Yapping motorists found to make long commutes longer
By Darren Murph 
posted Jan 3rd 2008 3:22AM
posted Jan 3rd 2008 3:22AM
As if there wasn't already enough conflicting evidence surrounding the act of talking while driving, along comes a new "study" suggesting that yapping motorists actually make long commutes even longer. According to David Strayer, a psychology professor at the University of Utah, drivers on the phone tend to cruise "about 2 miles-per-hour slower on commuter-clogged roads than people not on the phone, and they just don't keep up with the flow of traffic." Of course, one may wonder just how much difference that would make if traffic is crawling already, but we digress. Additionally, it should be noted that the results were garnered from three dozen students "driving in simulators," but nevertheless, Mr. Strayer still maintains that "distracted drivers are adding an extra five to ten percent of time to your commute." Telecommuting never sounded so good, eh?[Via Techdirt]
We all talk about the “distracted driver” as if it was the “other guy” but, in reality - it’s really all of us. The adult attention span is less than 20 minutes –and for a teenager it’s about 10 minutes. After that time, we’re all distracted, inattentive drivers.
http://www.superbumper.com
Well see, traveling 2 mph slower than everyone else when traffic is already at a crawl makes you a bit of a roadblock.
when people in front of me do this, I pull up, look em straight in the eye and curse em out.
"GET OFF THAT F*CKIN PHONE !"
do that in some parts of LA and you just might be eating lead. Road rage is all the "rage" in California.
Until July of 2008 at which point the new cell phone laws in California which prohibits cell phone usage in cars unless you are using a hands-free headset go into effect. I'd prefer to see a complete ban on cell phone use in cars, but I'll take a hands-free only law over nothing at all.
Well duh. I see cellphone yappers weaving toward the center line/oncoming traffic, driving in the bike lanes, sitting for 5-10 seconds before they realize the light just turned green, driving 5-10mph slower than the speed limit and plenty of other bad driving habits during my morning commute. Invariably, when someone in front of me is doing this, when I get the chance to get around them, I'll see them yapping intently on their phone. I can't wait til they make it illegal and stop putting everyone at risk for an accident.
this one is a given I think, I'd like to show sample of the crazy events I've seen of crazy cellphone talkers, specially the ones in SUV (just like in the picture) but that means I too would have to get a gadget out and cause more traffic so I can't.
I forgot to add that last month I saw a woman behind me talking on her cell and DOING HER EYE MAKEUP in her rearview mirror. WTF! I thought for sure I was gonna either get rammed from behind at the next stoplight or I was gonna crash myself because I couldn't stop keeping an eye on her in my rearview so I could take evasive action if she didn't stop at the next red...
I once saw a woman driving at 65 and putting makeup on during my commute to work. I was so surprised I nearly spilled my cornflakes all over my newspaper.
I can atttest to this. I am not a person who talks on the phone all the time. There is a rare occasion where I do need to talk while driving and I do notice when I hang-up I need to speed back up to where I was before.
Remember folks, the guy who drives 1mph faster is a maniac, and the guy who drives 1mph slower is a freakin' IDIOT!!!! >
Oh and maybe if you r-tards hopped on public transport like real citizens you wouldn't care about the woman driving 1mph slower than you.
Some of us do just that.
Of course, at the moment, there are 60 minute delays on NJ Transit into New York due to downed catenary wires. So, you pick your poison, I guess.
I ride the LIRR, and the whole system goes down if the power goes out on a single line... which happens frequently.
Mass transit's great if it actually works properly. Trouble is, in this country, that doesn't seem to happen very often.
Your right, let me first build a rail from my house to work... then I'll start using it. Oh, the bus you say? Sure, let's convince the buses to come out to the country and pick me up.
judging the whole countries mass transit by NJ's sub standards is a bit of generalization. On the west coast things run smoothly. Trains and buses run on time and are almost never broken down. Yes, they don't come to your door, but there are park and ride areas where you can park you car, and take either the bus or train into the larger metropolitan area.
It isn't just phones. I was in a traffic queue at some lights. I looked in my rear mirror and a women was cutting up banana and putting it into some yoghurt.
The lights changed, and she took about 2 mins to realise this. Even with people honking at her.
It is illegal in the UK, and has been for sometime. That didn't stop someone almost crashing into me whilst on a phone. I had to swerve out of the way because he was weaving all over the place unaware because of a phone strapped to his face.
I also saw a cement truck drive with 1 arm on a phone, and the other out the window going around a roundabout, no hands on the wheel at a roundabout, driving a huge truck.
You saw a cement truck with a phone on it's arm, with no hands on the wheel, driving a truck?
Whatever you've been smoking: I want some dude!
geeeesh, find a new pic already, maybe one with a lady in it...
Maybe this is true as those of us that do drive fast, either have BOTH hands on the wheel, or one hand shifting and flipping off you yappers that are causing the delays!
Cell phones really don't have much to do it with it though, it's irresponsible drivers that are the problem, cell phones are just the method. I'd imagine holding a conversation with passengers is just as distracting to driving.
cellphones are a distraction and remove some of the attention off the road. There have been several studies done that prove this.
The problem is if there's a cellphone ban while using an auto, how are you going to enforce it? Police can hardly enforce traffic laws, much less idiots yapping on the phone in rush hour.
Another law is never the solution. In most places there are already laws against reckless operation of a motor vehicle. If you are weaving in and out of lanes or taking too long to leave from signal lights that law would apply. If you get into an accident because you were talking on a phone you would also be charged with failure to maintain control of your vehicle. Making cell phones illegal to use while driving is as dumb as the state that made texting while driving illegal. We don't have laws making getting blow jobs illegal while driving but people still do it and then post it on YouPorn. There are already laws to take care of this and those need to be enforced instead of wasting taxpayer dollars and lawmakers taking creating another useless law.
Another law is never the solution. In most places there are already laws against reckless operation of a motor vehicle. If you are weaving in and out of lanes or taking too long to leave from signal lights that law would apply. If you get into an accident because you were talking on a phone you would also be charged with failure to maintain control of your vehicle. Making cell phones illegal to use while driving is as dumb as the state that made texting while driving illegal. We don't have laws making getting blow jobs illegal while driving but people still do it and then post it on YouPorn. There are already laws to take care of this and those need to be enforced instead of wasting taxpayer dollars and lawmakers time creating another useless law.
I take longer in the bathroom when I take my phone - usually playing games or surfing the internet.
so, do you wash your hands AND the phone when you are done?
Just a quick comment about the tone of this post... I'm a Ph.D. student in the department where Dr. Strayer works and I can assure you that this research, like the rest of Dr. Strayer's work, is carefully controlled and well thought-out. The condescending quotations around "study" are totally uncalled-for. Read the actual peer-reviewed journal paper rather than the blurb in some mass media outlet and you'll see that the work is methodologically rigorous and has met the expectations of the scientific community. When you can point to an analogous real-world experiment with a larger sample size, then I'll accept your critiques but as of now they're just ignorant and insulting.
I am impressed by your retort. It must be very difficult to type while your nose is so far up the good doctors bum.....
I don't work with him and I don't even conduct this type of research. I just know of his work and that he's not on the take from the cellular industry or the auto industry. For example, GM has funded much of the research that refutes Dr. Stayer's (and others') research because they fear that any legislation against cell-phone/driving use will hurt their On-Star program. Having seen Dr. Strayer's automobile simulator and his research methodology I can assure the author of the blog post that his methodology is the best anyone can hope to get through a research review board right now. My point was that there is no more ecologically valid experiment that refutes these claims and so the post need not be so condescending.
I could not agree more with your logic; except this is a BLOG. Your "mistake" is in thinking this is some kind of per review, academic format. These are people from all walks of life who have opinions about anecdotal observations. NOT people who do controlled studies. Reality to them is only what they see on their daily commute.
You're right, of course. Blog authors offer snippets of info for a casual audience (often with editorial commentary) but I think that many of the critiques leveled by this particular blog post are addressed in the research literature. Since the casual reader is unlikely to delve into that literature, I'd like add my two cents by saying that I think there is now a good amount of scientific evidence to suggest that cell use does impair driving attentiveness to some degree. This is not to suggest that the impairment is of a critical level or that it affects all drivers equally or that drivers do not compensate for the impairment.
I have to agree with the study. I've seen way too much evidence to back up this claim. But like all research on cell phone distractions, it does not apply to everyone. Some people are good multitaskers. Some aren't. Some people are timid, inattentive drivers to begin with, and cell phones, kids in the car, etc. all make that behavior much worse.
But I can't even count the number of times I've witnessed a driver going too slow, weaving around, making last minute lane changes, etc., just to get alongside them and see a phone up to their head. It's sort of a contest with my wife now: "Hey Honey, I bet that idiot driving too slow is on the phone." I'm almost always right. If I'm wrong, then they are being distracted by something else.
While using a cell phone while driving can cause a driver to be distracted, so can talking with passengers, eating, playing with the radio/cd player controls, etc.
Back in the early days of the automobile, there was a huge debate over whether or not to add windshield wipers. It was said by opponents that the steady beat of the wipers would hypnotize the driver, causing him to crash.
A few decades later, the debate was whether or not to allow a radio in the car because of the added distraction and the wrecks it would cause.
I don't think adding more laws is going to make the bad or irresponsible drivers any better. I think this whole debate is simply another case of "The Sky is Falling" and people trying to find a bogeyman on which to blame poor driving habits. It's another case of people refusing to accept responsibility for their actions or placing blame directly on those at fault.
Someone probably lost a loved one because of the distraction of someone driving while using a cell phone. While I feel sorry for them, let's not blame the cell phone for the stupidity of the driver. The driver would have more than likely wrecked at another time because of some other distraction. It's just a law of numbers. Bad Driver + Distraction X Driving Hours = Eventual Wreck.
IMHO, this law is really something that officers can use to add to penalties in case an accident does occur. For example, if some moron is yappin away, and hits somebody due to their ignorance, it will be something that counts against em, very severely. My feeling is that these laws exist so that if something were to happen itll count more against that person. Personally speaking, I have talked while driving, however, i have a nice useful tool for preventing traffic congestion, use cruise control, hehehehe. I wonder how many pple actually know of its existance, it has after all been there for over 15-20 years.
I have talked on the phone before, but I make it a point to make sure it is when theres actually no traffic, or take an exit, if a call is that important, you really shouldn't be driving while talking.
I think that if some fool becomes a threat while doin stupid stuff while driving (cell, makeup, etc), someone should chuck a brick at their car for their stupidity, they deserve it after being a driving hazard.