The cellphone paradox - where are all the accidents?

What about women who are driving and putting on their makeup, or people looking at themselves in the mirror?

Reply to
JR
Loading thread data ...

Per Muggles:

Understood that there may be people out there carrying on cell phone conversations who I do not notice, but I still have to wonder why is it so often obvious that somebody is talking on a phone even before one overtakes them and confirms it?

- Varying speed for no apparent reason

- Cruising the left lane below lane speed

- Wandering back-and-forth across lines....

Seems like a virtual definition of "Distracted" and all seem to me tb highly correlated with talking on a phone - and I see it on a daily basis... My guesstimate is 3-5 times on an 80-mile round trip. Yesterday it was 4.

Reply to
(PeteCresswell)

Per Muggles:

Bingo!... I think we have an answer....

Reply to
(PeteCresswell)

Radio just said that traffic deaths were up 14% this year and injuries

1/3

On track to be the worst year since 2007, when fatalities were 45,000, I think she said. If not that, then 40, 000.

So traffic deaths are up in general because they were down to 35,000 for quite a few years.

Reason given is low gas prices and more diiving, but you know you're not getting a complete analysis from top-of-the-hour news. And it still ruins your prmeise that accidents are not up.

Reply to
micky

Sorta. Different people can do varying number of things at the same time. (For a few, that number is zero). When I'm talking on a ham radio in the car, I can only do two things simultaneously. I sometimes announce that: "Talk, Think, Drive... pick any two" I tend to favor Talk and Drive. The usual result is that thinking and therefore the quality of my discourse suffer greatly. With a cell phone conversation, I need to both talk and think, leaving driving as the lesser priority. However, with ham radio, little or no thought is involved because I mentally rehearse what I'm going to say in advance.

I've only seen someone do 3 things at once, once. I was once at a ham convention and watched someone simultaneously copy high speed Morse code in his head, engage in a PSK-31 keyboard to keyboard exchange, and talk to me at the same time. I was impressed, but I must say that he was also well practiced. I suppose if someone offered classes in reactive driving responses while texting or talking, it might improve the situation.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

One such study simply counted the number of people that drove by with BlueGoof headsets screwed into their ear and simply assumed that if they were wearing the headset, they must be talking while driving. A few of my friends wear theirs almost full time, because they don't want to fumble for the headset while moving.

My guess(tm) is that the number of cellphone using drivers, in heavy traffic, is much higher. From cell phone provider logs and statistical summaries, it's known that cell phone use tends to follow traffic congestion patterns with peaks during the rush hour. I can see the increased "hash" in the 850/1900 MHz bands on my service monitor during rush hour. (My office is near a major freeway exchange). The assumption is that most of the calls come from drivers either on the freeways, or the nearby roads, both of what are typically barely moving. I wanted to do a time lapse video showing the effect, but my IFR-1500 currently has a very sick power supply.

The problem is that in heavy traffic (rush hour), the traffic isn't moving very fast. The opportunity to do some real damage or produce a fatality is quite limited. At worst, a minor rear-end fender bender. The fatalities seem to be more on the open highways, uncrowded streets, and intersections, where traffic is light and moving at considerable speed. Counting cars in such situation will probably yield considerably less than the claimed 1.5% simply because there far fewer automobiles. Therefore, I would guess(tm) that the 1.5% is an average between congested traffic with high cell phone use, and light traffic with light cell phone use.

If someone counted distracted cell phone drivers that are driving fast enough to do some real damage (e.g. >25 mph), methinks the percentages will be very low. Yet those are the ones that are going to kill innocent people or themselves.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

Well Jeff, you've provided the answer to the question, WHERE ARE THE ACCIDENTS? Now convince them it's not a "paradox."

Reply to
Vic Smith

I've seen many people on their cell phones still using their hands to hold the phone, which, in this digital age, I wonder why they don't go blue tooth and hands free.

Reply to
Muggles

I don't use the phone often while driving, and in the past had a blue tooth earphone that would answer a call automatically, so everything was hands free. Never had a problem with hands free and talking on the phone that way. The next phone I got had an awkward blue tooth device and I hated it, so chucked it and haven't used it. Rarely get a call while driving, and usually ignore it when it rings. I can always call them back. If I'm in stop and go traffic and at a stop light and it rings, I may answer it and tell them I'll call them back.

Reply to
Muggles

I've seen the same thing, too, but it also seems everyone is more aware of it, too. I steer clear of drivers like that, and it isn't just the people who are on their phones while driving. There are some nuts on the roads who like to drive fast and aggressive that scare me just as much.

Reply to
Muggles

:D

Reply to
Muggles

q: Do you think men are more likely to only do 2 things at one time, and women more able to do 2+ things at one time? I've seen discussions where the conclusion was that women are more able to multitask without skipping a beat and men were more single minded limiting their ability to multitask?

Reply to
Muggles

Can one text through BT?

Reply to
John S

Studies seem to indicate its the conversation, not the phone, that creates the biggest distraction. IOW, hands free does not make the conversation less distracting.

Reply to
SeaNymph

This is an interesting place to get information. At the bottom is a link to a multitude of studies.

formatting link
Additionally, there is much information about the myth of multi tasking.

Reply to
SeaNymph

I think some phones allow voice texting, but I think it'd be more trouble than it's worth.

Reply to
Muggles

Many people seem to be OVERLY "visually oriented". I.e., almost

*needing* to look at the phone while talking. As if it allows them to figure out what to say next.

Others use the phone as a visual "distraction" -- dividing their time between the conversation and they find so fascinating about the little electronic "pacifier". (the

*primary* task -- e.g., driving a car -- places a distant THIRD in terms of *interest*! :> )
Reply to
Don Y

I have no opinion on the matter. Well, maybe a small one. I've seen women successfully juggling three or more children at one time with little obvious difficulty. I presume that skill could also be applied to driving. I can only handle one screaming brat at a time, and not very well at that. If true, the difference should appear in the distribution of distracted driving accidents and fatalities by sex. I'll dig (later) in the NHTSA data dumpster and see if I can find anything that provides this information.

It's quite possibly true, but I have no experience in the matter. My marginally relevant experience is primarily in RF exposure from cell phones.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

Do you think there's more a problem with younger people than older people when it comes to using cell phones while driving?

Reply to
Muggles

It would be interesting to see what sort of results you find. I'd guess that men would have more difficulty multitasking than women. The results might also trickle through to the level of difficulty each would have using a cell phone while driving.

ahh OK.

Reply to
Muggles

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.