Insurance >> Auto Insurance >> Consumer Info >> Defensive Driving >> Duid

DUID: Driving Under the Influence of Distraction

staff article - TKeil - 2004

Distracted drivers cause accidents; concerns over this issue has spurred countless in-depth studies over the past few years towards finding the effects certain distractions have on driver ability.  The ever increasing popularity of the cell phone, especially with the most inexperienced drivers from the ages of 16 to 18 years of age, has prompted several countries to study how affected drivers actually are by cell phone usage.  Resent findings in Brazil, Switzerland, and two Australian states have prompted local authorities to restrict the use of hand-help phones in automobiles completely.  Research proves that cell phones are an added distraction to all drivers regardless of experience, age, or sex, and in all traffic conditions to a varying degree.  Informing the public of the danger this distraction poses is a proactive way to squelch a growing problem.

Human error is the main cause of over 70% of all traffic accidents, all of which fall into four basic categories: improper lookout, speeding, lack of attention, and poor defensive driving.  Improper lookout and inattention are the two leading contributors to most accidents.  Unfortunately, as cell phone technology increases in popularity, so will the risk of accidents caused by distracted drivers.  Even experienced drivers who frequently operate a cell phone while driving are not immune to its distracting effects.  Evidence uncovered in a recent study by McKnight & McKnight, of the National Public Services Research Center, entitled, "The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention", reveals a two-fold problem, since operating a cell phone requires increased motor and cognitive activity.

Research shows that it is the cognitive activity that poses the greatest distraction.  In the April, 1996, issue of the Journal of Accident Analysis and Prevention, Violanti and Marshal made the observation that there is a direct link between an increased risk of traffic accidents and the added motor and cognitive activity necessary in operating a phone while driving.  This information should be especially important to the business industry that relies heavily on cellular communications daily.  Is the mobile office, really worth the risk?  Should major deals really be negotiated, while you're trying to negotiate rush hour traffic?  Difficult questions, for a difficult issue.

In the McKnight & McKnight study, a driving simulator was used to insure the safety of the participants.  Test covered a variety of road conditions and activities that consisted of: radio tuning, call placing, casual conversations, and intense conversations.  As one would assume, the most significant distraction was found in the area of intense conversations.

The number of businesses using cell phones combined with the number of personal users reached approximately 10 to 20 million to date.  Since calls of an intense nature are attributed to one of the leading forms of driver distraction, business callers would due well to find an alternative to the mobile office for their important calls.  In the McKnight study, they urge that, "businesses whose employees regularly carry on transactions by means of cellular phones, should be directed not to place those calls during drive time."  A recent editorial published in the New England Journal of Medicine has set the cellular telephone industry on the defense.  The study by Dr. Redelmeir and Trbshirani drew the conclusion that the risk of driving while using the cell phone is, "similar to the hazard associated with driving with the blood alcohol level over the legal limit.  The editorial carried a devastating blow to the cellular phone industry.

Advocates of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association released a rebuttal to the claims made in the Journal's editorial.  The first line of defense from the cell industry came from an article published by Fox News, where they made the claim that the New England Journal of Medicine's study had several shortcomings.  The Fox News article went on to say that the study did not prove the phones themselves caused the increase in accidents.  This statement does little to combat any of the studies' results discussed, since results of all the recent studies point to the problem of distraction to the driver not the phone itself.  The cellular industry needs to focus on a solution, not pick irrelevant points, postulating on the fact that it's the drivers problem and not that of the distraction the cell phone brings to the equation.

It would be noteworthy for the cellular industry to work in conjunction with officials to inform the public of these findings, not avoid the facts by belaying blame back on the driver.  The McKnight's study called for the cellular industry to realize its, "…ethical obligation to include warnings on their products and mailed bills…".  The cellular phone is a useful tool, in the right hands and place of use that is.  In the end, it all comes back to personal responsibility; drivers should place cell phone calls responsibly to insure their safety and that of others on the road.