Few conclusions from very interesting book “Human Factors of Visual and Cognitive Performance in Driving”:
There is no difference in impairment to driver attention between talking on the mobile phone
and with passengers in the car.
The only factor is how much attention, cognitive effort the driver needs to spend on preparing the answer.
So the good rule is: do not talk to driver (at least do not require/expect him to answer)
Following speed limits has significant cost on driver attention:
[quote]Mental Load, Speed Perception, and Speed Control
Traditionally, speed has been a relevant issue in safety discussions and certain
assumptions in particular have been made regarding attention and perception. In
Section 5.2 we made a reference to the experimental evidence against the interpretation
of speed-induced spatial gaze concentration as a tunnel vision effect. However,
besides this, the most common assumption is that increased speed implies higher
visual load. In an experiment on highway driving explicitly designed to evaluate the
effect of speed and traffic complexity, using a visual detection and discrimination
task with free speed choice, Nunes and Recarte (2005) found no evidence of any of
the impairment effects observed with cognitive load and the observed changes in the
observed visual search were interpreted as an adaptive resource reallocation effect.
Traffic complexity, independent of speed, negatively affected the visual discrimination
task and produced pupil dilation, as did cognitive load.
Another aspect of speed relevant for attentional issues is when a driver has to
adapt to mandatory speed limits. Recarte and Nunes (2002) demonstrated that
explicit speed restrictions impose not only an additional visual load (more glances
at the speedometer are needed) but also cognitive load. Drivers, having the tendency
to drive at their preferred speed, must keep the speed restrictions in mind to keep
their speed under control. If a cognitive task is performed, they tend to drive at the
preferred speed, presumably because the preferred speed is controlled with minimal
resource consumption.
[/quote]
I would contest your first point strongly, as I don’t believe they have accounted for at least one important factor: when you have passengers in the car, they have access to the same situational awareness that the driver does, so they also talk less at busy times, giving the driver more chance to focus on driving when it is needed.
When you are carrying on a conversation on a phone with a remote person, that person has no idea of your situation and consequently they don’t modulate their discussion pace. Also, you tend to concentrate more on a voice over the phone than a voice in the car as you are not receiving non-vocal cues that assist in comprehension, therefore diverting more of your attention away from the task of driving.
They of course discussed that.
It does not change the fact that impairment is the same if the passenger won’t shut up:
back seat passengers who cannot judge the situation, feisty mother in law etc
My point was that while mobile phones are the center of attention now, talking to passengers may have similar effect.
BTW the book includes results of studies showing that lack of attention is leading cause of accidents for young drivers. One of major factors to this loss are the friends in the car.
[quote=“pb”]They of course discussed that.
It does not change the fact that impairment is the same if the passenger won’t shut up:
back seat passengers who cannot judge the situation, feisty mother in law etc
[/quote]
I never read a scientific paper in my puff, but I can tell you right now that talking on a cellphone is a WALK in the fucking PARK compared to dealing with the shrill and unceasing stream of “advice” from my wife sitting in the back seat. She can’t even see out the windscreen because of the front seat headrest? Ya REALLY think THAT’S going to stop her telling me to slow down, watch where I’m going LOOK OUT FOR THAT TRUCK!!!
[quote=“pb”]They of course discussed that.
It does not change the fact that impairment is the same if the passenger won’t shut up:
back seat passengers who cannot judge the situation, feisty mother in law etc
My point was that while mobile phones are the center of attention now, talking to passengers may have similar effect.
BTW the book includes results of studies showing that lack of attention is leading cause of accidents for young drivers. One of major factors to this loss are the friends in the car.[/quote]
Did they say anything about the effect of having at least one hand holding the damn phone while navigating with the other (or one’s knees)? Of forget the physical act of using just 1 hand to drive, what about the effect on your awareness of having your hand and a gadget held next to one side of your head for any length of time - distracting? Tends to “lean” to one side while driving?
[edit} do you have a link to this? did they do it in taiwan? were betel nut girls involved in the test?
[quote]Did they say anything about the effect of having at least one hand holding the damn phone while navigating with the other (or one’s knees)? Of forget the physical act of using just 1 hand to drive, what about the effect on your awareness of having your hand and a gadget held next to one side of your head for any length of time - distracting? Tends to “lean” to one side while driving?
[/quote]
No doubt. There is discussion of effects of moving focus of your attention away from the road.
But this is also a common sense.
[quote=“redwagon”][quote=“pb”]
But this is also a common sense.[/quote]
I am moving to start calling it ‘uncommon sense’ due to apparent scarcity.[/quote]
We keep hearing that common sense is making a comeback, but it’s more often than not a false alarm.
With a daft title. Is the use of “Human Factors” necessary to differentiate from the possibility of mechanical or alien factors of visual and cognitive performance? Anyone seen a hippo driving lately? Or maybe there is another book that I have not yet seen entitled “Canine Factors of Visual and Cognitive Performance in Driving”?
With a daft title. Is the use of “Human Factors” necessary to differentiate from the possibility of mechanical or alien factors of visual and cognitive performance? Anyone seen a hippo driving lately? Or maybe there is another book that I have not yet seen entitled “Canine Factors of Visual and Cognitive Performance in Driving”?[/quote]\
The title suggests its either written by non-native speakers, or by illiterates. While the latter is entirely possible, I’m betting it was written by Taiwanese.
If the context is Taiwan, there are some conceptual factors that need addressing before worrying about marginal erosion of visual and cognitive performance.
General concepts like cause and effect (which they havn’t really got down yet) and specific cases like:-
“Driving at speed round a blind corner on the wrong side of the road is dangerous”
Very many Taiwanese will actually debate that, and on a multiple choice would select the “efficient” or “smoother” option.
Scroll to the bottom to get to interactive video tests.
Looking at some of these videos makes you wonder if these were arranged or real life situations
BTW road marking clutter is amazing in some places (actually this may be intentional design as it increases driver unease reducing speed)
[quote]The title suggests its either written by non-native speakers, or by illiterates. While the latter is entirely possible, I’m betting it was written by Taiwanese.
[/quote]
It is an nice summary of Human Factors in driving research edited by Spaniard lady but the contributors are mostly from US and UK.
I guess Human Factors refers to the field name here but then I’m not an expert nor a native speaker.
Anyway no need to get worked out about it or bash Taiwanese.
[quote=“pb”][quote]The title suggests its either written by non-native speakers, or by illiterates. While the latter is entirely possible, I’m betting it was written by Taiwanese.
[/quote]
It is an nice summary of Human Factors in driving research edited by Spaniard lady but the contributors are mostly from US and UK.
I guess Human Factors refers to the field name here but then I’m not an expert nor a native speaker.
Anyway no need to get worked out about it or bash Taiwanese.[/quote]
OK “illiterate” might be a bit strong. I encounter a lot of bad academic writing at work and I guess my free time tolerance of it is eroded.
As for “bashing Taiwanese”, the pen may be mighter than the sword, but a blue truck in the face often offends.
[quote=“Ducked”]
As for “bashing Taiwanese”, the pen may be mighter than the sword, but a blue truck in the face often offends.[/quote]
Often? More like more often that not. Which is, in terms of degree, one Kentish hair on the liberal side of always.
Let one’s guard down with those rampant evil hogs, surely at one’s immediate peril. I give them a wide berth and will only engage with a sure fire exit tactic.
[quote=“greenmark”]As long as the study says it’s fine watching telly while driving, I’ll continue to feel safe using the taxis here[/quote]I would also like to know if using the cellphone while riding a scooter was studied. And if it’s okay to do at 5km/h while swerving into and out of the scooter lane.
etc
