Tom's Views

Studies imply that even hands-free operation of cell phones impairs safe driving ability. While I’ll admit that voice-actuated, eye-free operation is safer than traditional phone-in-the-hand-with-button-pressing mode, cell phones still present many opportunities for distraction when complete attention to the road is criticial; like when merging or exiting interstate highways, driving around the barrels in construction zones, avoiding black ice and pot holes, steering through wind gusts, and moving through heavy rain or snow storms with the windshield wipers flapping and the raindrops distorting the view. Since one or more of these adverse conditions can arise at any time and without much warning, IMHO, a driver’s attention needs to be focused on driving, with near minimal distractions.

 

Conversations with passengers are safer than those with folks on the cell phone, also,  because the passenger can observe the driver’s body language, and can also see the road conditions to the same degree that the driver does. So, when a attention-demanding situation occurs, the driver need not tell the passenger to be quiet, but might have to tell the person on the cell phone.  The person on the phone does not as directly observe the road conditions and can thus, unintentionally distract the driver with his banter. 

Also, a passenger’s voice demands less of the driver’s brain power to comprehend than a voice on a cell phone – hands-free or not. The audio in cell calls tends to be more muffled and constrained in audio frequency bandwidth and volume, and thus, is less intelligible than a voice on a radio, or a passenger’s voice for that matter. Additionally, intermittent cell signals often cause some words to be lost; there’s a lot of, “What did you say?” and “I can’t hear you” with cell phones that cause the driver to (albeit momentarily) direct his attention away from the road. In this way, even a hands-free cell phone conversation demands much more mental overhead than a direct verbal exchange with a passenger, and thus, places the driver as well as his passengers in greater peril.  The technology is not mature enough to be consider safe to use while driving. 

GPS Vs. Cell Phone Usage Dangers

Some suggest that if we ban cell phones, then why not ban GPS units as well.  My answer: GPS units differ from cell phones in several key ways.  First, the ones I’ve observed require less of the driver’s attention.  Once you program your destination into them, they generally require no further adjustment.  They call out the directions clearly (usually), and the announcements are timed to occur well before the driver is required to merge, exit, or turn. 

Also, the speech that GPS units generate is typically more legible than cell phone chatter, and what’s more is that there’s much less of it except during those times when you’re driving in the close quarters of a city.  Then they can be a bit monotonous.  But unlike a conversation with a real person, the driver is not mandated to pay them attention.  With people, there is social pressure to respond promptly during conversations. 

Further, unlike most cell phones that tend to be very compact, GPS units are specifically designed ergonomically for drivers so that they’re as minimally obtrusive as practical.  Indeed, they’re meant to be used by drivers. 

Many units even provide timely information on traffic and construction conditions that enable drivers to avoid congested areas as well as the risks of driving in said places.  Though the GPS technology is newer than cell phones, and thus hasn’t been studied as much, my hunch is as follows: Whatever increased danger to drivers there is that’s due to paying attention to the GPS unit instead of the road, is more than offset by the improved safety they bestow.

After all, with an audible GPS unit in the car, the driver need not look away (or as far away) from the road as much as he would if he was using a paper map.  The GPS display is much simpler than most maps and would seem to require of the driver less concentration for navigational purposes than a map.     As far as map usage goes, a GPS unit may in fact reduce accident rates because it conveys its information to driver more efficiently by taking much of the guess work out of where to go. 

So because of the more tightly focused and useful niche role of GPS units in the car’s cockpit, they can’t be legitimately likened to cell phones.  Indeed, I’d argue that GPS units as described, are far less dangerous than cell phones. 

Now as I do not drive, my experience with GPS systems is admittedly rather limited.  However, my original statement was about the distracting effects of cell phone usage only.  GPS usage and how closely it mirrors the cell phone in the degree of distraction it creates I would have preferred not to get into, as I do not see them as being in the same class of activities.  While the former is specifically designed to aid the driver, the latter is not.  Practically all the information provided by the GPS pertains to the driver’s focus, which is driving and navigating the vehicle.  But most often, the information being exchanged while talking on a cell phone has nothing do with (and thus supplements in no material way) the task at hand, which is to drive the vehicle safely. 

The jury is still out on the dangers of GPS usage — indeed, much less scientifically obtained data is available about GPS than cell phones at this time. The intense visual GPS interfaces of today’s sleek GPS devices may indeed be more dangerous to use than talking on a hands-free cell phone.   So I’m not passing judgment on GPS just yet. 

But with the cell phone, unlike the GPS, much evidence is already in that shows this activity to impair a person’s ability to drive a car as much as 90 percent, which is worse than many drunk drivers experience at the height of their intoxication.  Now the potential for danger with GPS is real, I think.  But it hasn’t been studied enough yet to know how much it impairs a driver. 

Cell Phones Are Visual Too

On the simple interfaces of cell phones being less dangerous to use than the highly visual GPS ones: The trend is that cell phones are becoming more visually-operated as well — especially with the recent landslide popularity of the iPhone 4.  There are millions of iPhones in use already, and this latest one’s only been on the market for roughly two months.  In fact, with this phone, most of the arguments made against the GPS and how its visual interface might be very distracting would also apply to the iPhone, the Droid, the Blackberry, and other devices that are more-than-ever utilizing a visual interface for user I/O.  So in this sense, perhaps GPS usage could be viewed as akin to cell phone usage.  

Within the city, GPS units are admittedly more intrusive than they are on highways and strait-shot pathways. But even in the city, I can’t imagine them being AS intrusive as an ongoing cell phone conversation that requires listening as well as thinking up responses. In the GPS case, all you have to do is listen to it chatter.

With the plethora of road-ready apps available on the iPhone et al, the potential to lure drivers’ eyes from the road is likely no less than a GPS.