Holding the phone while you use it is not the problem, according to a study by psychprof David Strayer. This doesn't surprise me. Talking on the phone takes the visual part of your brain into the world of imagination.
Just the other day, I was talking to one of my colleagues about this as we were watching Bloggingheads -- which, you know, I was on. You're hearing the other person over a phone line and not seeing him, but you want the expression on your face to look like you're seeing him. It's somewhat hard to do, because the natural tendency is to have "phone face" (a term I'm making up). You're eyes are open but they've gone rather blind, because the brain connection to the eyes is not there. The brain's visual center is working in the imagination mode, summoning up images of things that aren't coming in through the eyes. That's how I'm explaining it to myself at least.
I think when you talk on the phone, you are generating a temporary blindness. It affects the way you look on Bloggingheads, and you need to do a little acting to disguise it. Of course, to do that is to use even more imagination, not to turn your eyes back on. When you're driving, we mostly don't care how you look, but you really do need to see. How are you going to keep your brain from disconnecting with your eyes?
Speaking of Bloggingheads, by the way, Bob Wright and Mickey Kaus talk about me in the beginning of the new episode (which also has other good stuff in it). The part about me starts at 2:23. Referring to my Bloggingheads performance, Bob says, "She was very civil. I mean, maybe she has a latent combative side that could be brought out by a sufficiently provocative interlocutor." He says he's "hoping to provoke an ill-advised outburst" from me on the show, and Mickey's response to that is "But she's blonde." Is he trying to provoke me?
August 16, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
13 comments:
Just imagine the problems we would face if we could see who we were talking with, while driving. If trying to visualize them is distracting, actually doing so, and following all of their non-verbal cues, etc., would be a sure recipe for roadway mayham.
Amazing how we've been able to survive talking to passengers all this time.
Soon, we will have convinced ourselves to ban talking or eating in a car, being tired, having had any alcohol at all within 24 hours of driving, being old, having arthritis, heart disease, neuropathy, incontinence, or diabetes, being angry or upset, or being anything but positively robotic when driving. Oh, and no smoking!
Eliminate humans. Problem solved.
"Bob says, 'She was very civil. I mean, maybe she has a latent combative side that could be brought out by a sufficiently provocative interlocutor.'"
Well, we already knew that much. Consider your appearence on Wisconsin Public Radio talking about Barrett last month.
By the way, I have to add: Ann, you missed a golden opportunity at the end of the BloggingHeads thing. When you were explaining that you can't talk about the engineering and physics questions involved in the WTC collapse, and that you're not qualified to do so, you missed the opportunity to put the obvious full stop on that train of thought that would drive the point home: no, you're not qualified to talk about materials science and civil engineering or the tensile strength of steel -- and neither is Kevin Barrett.
I often see that while drivers are using cell phones, their eyes are looking upwards at the sun visor or headliner. This story confirms my thoughts that phone users are imagining (dreaming) during their conversation and are largely oblivious to what is in front of their automobile. Check it out; I think you'll see that this is indeed true.
These arguments were all gone through in Britain a few years ago: the conclusion there was also that it is the conversation that matters, not holding the phone. But it was the latter that was made illegal, since the other wasn't policeable. Mind you, lots of people ignore the prohibition - to the extent that there's been a recent case of vigilate attacks on the cars of people who use their mobiles while driving.
Well, then it stands to reason that talking to someone in the back seat of a car is equally dangerous. Are we going to ban that as well? Permit conversations only with people in the front passenger seat, and then only if you promise not to turn your head away from the road too much?
Oh wait, if you don't turn your head, then you're not getting the visual cues, and that's dangerous. So you'd better turn your head some, but not too much. I think more studies are required here.
Let's get to the bottom of this, because it's very important that we do this, because driving ought to be a 100% safe enterprise.
Simon: It was implicit. That’s kind of why you thought it.
MCG: The linked study refutes that.
Ann, the article does say that a conversation with an adult passenger does not have the same impact, because the adult has an interest in the driver's safe behavior and can stop talking as needed.
But frankly, that's pretty vague. Is he saying it has no impact or less? Furthermore, what about children who don't appreciate the safety aspects? And again, what about backseat talkers versus frontseat talkers?
Right, that's the impression I get from the article. But of course, that's not always true, now is it? For example, what about children, who don't have a full appreciation of driving and the safety issues thereof? What about a person in the backseat who doesn't have as good a view of the road? What about someone who has simply been caught up in the conversation; who, because they are not in fact driving, simply are not attuned to the needs of the driver?
If it sounds like I'm being argumentative on purpose... guilty as charged. I guess what I'm saying is that there is a certain degree of arbitrariness here. If it turns out that, due to the factors you state and others, that a conversation with a passenger in the car has no bearing on safety, then so be it. But if instead it turns out that it has some impact (which it most likely does), do we start a campaign to get people to quit talking in the car?
Remember, when we talk about driving we're not talking about an enterprise that is 100% safe but for a small number of easily identifiable factors like alcohol or cel phones. We're talking about an enterprise which is inherently risky, period; and we've chosen to balance that risk against its benefit to society, and smooth out the difference with mandatory insurance.
I do wonder, then, if we really have the political willpower to ban all cel phone conversations in cars---and not just because it's darn near unenforceable. We can ban handheld phones, and even earpieces, certainly, because that is visually verifiable, but hands-free car kits change the equation.
Given that occupants within the same car seem to be able to have conversations with relative safety, a 'simple' solution.
Attach a camera to the front of the vehicle and then send that video along with the voice data to the party on the other line, that way the person on the other end of the call can react to traffic patterns and potential dangers just the way passengers do.
My other 'simple' solution would be to eliminate automatic transmissions and power steering. When driving was a real physical activity, folks attention didn't stray. Drivers were constantly engaged in driving.
With the advent of all these technologies, too many folks mistake their cars for moving living rooms.
People drive distractedly because driving seems far too easy.
Ann Althouse said...
"Simon: It was implicit. That’s kind of why you thought it."
Actually, I thought it because I'd already commented about that point two weeks ago ("Barrett may or may not be qualified to teach about Islam, but what - if anything - qualifies him to discuss structural engineering, materials science and physics?"). ;) As to it being implicit, that may be, but we are not dealing with rational people here. If they were smart enough to recognize your taking of the high road, on the principal that people rarely choose to wallow in the lies and mud of the low road, they'd probably join you on the high road, n'est ce pas?
Tell me about it. On my way to work yesterday, some idiot was driving 5 mph too slow and swerved into my lane as I passed him because he was too busy talking on his cell phone.
I don't think it has anything to do with whether or not you use an earpiece or handsfree kit. Some people just can't drive and talk at the same time.
Post a Comment