was a woman driving her SUV in the lane next to me on a very crowded 60mph highway. She was obviously driving with her knees because she had a bowl of cereal, WITH MILK, in her left hand and a spoon in her right hand. I know the cereal had milk in it because it was dribbling down her chin.

[Jason Dunn]

If you are smart enough to press the keys, you should be smart enough to know that texting while driving is just plain stupid. :mad:

Agreed - but I think there's a common attitude that "everyone else" is bad at driving while texting, but "I'm special and can do it". Sometimes we need a study like this to really hammer the point home that this impacts EVERYONE...and there aren't many people that are more skilled at driving than professional truck drivers.

[burtcom]

I think a better solution is to adopt what Europe already has: mandatory classes in order to get your license in the first place.

Brilliant!

I can imagine all the anguished protest if this were proposed here in the US though.

[Jon Westfall]

Nothing you're getting send to you is important enough to warrant endangering the lives of those around you.


(Oh you just had to tempt me...)

Here's something important enough, a text message reading:

"Honey, the mechanic called and said the brakes could go out at any time"

:)

[Jason Dunn]

Hands free is not mind-free

Indeed. I have a hands-free Bluetooth system in my new GMC Acadia, which I was excited about because it meant not reaching for my phone when it rang while I was driving. I make and receive very few calls when I'm driving, but I'm quite interested in the studies that talk about distracted driving. Here's a similar article on NYT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/technology/19distracted.html

I find that when I'm talking on the phone while driving - hands free or not - I have what I call a "distracted conversation". Meaning I'm so focused on the road that I don't say a lot during the call and frequently ask people to repeat things. I *feel* like I'm heavily focused on the road, and the conversation is lower on my priority list, but maybe I'm just fooling myself and I'm just as distracted as anyone else? :confused:

[Jason Dunn]

Thats fine -- but I certainly hope it doesn't lead to people thinking its OK to talk on the phone instead of texting because it's "less dangerous"

But isn't that what the article shows? That it's significantly less dangerous? That doesn't mean it's not increasing your chances of an accident, but on a scale of most to least dangerous distractions, texting is really high, and talking is much lower. I think cell phone use should be minimized as much as possible when driving - heaven knows I've had to move

As for education -- I think we should have to repeat a driving test, written and behind-the-wheel, everytime we go for a renewal.

I've thought about that myself, but I wonder if the cost to society would be too high? By that I mean that there are a lot of bad drivers on the road (let's say 25% of all drivers) and if they lost their ability to drive, what would happen to jobs, families, the housing market, etc? It would have a massive impact on society as a whole...I wonder if it would be worth it?

[Jason Dunn]

I think a better solution is to adopt what Europe already has: mandatory classes in order to get your license in the first place. These classes are serious and *expensive* (thousands of dollars).

I think mandatory classes are a great idea (I took some serious classes before I went for my test), but if they cost thousands of dollars, this becomes a rich vs. poor thing where only the rich can afford to drive - and I wouldn't support that.

I think part of the problem, in Canada at least, is the very lax test instructors and the ability for people be tested wherever they wish - it's common knowledge here that if you want to pass your driver's test easily, you get tested in one of the small towns outside Calgary. It's hard to screw up a driver's test in a town of 10,000 people with no lights and one stop sign. You should be REQUIRED to be tested in a complex, fast-moving city environment.

[doogald]

The amazing thing is that we even need to have this conversation, and that we needed to spend $6 million to prove what any moron ought to be able to figure out with a moment's thought.

To be fair, the $6 million study was not necessarily to prove that it was more dangerous - it was to prove that it was more dangerous and to measure exactly how much more dangerous it is.

As for mandatory classes, we have that is Massachusetts for first time teenaged drivers. Not only is there mandatory driver's ed classroom instruction and in-car instruction, parents are also required to take a mandatory class in order for their children to get their license (or perhaps it is to get the permit - I can't recall which.)

[WayWanderer]

Really?

Taking both hands off the wheel while driving isn't a good idea?

I don't know which is more stupid; the fact that people actually do this or that someone had to do research and then write an article to tell people that it wasn't a good idea.

[Rob Alexander]

I find that when I'm talking on the phone while driving - hands free or not - I have what I call a "distracted conversation". Meaning I'm so focused on the road that I don't say a lot during the call and frequently ask people to repeat things. I *feel* like I'm heavily focused on the road, and the conversation is lower on my priority list, but maybe I'm just fooling myself and I'm just as distracted as anyone else? :confused:

Well none of us can conduct the conversation and drive and not have it impair our ability to react to unexpected events. You'll either be largely neglecting the conversation or you'll be largely neglecting the driving. Most people do the latter. And that's another conversation altogether, where there shouldn't even be a debate about texting.

I completely disagree with burtcom that talking hands-free is as dangerous as texting. The studies do not bear that out nor does it make sense. That is not to say that talking hands-free is not dangerous (it tests out as being about as dangerous as driving while borderline intoxicated), but as least your hands are on the wheel and your eyes are on the road. Your mind is distracted, but that cannot be as bad as having hands off the wheel, eyes in your lap and mind distracted all at once. I must admit that I didn't even know texting while driving was an issue until I saw the NYT article last weekend that Jason posted the link to.

On doogald's comment, I'm not actually criticizing the people doing the study. I'm criticizing our society for being one in which enough people do this stupid thing so as to have made it an issue worth studying. I think the hands-free cell question is much more worth studying because it raises a lot of interesting questions about cognition like why discussions with a passenger don't show the same impairment and whether there is a difference based on the type of hands-free system used (in-ear vs audio sound system etc.).

[doogald]

There are studies about talking and driving already that show that it impairs you, and analysis of the data shows that hands-free does not appear to be any safer than handling the set.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety

1997 American study [2] and a 2005 Australian study [3] both estimated the risk of a collision when using a cellular telephone was four times higher than the risk when a cellular telephone was not being used. 699 and 456 drivers, respectively, who owned phones, were involved in crashes, and volunteered for the studies were examined. By collecting volunteers' cell phone records, scientists were able to determine who placed telephone calls shortly before the time of crash, and through case-crossover analysis (a technique often used in medical studies of heart-attacks and air pollution) of cell phone habits, calculated the increase in risk. Both studies found that hands-free devices were not considerably safer.

Simulations are particularly useful for comparing cell phone use while driving with the known-dangerous drunk driving. A 2003 study by University of Utah Psychology department measured response time, following distance, and driving speed of a control group, subjects at the legal BAC limit of 0.08%, and subjects involved in cell phone conversations. Data from the report are listed to the right.

From the report:
Drivers in the cell-phone condition exhibited a sluggish behavior (i.e., slower reactions) which they attempted to compensate for by increasing their following distance. Drivers in the alcohol condition exhibited a more aggressive driving style, in which they followed closer, necessitating braking with greater force.

After controlling for driving difficulty and time on task, the study concluded that cell phone drivers exhibited greater impairment than intoxicated drivers.


Texting is far, far more risky than talking on the phone, but both are still risky behaviors.

[Jason Dunn]

There are studies about talking and driving already that show that it impairs you, and analysis of the data shows that hands-free does not appear to be any safer than handling the set.

Thanks for the quotes. I find the results baffling in that when I'm hands-free and have both hands on the wheel, I feel much more in control. I guess that's just an illusionary feeling. :confused:

[doogald]

Well, perhaps it is comforting that these stats are measuring all drivers. If you are cognizant of the fact that you need to concentrate on the road, you are probably doing so better than somebody who has no idea that hands-free operation is that much more risky.

I do not think that banning cell phones is at all politically feasible - it would be similar to declaring alcohol an illegal drug and prohibiting its use again. I think a reasonable solution is to increase the penalties for traffic infringements if it can be demonstrated that you were distracted by a cell phone at the time (i.e., your phone is found with parts of a text message typed, or it can be easily shown that you were talking at the time of the incident.) If a running a traffic light ticket was doubled with the first offense, quadrupled with the second, multiplied by eight with the third, etc., (or jail sentences for vehicular manslaughter were similarly multiplied), then we'd have no prohibition but instead a strong deterrent. You still read in the news sad stories about drunks with multiple offenses, driving without licenses, killing innocent people. You can't stop that with legislation, but with reasonable deterrents perhaps they can be minimized.

As for me, I minimize my hands-free use as much as possible because I do not want to end up hurting somebody else because of something that I have done.

[Janak Parekh]

As for me, I minimize my hands-free use as much as possible because I do not want to end up hurting somebody else because of something that I have done. Or yourself, for that matter. ;)

Part of it also depends on where you regularly drive, of course. In New York, there's always a million cars on the road, and something interesting's happening at every intersection. If I was driving on an empty road in the Midwest, then I might begin to consider talking while driving.

--janak

[Jason Dunn]

If you are cognizant of the fact that you need to concentrate on the road, you are probably doing so better than somebody who has no idea that hands-free operation is that much more risky.

That's what I'd like to think. What I'd LOVE actually would be if there was a way to be tested - to find out of it's all in my head, or if there are some people who, by focusing more on the road than their call, can drive unimpaired. I realize though that it's human nature to think that oneself is different and "special". ;)

If a running a traffic light ticket was doubled with the first offense, quadrupled with the second, multiplied by eight with the third, etc., (or jail sentences for vehicular manslaughter were similarly multiplied), then we'd have no prohibition but instead a strong deterrent.

I like that idea! :)

[Rob Alexander]

Another thing I'd like to see studied is the nature of the hands-free experience and whether it makes any difference what type of hands-free device you use. I don't talk on the phone very much when I drive because I feel distracted, both when holding a handset and when using my BT ear bud headset. (Heck, I don't talk much on my cell phone period, but that's another story.) In both cases, my attention wants to contract to inside the vehicle to whatever is going on with the device. That's not a good way to drive and so I usually just let my phone go over to voicemail and return the call when I get where I'm going. As some others here have mentioned, it depends on the traffic situation.

But recently I got a new GPS that actually has a usable hands-free built-in (previous models that I owned had such poor quality as to be useless) and I find that I don't respond the same way to it that I do to holding the phone or a headset. Talking through the GPS feels more natural and doesn't seem to require the same level of concentration as the others. Of course, I'm only one person and may or may not be typical in this regard, but it has made me question whether a conversation that more closely simulates that of another passenger might not be different in terms of the attention it requires.

BTW, I noted that the quotes doogald provided answered the question that arose elsewhere in this thread. Talking on a cell phone makes your accident risk 4 times higher than without a distraction and texting makes your accident risk 23 times higher. That quantifies my original contention that, while talking on the phone is dangerous, texting is dramatically worse.

[Russ Smith]

Some people are capable of being fighter pilots, requiring incredible multi-tasking of reading and sorting through displayed information (albeit in a Heads Up Display), filtering out all but the important items while simultaneously steering a multi-ton piece of steel in three dimensions while also simultaneously avoiding other aircraft.

Other people can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

Laws are often written with the "lowest common denominator" in mind.
... and that's OK.

However, there are already laws against reckless (and even, in many places, "distracted") driving. The only issue I have with outlawing texting while driving is that it gives the false impression that grooming, reading, eating, etc. are somehow OK.

Somehow, it's OK to ban something technological where something mundane is just as likely to cause an accident.

My $0.02: Let the police issue citations for anyone who exhibits dangerous behavior like shifting lanes without signaling, turning in front of traffic, rapid speed changes, and so forth, regardless of whether it's because the idiot behind the wheel is texting, farding (putting on makeup), or searching for that french fry that fell into his/her lap.

[ucfgrad93]

If you think talking while driving is dangerous, check out this moron.:rolleyes: He is a future Darwin Award winner.

Police said a Buffalo-area tow truck driver was texting on one cell phone while talking on another when he slammed into a car and crashed into a swimming pool.

Niagara County sheriff's deputies said 25-year-old Nicholas Sparks of Burt admitted he was texting and talking when his flatbed truck hit the car Wednesday morning in Lockport.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,535640,00.html

[Sven Johannsen]

My $0.02: Let the police issue citations for anyone who exhibits dangerous behavior like shifting lanes without signaling, turning in front of traffic, rapid speed changes, and so forth, regardless of whether it's because the idiot behind the wheel is texting, farding (putting on makeup), or searching for that french fry that fell into his/her lap. Hear, Hear. Couldn't agree more, with the possible exception of this very obvious, demonstrably dangerous and clearly enforceable item. I have a lot of personal conflicts on things like this, leaning mostly towards personal responsibility rather than the nanny state. Sometimes though, I can stomach the government helping to protect me, and my loved ones, from the preponderance of idiots out there.

I do wonder about the relative level of distraction between talking on the handsfre set, or having an animaed conversation with the passenger in the back seat. (or the front seat for that matter). How about the rabid sports fan listening to the game on the AM radio? Maybe vehicles should only be single seat with no entertainment appliances. If you need to move kids, take them on the bus, the driver of which should be in a sound proof enclosure. ;)

[doogald]

One reason to specifically ban texting as a separate statute is that it is a fairly easily provable case. Specifically banning makeup application, fiddling with the radio, etc., would be difficult to prove in court. Texting leaves a very specific electronic trail of evidence. And it's not like it suddenly makes the criminal justice system so bogged down because there is suddenly this one specific statute that could be lumped with another. We have separate statutes dealing with vehicular manslaughter and vehicular homicide that haven't so completely complicated the courts that we have ended up with anarchy, right?