Ask a younger driver which is worse: A crash from someone texting, or a crash from someone drinking? Which one do you think they would pick?
It turns out the answer is a bit complicated.
Here at the University of Kansas, we've recently finished a study in which we presented four different groups of younger drivers with a description of the same crash scenario, but with a small twist to each version. We'll present the full findings at the
Psychonomics Society Conference later this year. In one case, a driver was attentive. In another, drinking. In a third case, the driver was on the phone. And in the final version, the driver was texting prior to the crash. In all cases, the crash was serious, with major damage and the other driver taken away in an ambulance.
We asked participants to rate how preventable each crash was, how much the driver should be fined and how much jail time should the driver serve.
In the good news column, the younger drivers rated the texting crash as the most preventable. Some more good news? They thought the drunk driver crash and the calling driver crash were equally preventable, though less so than the texting crash. The attentive driver crash was the least preventable of all.
In the bad news column, despite saying the texting crash was the most preventable, the younger drivers did not punish it as strongly. The attentive, talking and texting drivers were fined equally, but far less than they fined drunk drivers. And only the drunk drivers were assigned a significant amount of time in jail.
In a second version where we had them consider the crash in the context of a serious distracted-driving law, the texting driver was punished a bit more, but still not even close to the drunk driver.
So, what's with my reference to the 1970s?
Well, the study has two key elements that tie it very closely to that era. First, it was modeled on a study done in 1977, to ascertain the social attitude regarding drinking and driving. What we found, nearly 35 years later, was that there's a stronger social norm against drunk driving now, as we might expect.
Second, the attitude of younger drivers today regarding distracted driving is very much like the attitudes toward drunk driving in the 70s. Namely, "
It's bad but let's not punish folks for doing it, because I am doing it."
But being stuck in the 70s is not without its advantages. It was in the 70s and 80s that we saw the biggest change in laws, enforcement, education and attitudes about drunk driving. It was on the heels of those 1970s changes that MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving), was formed. That rethinking resulted in the new attitude toward drunk driving that we're experiencing today.
Hopefully, we can see a similar change regarding distracted driving in the near future. Already, we're seeing some inkling of that change, with the formation of a growing number of
advocacy groups and the Department of Transportation's
Faces of Distracted Driving campaign. Here's hoping that's just the start.
Login or Register to post comments
Walt in Michigan
@ Jerry Stanton > I hope you see the error of your logic BEFORE you kill/injure yourself and/or others. When you're driving, that is your PRIMARY responsibility. So HANG-UP AND DRIVE!!! If a call/text is that important, park it and THEN take care of business. I haven't met anyone yet that's so important (in reality, not in their own minds) that they need to jeopardize their safety - or anyone else's because they had something better to occupy their thoughts with while ATTEMPTING to drive.
Paul Guyon
All the more reason to support the development of self driving cars!
Almost Dawn
retesting every few years! Don't you think that is a little much? So everyone in society is supposed to make an appointment at our overcrowded DMV to retake a test? If new drivers with less than a year of experience can do it any seasoned driver over 18 years old can pass.
Karen Swim
It is sad that we have to have the discussion about legislating 100% preventable offenses but obvious that there is a need. This is not a casual discussion but one of a life and death. Far too many have lost their lives because of the decision to drive impaired. We should also not be lured into believing that hands free talking is safe. There is far too much scientific evidence that validates the fallacy of multitasking. Driving requires our full attention and is already a multitasking activity. I hope that we will begin to take these issues seriously and use everything that we have to prevent and punish those who drive distracted or impaired.
Joe
I would love to leave it up to people to behave responsibly on their own, but unfortunately, they don't.
Joe
And I also agree that photo enforcement is a joke whose primary purpose is to make money.
andy gabrys
Interesting study and article. I very much support not holding a phone while driving (texting or calling). it makes sense, and its very preventable. Quite a number of cars on the road today have built-in bluetooth allowing completely hands free use of your phone. A lot of newer phones (i.e. like the iPhone) come with a headset. Most phones have some kind of voice dialing allowing you to keep your eyes on the road. You can always pull over and text or make your call. In short there is little reason that you would have to risk a crash using the phone while driving. I also support not drinking and driving. that seems to be a no-brainer. but with the exposure and focus on DUI (DWI) over the past years, I would imagine there is far less incidence of drunk driving that there is text-driving, or holding a phone-driving. More exposure = more risk = more accidents. I don't think its a youth issue. People of all ages are texting today. sure more "kids" do a crazy amount of texting. But a lot of people do. What it comes down to in the end: the state laws. When I lived in New York state (NYC), the fine for using a cell phone without a hands free kit was $500. And I am willing to bet the law was enforced, because I rarely saw someone speaking on their phone while driving. it almost seemed to be a status symbol to look like a Borg with your bluetooth earpiece. Now in New Mexico, the fine is only $100. And its probably the last thing any officer in New Mexico would bother enforcing. As a result, there are a lot of people talking on their phones while driving. the biggest majority that I see? Older (lets say over 30) people driving fairly decent cars. recent model Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Audi, lots of SUVs. the same kind of cars that often come with Bluetooth phone modules. Surely these people can afford a headset? (they are often on smart phones like the iPhone that come with a headset anyway). So it seems like with many traffic problems in this area (changing lanes or turning corners without signaling, excessive tailgating, running red lights, drifting wide and cutting across lanes when turning left from a dedicated left turn lane) that people figure "whats the big deal, it hasn't happened to me" or maybe "I am a good driving therefore I can do this (illegal) maneuver because I am looking out". And they go ahead and do it. So I also support the idea of testing every X years - maybe 5 years is the right number. Seems like people either forget the rules of the road from their initial drivers test or they get complacent and start driving as poorly as everyone else is on the road. As far as why we need a law to enforce this - why does something that is common sense have to be legislated? Good question. I don't know.
andy gabrys
good point about the photo enforcement. Money maker. of course, if you are not speeding, and not trying to get through that red light, or not turning right on a red light (I think NYS was the only place I lived where this was illegal - other places let you stop, look and go if its clear, which seems like a sensible idea in my mind), then you don't have to worry about it.
Joe
I have to agree about the regular testing. And I think the punishment for dist. driving offenses should be that you lose your license... like forever. Make a DL something difficult to acquire and difficult to keep, and drivers will show a bit more consideration to their surroundings while behind the wheel.
Mike Perrault
I guess my issue with the texting laws is they forget about smoking in cars, listening to the radio, playing with the ever more complicated in car computers, putting on makeup or eating breakfast. Why not make a blanket law against all distractions? Because texting is a youth issue and they're easier to legislate against.
Walt in Michigan
@ Joe > In most of Europe, drivers are held to a much higher standard. It is quite easy to lose your license FOREVER, since they take the PRIVILEGE of driving much more seriously than we do here. I've met lots of folks in my 51 years that still think that being able to drive is a right. Not so!
bad driver
concerning the retesting every few years.... that would be a joke bigger than the photo lights. come on, wake up, we all know the rules and how to drive... and because we are paying money for the test, some would even brush up and study the rules a little again before the test... then scre and drive almost perfect, only to get right back on the road into their "rushed" over complicated lives and fall right back into old habits. just like seatbelt awereness and click it or ticket weeks... most are smart and are more carefull during those times, then after back to their old habits. we also do not need more laws, we need the traffic officres to start pulling people over for these common infractions... to add to the list mentioned above... headlights and wipers on when raining, insanely bright fog lights on when there is no fog, etc... Im not suggesting giving tickets everytime either, the traffic enforcers have let all these laws slide for so long it is now norm... thay would have to start out just giving warnings to prevent a massive revolt, only ticketing repeate multiple offenders at first.... then, just as in the story, as it becomes a norm, then ticketing more often for it, but by then word would be out and there would be less offenders.. theres my incoherent soapbox rambling for the day. last, if i am driving less than 20mph in zones/areas where other cars are also that slow or non existant, or on 2 tracks in the woods... i dont wear my seatbelt... gasp!!! i rarely put it on until i get onto a main road... and rarely forget to put it on on the main road because it is habit... and common sense.
IQTech
Mike, you make an excellent point. It's just as scary to see someone careening down the highway while applying makeup or eating or fiddling with the radio or computer. It is time to penalize all these distractions. I'm also of the unpopular opinion that it is time to start having driver testing every five years instead of just once - and maybe ever two years for the over fifty crowd. And no, I don't do any of those things while driving - because as an over fifty driver, I very aware that I need to have my attention on the road and both hands on the wheel!
James
I'm for common sense and personal responsibility. Why do we need to have the government become our baby sitter? Don't do that, don't touch that, you can have that after we stop. I don't think we need to criminalize every aspect about driving, Including eating in the car or talking on the phone. Are they always the best idea? No. Can it be done under some circumstances responsibly? Yes. I don't wear my seatbelt because I'm told to; I wear it because it makes driving safer. State and local governments would jump at the chance to improve revenues with new laws. It will be like red light cameras all over again. It will be sold as a safety measure, but instead done, and tweaked, to increase the amount of revenue a government can collect. (Red light camera lights change the length of the yellow, will ticket right turns on red, etc.)
Eliz
I haven't completely read through the blogs above, but I do agree that cars in the 70's were spectacular. Not just for the boxy look and the bright colors. No, for their FUEL EFFICIENCY. In three years, I will be able to buy a car so my pa and I have been talking about it frequently. I'm into older cars and I support the environment, so we started there. I wouldn't have to drive the car much, too, so inexspensivity counts.
Ben Buchwalter
Great points about the connections between future laws against distracted driving and the push for laws against drunk driving. The same goes for attitudes toward seat belt laws. There was a time when seat belts were considered unnecessary. Now, basically everyone agrees that refusing to buckle up is just stupid. It might take time, and a lot of effort from safety advocates, but I'd be surprised if laws against distracted driving aren't eventually as strict as those against drunk drivers, especially considering that they have been shown to be equally dangerous.
hwertz
"OK here’s the deal. I’m 54, I text, drive, eat a snack, drink a soda, all while driving BETTER than most drivers who have both eyes on the road and both hands on the wheel! The difference is that I Text while Driving…Not Drive while Texting! See the difference? " No, I don't see the difference one bit. You cannot touch type on any phone, even with a physical keyboard, so you are looking at your phone and not the road. People that drive horribly and wander all over the road (either due to distractions or just because they are a crap driver) tend to INSIST their driving is impeccable. When not paying attention, the brain fills in that everything is just fine. The most enlightening thing I've seen regarding this was an experiment where some drivers had a cam popped in the windshield, this recorded while they drove, then the video was played back for them to watch. People that did all this stuff you are doing were absolutely HORRIFIED at the number of accidents they almost caused, since they thought there was no problem at the time they were driving. The only time I've even considered texting "while driving" is sitting at a red light, if the light turned green I'd set the phone down (mid-word) and go. This city has plenty of mistimed lights. However, I think even this is a bad idea so usually I've just let people wait. Seriously, if your car is moving do not mess around with your phone. As for laws -- I don't think there should be laws targetting texting. Making specific laws for each specific distraction is pointless, there should be general distracted driving laws that are enforced -- covering putting on makeup, talking on the phone, texting, dicking around with those stupid touch screen things they put in cars these days instead of buttons, trying to eat food that needs both hands, right up to getting head while driving. There could be "normal" and "aggravated" levels of this so someone putting on lipstick and someone driving around while reading a book are not treated equally.
jerry stanton
OK here's the deal. I'm 54, I text, drive, eat a snack, drink a soda, all while driving BETTER than most drivers who have both eyes on the road and both hands on the wheel! The difference is that I Text while Driving...Not Drive while Texting! See the difference? I have NEVER wrecked a car and I ride a motorcycle. Just havn't mastered texting while Riding yet! lol!
maverick80
When you’re driving, that is your PRIMARY responsibility. You are responsible for yourself and all passengers!
cherokeeboogieman
Some people can multi-task & still drive. I do it frequently, but there are some days when I just don't have the mojo going, so I concentrate on driving. It's a common sense thing. I realize that not only is my safety at stake, but the safety of all other cars on the road with me. And, by the way, I'm an old fart, so texting is no in my repertoire.
Rubenoff
please visit u tube weblink to see an area of driver distraction with Daytime running lamps that blind oncoming drivers at nightime http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfYTXh7_qkA&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL