The Dangers of Cell Phone Usage While Driving - Article Example

Mobile phone ownership has increased manifolds in the past two decades and its usage while driving has aroused several debates. How much driving interference cell phone use produces is debatable as findings are conflicting. According to some, drivers exhibit decreased lane deviations while engaged in cell phone talk; others suggest that there is increase in response time on a variety of perpetual and cognitive tasks while they are engaged on the cell phone (Horrey & Wickens, 2004, pp 3). Driver distraction has been established as the cause of approximately 25-30 percent of the injuries in car crash, as per a study published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) (cited by Tseng, Nguyen, Liebowitz, & Agresti, 2005, pp 2). The use of cellular phones while driving has been established as the major cause of driver inattention. When changing a CD or tuning in the car radio does not cause distraction, how does being engaged on the cell phone lead to driver inattention? This makes it interesting to research into the dangers of cell phone usage while driving. The Harvard Center for Risk Analysis found that use of cell phones while driving caused 330,000 moderate to severe injuries and approximately 2,600 deaths each year (cited by Tseng et al., 2005, pp 3). Driver distraction can be classified into two types (internal distraction and external stimuli) and four categories – visual, cognitive, auditory and biomechanical distraction. Of these, auditory distraction is associated with cell phone usage (Tseng et al., 2005). This is more likely in case of hand-held phones but other studies demonstrate that primary cause of inattention is cognitive, which implies that even hands-free phones are equally dangerous (Horrey & Wickens, pp 3). Michael (2005, pp 2) also contends that cell phone use creates not just a momentary distraction but a period of “cognitive inattention” that acts as a perpetual disability and even hands-free phones offer no safely advantage. The character of the cell phone conversation impacts the distraction that the driver experiences rather than whether the cell phone is hands-free or hand-held. The more complex and emotionally charged the conversation, the greater the impairment of performance. According to Caird, Scialfa & Smiley (2004, p 5), a single epidemiological study found an unexpected effect of a slightly higher risk for hands-free use although most studies found no difference between hand-held and hands-free phones. Hahn and Prieger find that hands-free device users are more careful drivers (Jed, 2007). This implies that hands-free devices offer no reduction in driver inattention but hands-free laws definitely help to reduce traffic fatalities, at least in the long-term. To utilize their time while driving, (Americans spend a substantial amount of time on the road), drivers are increasingly engaged in activities that take their hands and the focus of their attention, off the road. A study conducted by Virginia state troopers indicated that only 5% of the 2700 road accidents related to drivers distraction were connected to cell phone use while driving (pp 5) but a study conducted by a university of Montreal revealed that using cell phone while driving creates 38% greater likelihood of getting into an accident (Michael, 2005, pp 9). Drivers fail to look at traffic lights while being engaged over the phone, contends Michael while Ivankovic, Ouellet, Oyetunji and Roberge (2005) also found that drivers missed twice as many simulated traffic signals when talking on a cell phone than when not talking. The reactions too are slower when talking on the cell phone. Young people are among the largest users of cell phone. During the probationary period drivers are only allowed to operate vehicles under restricted conditions. New drivers cannot have any alcohol in their blood while operating automobiles but no restrictions are made for cell phone use (Caird, Scialfa & Smiley, 2004, pp 7). The young people are most likely to be involved in distraction related crashes. At the same time, accidents occur equally among new and experienced cell phone users which suggest a fundamental limitation in human performance (Ivankovic, Ouellet, Oyetunji & Roberge, 2005, pp 20). Jed (2007) discusses the data collected by Hahn and Prieger in 2006 who found that individuals with higher mobile phone usage are riskier drivers independent of their mobile phone usage (pp 5). Other studies confirm that mobile phones create significant distractions from mobile-phone usage more accident prone than having a blood-concentration level higher than the norms (pp 5). The figures on fatalities suggest that even though the mobile phone ownership has grown by 38 percent between 1997 and 2005, the traffic fatalities have reduced from 15.4 per 100,000 population in 1997 to 14.7 per 100,000 population during the same period. In some states, the accidents increased as cell phone users increased (pp 12). The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, Britain found that operating a mobile while driving impaired a driver’s maintenance of lane position and maintenance of an appropriate and predictable speed and following distance (Jessop, 2005, pp 2). It also affected the reaction time, the judgment of safe gaps in traffic and general awareness of other traffic. Studies suggest that cell phone conversation and information processing tasks used to simulate the distraction of conversation interfere with performance. Drivers also tend to drive more slowly when using the cell phone. Drivers have also been found to control the lane position to stay within the lane but do not try to position their vehicles right in the centre (Caird, Scialfa & Smiley, 2004, pp 15). Brake responses are slower when cell phone users are conversing. Older adults are slower to respond to critical events and hence are at a greater risk when using cell phones while driving (Caird, Scialfa & Smiley, 2004, pp 17). To read a display or dial a number, the presence of a cell phone increases the eyes “off the road” time. This impacts the allocation of attention to the vehicle and roadway in semantic ways. Mobile phone ownership does not have statistically significant effect fatalities at a particular time of the day but it does have effect under specific conditions (Jed, 2007, pp 17). In bad weather and on wet roads, mobile ownership is associated with a large increase in fatalities, which suggests that the distraction of mobile phone usage aggravates the challenge of driving under difficult conditions. Rush-hour congestion or decreased visibility does not increase fatalities due to mobile phone usage. Horrey & Wickens (2005, pp 4), through meta-analysis conducted, concluded that depending upon the response time, different hazards can occur due to talking on the cell phone while driving. For instance lane keeping and hazard response depends on ambient and focal vision. They also found that the driving performance in hand-held phones and hands-free devices do not differ. This confirms that the manual activity of holding the phone is not important. What matters is the cognitive aspect. The various studies demonstrate that there is an increased risk of accidents from the use of cell phone when driving. It is not necessary to talk on the cell phone; just its mere presence can induce one to take eyes off the road. There is no significant difference between the use of hand-held devices or hands-free phones although enforcing law for hands-free phones has found reduced risk. Cognitive responses get impaired and judgment is affected with the use of cell phone. More important than the duration of the conversation is the emotional content that can affect performance and response time when driving. Risks do not increase or decrease with the time of the day but reduced visibility increases the risks if cell phone is used while driving. Response of older people is slower to events and hence they are at a higher risk when using cell phone while driving. Undoubtedly, the use of cell phones is the major cause of fatalities and driver distraction. References: Caird, J. K., Scialfa, C. T., & Smiley, A., (2004), EFFECTS OF CELLULAR TELEPHONES ON DRIVING BEHAVIOUR AND CRASH RISK: RESULTS OF META-ANALYSIS, CAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 08 Nov 2007 Horrey, W. J. & Wickens, C.D. (2004), The Impact of Cell Phone Conversations on Driving: A Meta-Analytic Approach, 08 Nov 2007 Ivankovic, M., Ouellet, R., Oyetunji, R., & Roberge, J., (2005), A Look into Cell Phone Networks in the State of Maine, 08 Nov 2007 Jed, K., (2007), Dialing While Fishtailing: How Mobile Phones, Hands-Free Laws, and Driving Conditions Interact to Affect Traffic Fatalities, Public Policy Institute of California, MPRA Paper No. 4135, posted 07. November 2007 / 03:41, 08 Nov 2007 Jessop, G., (2005), MOBILE PHONES, DRIVING AND WORK: Current debates and historical reflections, 08 Nov 2007 Michael, J. B., (2005), Automobile Accidents Associated With Cell Phone Use: Can Cell Phone Service Providers and Manufacturers Be Held Liable Under a Theory of Negligence?, 11 Rich. J.L. & Tech.2 (2005), 08 Nov 2007 Tseng, W. Nguyen, H. Liebowitz, J. & Agresti, W (2005), Distractions and motor vehicle accidents, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Volume 105 Number 9 2005 pp. 1188-12 Read More