Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

Search


Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • Observer on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Mike Rich on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • anon on Privacy and Tattletales

    • orly lobel on At CELS, Hoping to Blog

    • harry brooks on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Michael H Schneider on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • flood pictures on Public opinion on same-sex marriage

    • gtownstudent on And Justache For All at GW Law

    • AF on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Maryland Conservatarian on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Daniel S. Goldberg on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

  •  

    Site Meter

Just Turn Off Your Phone!

posted by Sarah Waldeck

T’is the season and all of that, so I’ll begin by noting that last year my husband gave my mother a hands-free cell phone kit. I thought the gift was motivated by a concern about her tendency to talk on the phone when she’s making the 90 minute trip to and from our house, but maybe the gift was more nefarious than I realized. Last week’s Economist is reporting on a study that shows even hands-free phones can dangerously impair driving skills:

Melina Kunar of the University of Warwick, in England, and Todd Horowitz of the Harvard Medical School ran a series of experiments in which two groups of volunteers had to pay attention and respond to a series of moving tasks on a computer screen that were reckoned equivalent in difficulty to driving. One group was left undistracted while the other had to engage in a conversation about their hobbies and interests using a speakerphone . . . . Those who were making the equivalent of a hands-free call had an average reaction time 212 milliseconds slower than those who were not. That, they calculate, would add 5.7 metres (18 feet) to the braking distance of a car travelling at 100kph (62mph). The researchers also found that the group using the hands-free kit made 83% more errors in their tasks than those who were not talking.

To try to understand more about why this was, they tried two further tests. In one, members of a group were asked simply to repeat words spoken by the caller. In the other, they had to think of a word that began with the last letter of the word they had just heard. Those only repeating words performed the same as those with no distraction, but those with the more complicated task showed even worse reaction times—an average of 480 milliseconds extra delay. This, the researchers suggest, shows that when people have to consider the information they hear carefully, as they might when making decisions about a business deal, it can impair their driving ability significantly.

Different studies have suggested that two other driving past-times—chatting with passengers and listening to the radio—do not have the same negative effects on driving. Researchers speculate that talking on the phone competes for the brain’s resources in ways that these other activities do not.


All of this raises some interesting legal questions. As The Economist points out, rules prohibiting the use of hands-free cell phones would be extremely difficult to enforce, in part because an increasing number of vehicles come equipped with such devices. (I suppose that this complicating factor could be addressed by regulation, at least prospectively.)

But the truly vexing legal problem is the extent to which using a hands-free phone and driving have become socially acceptable. Even use of a hands-on cell phone while driving in a jurisdiction that prohibits such behavior may be what Professor Mark Edwards would label within the parameters of acceptable deviance.

To wit, I read the Economist piece about a week ago and have been waiting to find a spare moment to post about it. The other day I was driving and mentally sketching out what I wanted to write. In the middle of my machinations, I used my (hands-on) cell phone to call work and check my messages. I had no particular reason to think that I had a message and, in any event, no-one has ever left a truly urgent message on my work phone. The use of a hands-on phone may or may not have been legal in the state I was driving though; I had no idea and didn’t particularly care. And, no, the irony of the call was not lost on me.

The most important question going forward is how to make driving and using a cell phone feel more like getting behind the wheel after having a few drinks than like speeding on an open highway. We’ve managed to achieve similar change before, with drunk driving, smoking, and other negative behaviors. It’s not an impossible task, but it’s certainly not easy.


 December 18, 2008 at 3:30 pm   Posted in: Criminal Law   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (2)

  1. Howard Wasserman - December 18, 2008 at 4:35 pm

    Your point about studies suggesting that talking with passengers or listening to (and, let’s face, it, talking back to) the radio is different and not as distracting, if true strikes me as the key. My non-empirical assumption long has been that a live conversation was the same as a telephone conversation once the issue of not having both hands on the wheel was taken out of the equation.

  2. Matt - December 18, 2008 at 4:38 pm

    On why chatting w/ passengers doesn’t cause as much trouble as talking on the phone does, the story I’ve heard (it’s probably mostly speculation but seems plausible enough to me) is that two things (at least) are in play. First, it’s easier to talk w/ someone near by whose reactions you can see, tone hear more easily, you see what they are talking about, etc. So, it just takes less concentration. Secondly, the other person is often also looking at the road and so tends to stop talking, or at least pause, if there’s a difficult situation (increasing traffic, hard turns, rain, etc.) in a way that someone on a cell phone cannot. In general I agree, though, that we ought to use public service campaigns to encourage people to see what a dangerous (and selfish!) activity it is.

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress