I just returned from the National Distracted Driving Summit in Washington DC. Here is my take on things.
Driver distraction is certainly on the radar of the federal government. Both Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis gave presentations and this year Secretary LaHood was in attendance for the entire summit (he skipped out after the introduction last year). We also heard from legislators that are concerned about the issue. Secretary LaHood's message is that you should keep your eyes on the road, hands on the wheel, and your phone in the glove box. Sounds a lot like the Car Talk message: "Hang up and Drive!"
Secretary LaHood meets 15-year-old open-wheel racing series driver Zach Veach who has been an outspoken promoter of Oprah's No-Phone-Zone pledge.
Good advice, but is it too little, too late? Have we become so addicted to the technology that we can't unplug? And are we focusing on yesterday's technology and not dealing with the broader issues? We heard several reports of people using Facebook while driving (and the auto manufactures have plans to let you do this with voice commands - now that's all we need...). I heard several people expressing these concerns and there were few concrete proposals to stem the driver distraction tide on our roadways. Realistically, we are losing ground on technology-induced driver distraction.
Molly Ramsdell of the National Council of State Legislatures reviews developments in texting and cell use bans among the states since last year's summit.
The following quote relayed to the summit from a recent automotive show sums up the problems we are facing:
"The company that can accommodate as many different mobile devices as possible, and integrate them in the car - they're the guys who are going to win long term."
Like last year, there was a heavy focus on the text messaging while driving. There are now 30 states that have laws prohibiting the activity (and it is expected that it will be prohibited in all states in the next two years). In fact, we heard from the Secretary of Labor that a company that requires of expects their workers to text while driving is considered to be in violation of OSHA regulations.
But the narrow focus on texting while driving is problematic. Sure enough, texting while driving is dangerous, but there aren't as many people doing it (because most people realize that it is CRAZY!). Unfortunately, the number of people texting while driving is growing, but the National Safety Council estimates that it only accounts for about 3% of crashes today.
Laurie Hevier talks about the loss of her mother Julie Davis as Sec. LaHood and Jennifer Smith stand by at a lunchtime press conference.
Almost completely missed by the conference is cognitive distraction. The folks at NHTSA aren't even sure that it exists! Or, if it does, how to study it! I don't know why the folks at NHTSA can't get a grip on cognitive distraction - perhaps it is an "inconvenient truth" that complicates business models of automobile manufactures. Thankfully the National Safety Council was there to remind people that 25% of all crashes are associated with talking on the phone.
Incidentally, I've become a fan of the National Safety Council - they call it like they see it. And, if you'd like to read about cognitive distraction, you can read a new review chapter that I've written on cognitive distraction while multitasking and you can read a white paper on the issue from the National Safety Council.
Gus and Liz Catherman tell the story of how their daughter Kassy Kerfoot lost control of her vehicle while texting. She was struck by a truck and killed.
We did hear about an innovative police enforcement project in Syracuse NY that cut cell phone use by over 50%. It didn't take sophisticated technology to cut usage, just good old-fashioned police work. As anyone who has driven for a period of time knows, it is trivial to identify the drivers who aren't paying attention to the road. This kind of concerted action really could change behavior (they got about 80% convictions, so the courts helped in keeping on message).
Contact Officer Shannon Tice from the Syracuse Police Department for information on how to cut cell phone usage in your community.
One of the strongest messages can from Jennifer Smith from the victim's advocacy group Focus Driven. She called the automakers on the carpet for their rush to make the car a mobile electronic device for entertainment and communication. I'll post more of Jennifer's comments in a later blog.
Login or Register to post comments
alexis jones
David, I sent this to Click/Clack ths a.m. --- that since the Harvard Med School is a neighbor, they should find author and have as a guest. I note it cites one of yours, Note the term: "inattention blindness.": In Brief: The Quirky Brain: Why cell phone conversations distract drivers, HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL NEWSLETTER Next Article: References for “Merits of psychodynamic therapy” » Roughly eight in 10 Americans who own cell phones say they talk on them while driving. The results can be disastrous, causing motor vehicle accidents and deaths. About one-third of U.S. traffic accidents each year (about 1.6 million) are attributed to people talking on cell phones. But many cell phone users remain skeptical that they might be endangering themselves or others. After all, why would talking on a cell phone in a car be any more distracting than talking to a passenger in the next seat? Studies suggest several possible reasons. One study using a driving simulator found that drivers conversing by cell phone were more likely than those talking to passengers to drift between lanes and to miss an exit they were instructed in advance to take. When the researchers analyzed the complexity of the conversations in this study, they found that drivers and passengers tended to modulate their speech in response to external traffic cues. For example, they stopped talking when a traffic problem developed, or the passenger would offer advice to help the driver navigate. Conversations taking place by cell phone, on the other hand, did not vary much in response to changing traffic conditions (perhaps no surprise, because only the driver was actually aware of what was happening on the road). Some drivers have switched to hands-free cell phones in an effort to eliminate the physical distraction of trying to hold onto a cell phone while steering the car. But a review of studies concluded that hands-free cell phones are just as distracting as handheld models. One study found that any cell phone use caused impairments similar to those observed in drunk drivers. And while people like to think they can multitask, cognitive research suggests that the brain tends to focus on one major activity at a time, while slowing the processing of other external cues. That is why talking on a cell phone may cause "inattention blindness." In any event, the research provides an important reminder to all drivers: hang up and drive. Ship AN. "The Most Primary of Care — Talking about Driving and Distraction," New England Journal of Medicine (June 10, 2010): Vol. 362, No. 23, pp. 2145–47. Strayer DL, et al. "A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver," Human Factors (Summer 2006): Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 381–91.
jim baker
There are lots of arguments today about too much government in our daily lives. Well here is a case where we need simply the correct amount of GOOD government. Only the federal government can step in and create laws and standards that restrict distracting in-car electronics. Unfortunately, these highly profitable and (as created by Madison Avenue) highly desirable devices have become ubiquitous, even in entry level automobile models. We are killling and maiming ourselves and we don't seem to care. Let's encourage our government - by writing letters - to do the right thing.
joe lauria
Why are we even having a debate on this? It is so apparent that talking or texting while driving is dangerous and there should be laws against it in every state. There seems to be a focus on no texting as a compromise against banning the possibly less dangerous practice of talking. They are both very dangerous and anything that takes your attention off the road including changing a radio station can have dire consequences. Is "common sense" dead in the US?
Otto Molmen
Common sense is indeed dead, as evidenced by the fact that the FEDERAL government is debating this matter. Is there NOTHING that can't be handled by the Feds anymore? Are the people and the states so incompetent that we have to have these idiots decide everything for us? Where will it stop?! Oh right, it won't...I should have known.
Shelley Gorman
I really appreciate David Strayer's wide scope of concern, research and expertise when it comes to driving and engaging in a variety of distracting activities. We will have to hope for more common sense towards some of these activities (applying makeup, dealing with the kids in the backseat, etc.) and hope for concise, clear legislation by the Federal government on others ( cellphones, computers, etc.). The evidence has been in for a long time. I would hope that American's overreactive concern for loss of freedom will not impede this legislation any longer. While they drag their feet, how many will die?
hwertz
"t is so apparent that talking or texting while driving is dangerous and there should be laws against it in every state." I agree people should be fined for texting or talking while driving. However I don't believe there should be a law against it -- there are already laws against distracted driving, and I think quite simply these should be enforced. Right now they are not.
“Hang Up and Drive!” | University of Utah Blog: Redthread.utah.edu
[...] voice command to update one’s Facebook status.) Read Dr. Strayer’s take on the Summit here from Car Talk’s Driver Distraction Center blog. Strayer, professor of psychology and head [...]
Don Rucknagel
All of the progressive institutions that we take for granted started first in states;e.g., the F.C.A., S.E.C, child labor laws, women's suffrage. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Brandeis called the states the laboratories of democracy.
Scott Driscoll
Interestingly says new laws haven't reduced crashes: http://www.iihs.org/news/2010/hldi_news_012910.pdf (hands free worthless?) Back in 2003, looks like only 1.5% of crashes were blamed on cell phones http://www.roadandtravel.com/safetyandsecurity/handsfreecellphone.htm
donald lowery
we need to dis able all communication devices in all cars /trucks/buses
Mark Sauerwald
@Scott Driscoll - It does not surprise me that the new laws have not reduced crashes, I don't believe that they have reduced driving while texting or or phoning. I live in a state with a supposed ban, yet I can see many (over 10%) of the drivers using a cell phone while driving.
Bob Seidel
If Scott had read the entire press release, he might have noted that for the most part, only hand-held cell phone use is prohibited by state laws. Hands-free cell phones are just as distracting, because although most of us can talk with a phone in one hand while driving with the other--although I saw a woman yesterday talking with one hand and waving a cigarette with the other--we cannot keep our minds on the road when someone is seizing our attention without regard to the environment in which we are listening. This is what "cognitive distraction" means, and, as the release points out, existing studies show that whether or not the cell phone is in your hand or in your dash, the effect of cognitive distraction is the same. The lobbyists who wrote the laws saw a wonderful market in devices to remove the cell phone from your hand while allowing its message to occupy your mind. Apparently, most people don't have enough cognition to recognize it, which is not surprising in the Washington bureaucracy, which is part of the best government money can buy!
David Doom
Could it be the automakers want us to drive distracted so we will wreck and buy more cars. They aren't that greedy, are they. Would the powers that be not want to limit automakers because our government has so much invested in them?
K E Lowe
1) The FEDS should have on such juristiction! 2) even if they did, You can't legislate "Common Sense" 3) Darwinisim will win in the end They all ready make cars that are "too safe"