Cell phone use while driving
Use of cellular phones while driving has been associated with road accidents as well as related deaths. According to Kelly Wallace 2010, crashes caused by drivers using cellular phones was estimated to be 1.6 million in 2008 up from six hundred and thirty six thousand in 2003. The report says that one out of four road crashes is caused by drivers using cellular phones while driving. Besides, at least twenty eight percent of all crashes translating to about 1.6 million crashes are caused each year by drivers who converse over the cellular phones while driving and a further two hundred thousand crashes result from cellular phone texting by the drivers (Insurance Information Institute, 2010). The statistics provide an insight of how dangerous the use of cell phone by drivers is hence the need to lobby for legislation that prohibits the use of cellular phones while driving.
The legislations that currently exist in some states in the U.S are somehow misdirected and largely provide no restrictions to driver cell phone use. Moreover, no state laws completely ban the use of cell phones while driving. According to Smet (2008) the five States that have so far banned cell phone use while driving have only focused on the handheld cellular phones and assumed hands free cell phones. In 2001, first law prohibiting the use of cell phones while driving was passed in New York. This ban ensures that the drivers have both of their hands free to operate the steering hence minimizing road accidents. Popular science magazine (2000) supports this idea by arguing that the use of cell phones in the cars are dangerous and should be subject to severe restrictions or total ban. However, they support the use of hands free phones. Smet (2008) however differs with the idea and asserts that rather than the occupied hands, visual and cognitive distractions pose more risks of road accidents while cell phone is in use. He explains that whether the phones are handheld or hands free driving performance is still impaired. Use of cell phones while driving prejudices the drivers situational awareness. To begin with, the individuals conversing with the driver are in most cases outside the vehicle and are therefore not in a position to change the conversation due to alterations in the prevailing driving conditions.
Consequently, the drivers are unable to identify, address or swiftly react to situations as well as changes in the relevant environmental stimuli. According to Smet (2008) cognitive distractions such as conversing while driving is caused by internal context and are always elicited when talking to other people or by an individuals own thoughts. He reiterates that holding a phone while driving may interfere with manual control of the vehicle leading to accidents or near crash. He however, stresses on the massive effects of use of hands free cell phones while driving. Smet (2008) explains that hands free cell phone use while driving has resulted in elevated traffic violations such as running on the stop signs as well as exaggerated delays at the stop signs and drivers attention drifts including stopping at green lights. All these indicate the drivers loss of attention and not mere loss of vehicle control. More scientific evidences prove this claim. According to Bridger (2003) human information processing is systematic and information flows in different systems. According to the model activities that occupy different modalities can be performed simultaneously. However, activities that occupy single modality cannot be simultaneously executed. Conversing and paying attention are such activities that can not be carried out simultaneously. Verbal communication completely disrupts the drivers attention and may therefore result in traffic crashes while driving (Bridger, 2003).
Application of situational awareness has been on the rise among the drivers in the U.S in the recent times (Smet, 2008). According to Smet (2008) situational awareness is relevant in the safe driving and should therefore be enhanced to minimize road accidents. Driving-related activities such as comprehension of directions, maps and city routes require cognition and working memory. This encompasses effort, time and attention. The latter has limited capacity and is only used in performing cognitively demanding tasks such as driving in a challenging environment as well as pursuing directions. This is however compromised by the use of cell phones while driving which is more cognitively demanding than can be provided by the central executive (attention) (Smet, 2008).
A recent study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety provides tangible evidence of the effects of cell phone use by drivers on injury crashes. According to the research findings, drivers are four times as likely to get into crashes that are serious to cause injuries to themselves and the occupants when using cell phones. The research whose aim entailed determination of risk involved was carried out by comparing cell phone use within ten minutes before occurrence of an accident with use by the same driver during the prior week. Drivers treated in hospital emergency rooms for injuries suffered in car accidents from 2002 to 2004 were the subjects of the study (Governors Highway Safety Association, 2010). Another research by the Public Policy Institute of California carried out in May 2008 on effects of state laws banning use of cell phone while driving found out that the ban had lead to the decline of traffic deaths by about three hundred annually. This outcome however was applicable in adverse conditions such including wet roads. Finally, a contradictory research report released by the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) indicate that there are no significant decline in the number of traffic crashes in the three states of Washington DC, California, as well as Connecticut which have adopted laws that ban the use of handheld phones while driving (Glassbrenner Jianqiang, 2007).
From the aforementioned study results, it is vividly clear that use of cellular phones while driving increases chances of traffic crashes and subsequent deaths. According to popular science magazine (2001) the brain has built-in limits in relevance to performing multi-tasks. A report released by University of Utah that studied the reaction of a driver while simultaneously talking on his phone and operating other devices revealed that the conversation affected the drivers attention and reaction times even when he never dialed his phone numbers (Popular science magazine, 2001). The lobby for enactment of policy guiding use of cell phones while driving is therefore genuine. However, the ban should be outright including both the use of handheld and hands free cell phone as the partial ban yielded no significant results according to Highway Loss Data Institute.
Many parents have bought their kid cellular phones to use so that they can be notified of any car breaks. However, this has posed more risks to the kids than thought. According to the research carried out by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration junior drivers who use cellular phones while driving are highly likely to lose situational awareness accompanied by loss of attention implying the danger of the cognitive effects, and the physical requirements of handheld phones use. This may therefore lead to traffic crashes andor related deaths. According to the statistics released by the National Transportation Safety Board, nearly sixty four thousand youths between the ages of fifteen and twenty died in traffic crashes from 1994 through 2003. It is common sense that teenagers get distracted more easily compared to older counterparts. Moreover, they are not young and inexperienced but also exhibit a slower reaction rate to the environmental changes and stimuli (Governors Highway Safety Association, 2010). The state of California has adopted policy that bans use of cellular phones by the teenage drivers while driving. However, the penalties or fines proposed for the offenders of such laws are minimal and can not therefore deter the teenagers from violating the regulation. Besides, the laws provide a leeway for those teenagers who want to make emergency calls.
Furthermore, the use of cell phones by the employees of various organizations has caused both financial and human loss to the involved companies. Under the principle of vicarious responsibility, legal accountability of employees negligent act committed during the course of employment is bestowed upon the employer. In 2007 for instance, a woman was compensated slightly over five million dollars by an international paper company after the employee of that company who was purported to be talking while driving rear-ended the woman. Failure to enact a policy regulating the use of cell phones by employers is always seen as a negligent act and heshe is therefore liable. In such cases, employers end up paying heavy fines in offensive acts committed by their employees. Even though many companies have adopted cell phone usage policies, a general and standardized policy need to be enacted to minimize the losses (Insurance Information Institute, 2010).
Cell phone texting
Recent studies have shown that use of phone by drivers through texting via cell phones pose more danger than other cell phone uses. According to Virginia Tech Transportation Institutes report that was released in January 2009, the risks of collision among drivers texting was about twenty three times higher. The study also took into consideration the time spent by the drivers off the road while sending or looking at the received messages on their cell phones. The research that lasted for a period of eighteen months, involved the use of cameras on the cabs of trucks traveling long distances. According to the report, drivers generally spent about five seconds looking at their cell phones before a crash or a near crash (Insurance Information Institute, 2010).
The District of Columbia as well as other twenty states has banned the practice of texting via cellular phones while driving. A tougher law was passed in Utah in May 2009 that enforces a fifteen years imprisonment for convicts causing an injury or death-related accidents while texting behind the wheel. This law considers crash caused by a multi-tasking driver as an inherent recklessness and not an accident. Moreover, further eight States prohibit the use of text messages by novice drivers while on the road.
So far a lot of support has been offered to the proposal of enactment of stringent policy that would minimize traffic crashes as well as related deaths on the roads as a result of use of cell phones while driving. Both the parents of the teenage drivers, the government as well as the public in general and other stakeholders have all accredited the existing laws that curb the use of cell phone while driving. The fatalities associated with the practice of conversing and texting via phone while driving has been immense and road crashes enormous that such laws should be enforced. However, such proposals face hurdles well. Even though everyone seems to like the proposal, mobile companies see this as an act that will interfere with their sales. According to Knowles (2000) cell phone industry lobbied against a law that was passed by Cleveland suburb of Brooklyn, in Ohio in March, 1999 that illegalized the use of cell phones by drivers within the jurisdiction of that State. Most of the adversaries of cell phone restrictions argue that drivers should be subjected to thorough education on the effects of all distractions. They also cite poor law enforcement as one of the main causes of increased fatalities and crashes resulting from cell phone use while driving (Knowles, 2000). Besides, some opponents of the proposed legislation cite a variety of reasons. First, drivers may utilize such devices to call while late thereby travel without any stress hence minimizing chances of collision. Second, rapid increases in such technologies have not been accompanied by the subsequent rise in collisions. Finally singling out cell phone use from a variety of drivers distractions is not justified (Rothe, 2002).
Conclusion
Dramatic technological advancements currently witnessed in the modern world have made it easy for the access and ownership of cell phones compared to the past. These devices have positively enhanced peoples lives in many ways except on the roads where fatalities and road crashes are reported on daily basis as a result of use of such phones while driving. Various laws have been enacted by various States to curb the vice but with little success so far. Opponents of the proposed laws suggest education and enforcement of the existing legislation as the remedy to road carnage. It is noteworthy that the existing laws are not outright and that no State has so far banned all the cell phone use including handheld and hands free by all drivers but most of them forbid all cell phone use by specific drivers. Many States have adopted laws that prohibit the use of handheld and not the hands free cell phones. This notion has to change for a reduction of fatalities and crashes related to the use of cell phone while driving is to be realized. As mentioned earlier, hands free use of cell phone poses both visual and cognitive distractions to the driver and must be avoided. The weakness of the existing legislation is that it has prioritized the occupied hands when the driver is conversing or texting while driving compared to the visual and cognitive distractions which pose more risks.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment