Click on your link
> and there is a listing for "distracted driving":
You have to realize what you just intimated.
Bear in mind, it's the PARADOX that we're trying to resolve.
If distracted driving statistics were reliable (they're not), then the paradox is EVEN WORSE!
Remember, the accidents don't seem to exist in the reliable statistics. The accidents only exist in the highly unreliable statistics, and they don't show up in the reliable ones - so - you and I both know what that means.
Even so, if, as you and I assume, cellphone use causes accidents, then we should be able to *see* those accidents in the aggregate statistics.
But we don't.
The fact that it's virtually impossible to determine whether a cellphone was the primary (or even secondary) cause of an accident isn't really part of the equation - because the accident count is going down (not up).
I don't know where in the world you are but in the UK there are a fair number of accidents where at the moment of the collision the driver was found to be on their mobile phone or still worse texting!
There have even been a few high profile fatalities with drivers jailed:
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
It isn't uncommon to see muppets on the phone weaving between lanes.
BTW they can test these sort of driver performance figures in a simulator without putting other drivers at risk.
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.
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*! :> )
[Please bear in mind that I don't "own" a cell phone]
On the one hand, I think younger people are more likely to be engaged by/with a cell phone. The "instant gratification" aspect (e.g., I don't answer the land line; let it take a message and I'll check on it sometime later that day -- "it can wait"). I think most of them would consider a ringing cell phone in their purse/pocket tantamount to an "itch" on the tip of the nose while your hands are otherwise "unavailable" (to scratch it). I.e., almost *impossible* to ignore!
And, IME, young people tend to be more engaged socially (even if they never *do* anything "in person"; they are more integrated with a larger number of individuals/groups). As one gets older, the pool of people that we're (IME) willing to spend much time "frittering away" shrinks. We're more likely to *see* each other if we want to enjoy each other's company.
[We also tend to have more responsibilities and less "free time" to fritter away on trivialities]
OTOH, I think "older people" (relative term, eh? :> ) tend to not be as comfortable with the technology. Certainly less willing to "waste" much time sorting out all the things that
*could* be done, potentially ("Which button do I press to make a call? How do I hang up??") I know very few "older people" who will sit down and try to impress me with the laundry list of "features" that their phone supports.
So, the less familiarity might translate into greater *distraction* (per event) among older folks; more effort required to get the phone to do what you expect a TELEPHONE to be able to do!
OToOH, older people seem to be more inclined to pull over to the side of the road to make a call. I will often see cars parked nearby and wonder why they are sitting there. Only to discover they are on the phone, talking. Keep in mind, this is a residential area, there is no "back exit" from the neighborhood and there's only another block or two of homes
*beyond* this one!
Translation: they thought it wise to pull over *now* instead of "two blocks hence". By contrast, I suspect most "kids" would just jabber away as they drove those last few blocks.
Do you do it the *instant* your phone chirps at you? While driving? Or, do you assume it can wait a minute/hour and reply later -- when it is more convenient/safe? If it's a text AND the sort of thing that you can *immediately* formulate an answer (i.e., doesn't require conferring with your SO or "thinking about it"), then is it really
*that* urgent?
We're frequently out front chatting with neighbors. Their kids are now out of the house (permanently?). While talking, invariably "his" (or "hers") phone will chirp. They'll ignore it as they are engaged in a conversation. After *two* rings, it will stop. Then hers (or his) will chirp. Again, two rings later, that stops. THEN, the land line in the house starts to ring.
We all *know* its one of the kids -- impatient, needing instant gratification. Their question ("what are you guys having for supper?" or something equally earth-shattering) just DEMANDS an immediate reply. Or, so *they* would think!
[I wonder what they would do if mom & dad were in the sack and didn't reply for an hour or so?? "Where WERE you guys?? I've been calling and calling..." "We were working on another CHILD..."]
I wait until I'm not driving any more to respond IF I remember that I actually got a text msg while driving. Sometimes, I don't hear the DING when I get the msg, too.
They are too stupid or too mean to buy the necessary kit or more likely learn to use it since many car radios come with bluetooth these days.
There are two sorts of bluetooth device the earpiece ones you see in supermarkets and on the move as pedestrians and the ones built into the car where typically the car also provides an aerial boost as well.
When bluetoothed the phone mutes the in car stereo and the call is routed through the entertainment system - there is nothing in your ear at all. There are a couple of minor problems. A slight echo on the line as far as the caller is concerned and some extra roadnoise.
Simulations show that talking on a mobile phone even hands free significantly lengthens reaction time to situations developing on the road - particularly if it is a complex question requiring thought before answering. Holding a phone up to your ear is worse and looking down to text whilst trying to drive a car or truck is suicidal. Although annoyingly they mostly tend to kill other people.
Simulations also show that the dangers involved depend on how often you talk on phones/radios while driving. People who do so regularly, such as police, taxi drivers, etc., are able to split their attention better, and "disconnect" from the phone if an emergency situation occurs. People who rarely talk on phones, however, can have their reaction times and attention reduced to the level of someone so drunk they have difficulty getting their key in the ignition - and that's on a hands-free phone. Using hands-free or hand-held telephones makes almost no difference to the reaction times - the key issue is that your attention is elsewhere.
Of course there are plenty of other causes of distraction that can be equally bad - having an argument with people in the car, turning round to threaten unruly kids with having to walk home, driving with a migraine, having food or drink in the car, etc., are all high-risk activities. Even just having hot food or drink in the car is a significant risk - the smell of a takeaway is distracting.
My Motorola Roadster speakerphone clips onto the visor and works just fine.
It's better than an earpiece, for me, because it will always be in the car, and it talks out my text messages, and takes dictation.
It *can* route through an unused FM channel of your choosing, but, I find that more work than it's worth to go through the radio amplifier. I just use the speakerphone portion.
When I receive a phone call, it tells me whom it's from and asks me "answer or ignore", and it always gets it right when I say either "answer" or "ignore".
When I want to call someone, I have to be a bit careful with strange names, such as "call Brumhilda", but, I "solved" that problem by assigning simpler names to the problematic ones, such as listing "Brumhilda" as "mom" (or some such simplification).
So, when I say "call mom", it asks "Do you want to call Mom?", where the number it calls is Brumhilda.
Overall, the Motorola Roadster is a fine device, but, I'm sure the Jabba and Plantronics, and other brands are just as well.
One caution though is that I don't use the Motorola Android software, because it never seems to work. I just use the native capability of the Roadster and the Android phone on Bluetooth.
ElectronDepot 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.