CNN reports on an Australian study a study conducted in Australia by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, of Virginia:
A study released Tuesday said drivers who use cell phones -- even hands-free models -- are four times as likely to be involved in wrecks involving a serious injury than are drivers who do not use cell phones.
"There was no safety benefit whatsoever from using a hands-free phone," said Anne McCartt, one of the authors of the study, which was published in the British Medical Journal and paid for by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
In fact there might be a revenge effect from the promotion of hands-free phones:
"Our findings indicate that laws that still allow drivers to use hands-free devices will not eliminate the crash risk of phone use," said McCartt. "In fact, to the extent that drivers perceive that hand-free phone use is safer, in some sense, these laws could have a detrimental effect if drivers increase their use of hands-free phone use."
Not surprisingly, the cell phone industry trots out the standard objections:
The Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association, a Washington-based trade group, downplayed the findings, saying the distractions associated with mobile phones are no different from those encountered by drivers who eat or talk with passengers as they drive.
I'm surprised these arguments are still used so often, since they're so easy to rebut. (1) Just because we can't ban all dangerous activities doesn't mean we shouldn't restrict any. (2) No, it's not the same as talking with passengers. Passengers are sensitive to what's going on around the driver and so they're not as likely to expect their undivided attention.
For more info in this issue, you can't beat Car Talk's Drive Now, Talk Later campaign, from whom I stole the above image.
Link: CNN.com - Study: Drivers on cells more likely to crash - Jul 12, 2005.
Longer articles at the New York Times: Hands-Free Cellphone Devices Don't Aid Road Safety, Study Concludes, Wired: Talk or Drive. Don't Do Both, and more articles via Google News.
[Updated with correction and more links.]
Comments