Mobile phone while driving NOT linked to accidents?

[Cyclone]

Cyclone, can you link the studies used to back up the claims made? I took a look before posting this thread and I couldn't find any study that says the opposite to this study? There were none used as reasoning why this law was introduced and from memory it came at time when there appeared to be a number of accidents that could have been connected to the person using their mobile phone. Could the government have seen an opportunity to create a new law that brings in a large quantity of revenue by way of fines on the back of a few media reports?

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2013 at 21:00 ----------

 

 

I know, but how many are truly caused by people using their mobile phones? You nor I know, but this large scale study disagrees, which is why I asked the question about the reasoning why this law was introduced in the first place.

 

The wiki article seems to contain links to several studies.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phones_and_driving_safety

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2013 at 22:38 ----------

 

I cannot believe that anybody can still think its safe to use a hand held mobile phone while driving.I was seriously injured by a moronic driver behind me using a mobile phone.I make no apologies for calling the driver moronic,hands free kits are dirt cheap there is no excuse.

 

Maybe he's a terrible driver when not on the phone as well.

 

Anecdotes do nothing to prove the case either way.

[DT Ralge]

Becuase this thread is about Mobiles not other distractions - while other distractions are a concern and should be looked at, the intent of my post is to show that the subject of this thread is not consistant according to other reports. The full article (See section 5. Wiki) mentions 24,000 crashes were caused in USA in 2009 by distraction from mobiles, which is a concern when you take into account that it is illegal, while having a passenger is not.

 

Indeed, I would not disagree with you that passengers can be very distracting.

But there's something about a passenger (their physical presence, their ability to read the driver's body language, the driver's hand up to say "hold on a sec' whilst I deal with this roundabout, their reading of the road ahead as an extra pair of eyes for the driver ...) that means the driver is more likely to manage the distraction level from the passenger more effectively.

 

A mobile phone conversation isn't as easily managed - when you pick the conversation up you effectively sign a contract that says you can/will deal with both driving and talking.

Drivers may well manage the level of distraction from the conversation by keeping the conversation short and sweet and decide to pull over to answer the boss'/customer's curved ball question. But I have a mate who runs a business, drives to the office on the north side of Nottingham and moans like hell about losing his signal for 40 minutes when driving daily through Clumber Park area. I can't believe that thinking of driving as getting in the way of doing business is at all healthy.

He does business hands-free, perfectly legal but not healthy, safe or a good idea, in my book.

The fact that the law allows hands-free but not hand-held is silly. Hand-held, after all, is only driving with one hand and millions get away with that every minute of the day. It is the conversation that can do the damage lowering the drivers vision and narrowing the width of observations (studies have shown this - I can't find the link to one notable example right now!) .

Phone conversations at the wheel have also been benchmarked against drink-driving (http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_road_user_safety/report_how_dangerous_is_driving_with_a_mobile_phone?_benchmarking_the_impairment_to_alcohol.htm).

[Cyclone]

A mobile phone conversation is easily managed. Either you stop talking, or you say "hang on". Much like you would to a passenger.

Not all passengers are drivers or even adults you know. A 12 year old talking to the driver from the back isn't a pair of eyes on the road, isn't looking at body language and probably won't "hang on" when told to.

[shadow05]

you shouldn't use your phone when driving anyone.. don't matter how good drivers they are.

[Cyclone]

Thanks for sharing your opinion. What did you think about the study though?

[DT Ralge]

This review of studies and research into the subject is worth a skim-read:

http://www.swov.nl/rapport/r-2005-12.pdf

 

Of all the summaries within this paper (the research finds that driver on-road risk increases with mobile use), I think this is a significant one - from page 48

 

"5.2.3. Summary and discussion

In most countries, the ban on handheld phones while driving seems to be the most popular measure for regulating mobile phone use while driving. However the results of behavioural studies showing that there is no significant difference in the effects of handheld and hands-free phones do not seem to justify this form of legislation. The effectiveness of this and other types of mobile phone legislation on the level of use and even more on crash rates are still not very well known. Although some results show that the short-term effects of these laws on the level of use could be significant and led to approximately 50% reduction, the long-term effects seem to be far less positive: after one year the level of use could even return to the same level as before the law."

 

So my summary:

Hand-held = illegal, hands-free = legal is a little silly.

The country-level (as opposed to individual driver level) effectiveness of the law and the actual level of risk posed by phone use is very difficult to assess now and, in the future, it is bound to change so any research is immediately out of date.

At a driver level, whatever the increased risk level, is the phone conversation worth it?

[Cyclone]

This study claims that usage is only affected for a short time. So there's an easy study to do, looking at the year before the ban in the UK and comparing it to the year afterwards.