Scare tactics - texting whislt driving...effective or not?

Chat Forum

[closed]

Scare tactics - texting whislt driving...effective or not?

30 posts & 17 voices | Started 2 years ago by doc_blues | Latest reply from firestarter

Tags:

No tags yet.

doc_blues - Member

came across this whilst bored at owrk yesterday:

txting innit!
(in case the clicky thing didnt work http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=323_1250531763)

Not something I do, and phone always stays in pocket/bag and goes unanswered if I am driving...but I still found this fairly hard hitting/thought provoking...

but it left me wondering just how effective these films are (I can remember the public safety films of the 70s - electricity pylon/fishing rod etc - scared the bejesus out of me as a kid). Think the film above was done for showing in schools in wales - but why not England - be ideal pre-movie fodder fo rthe cinema on a friday night (or would it just upset too many brain dead morons?)

Posted 2 years ago #
Onzadog - Member

The old pylon film scared me back in the day but I think that was because it was so far removed from what we would see normally. There's so much disaster and gore flooding at us normally that this only really seems thought provoking if you've got it about you to start thinking that this could actually be real. I'm all for trying to get the message across anyway possible, even if it is with gore or scare tactics, I'm just slightly concerned that they don't work as well as they could for the reason above. Some people just don't/can't/won't think.

Posted 2 years ago #
duntmatter - Member

That's a traumatic video. Exactly what's needed imo. Should be shown to as many people as possible.

Posted 2 years ago #
Kuco - Member

The crash just reminded me something out of one of the Final Destination horror movies. Though I was once behind some dozy bint on the A605 who was texting and almost went in to the path of an artic lorry coming the other way. I braked the lorry swerved hit his horn she looked up swerved back and then carried on texting as if nothing happend.

Posted 2 years ago #
Kuco - Member

Posted 2 years ago #
Surfr - Member

I like the fact that they are still trying to shock and this is one of the better Ads that I've seen. I think the length of the film helps drive the point home rather than letting you dismiss it instantly. I agree though that kids today are probably a lot more open to gore and violence than I was in the 70s/80s. I guess the target age is different too. Those films about open water and pylons were aged at young kids whereas these are aimed at young adults.

Posted 2 years ago #
Flaperon - Member

What I don't understand is why anyone would text in the first place - big difference between taking a quick call ((hands free or not), and trying to beat your way through a text message. Only a complete moron would try to do that, so I imagine this film is likely to have little impact on the people that truly need it.

Posted 2 years ago #
meikle_partans - Member

as someone who is very aware of their own mortality and quite capable of a good degree of abstract thought i really dislike seeing the crash horror gore adverts. i really dont want to be reminded of how horrendous a car crash could be for me because of someones total stupidity and how i could be randomly picked off at any moment. makes me feel ill. i wish people had some capacity for abstract thought and didnt need to be shown this kind of stuff to imagine it.

thats why tailgating pisses me off so much. it says 'i havent given one tiny thought to stopping distances, how cars work, the consequences of what im doing or the reality that things can and will go wrong for me and im not living in a happy lala land of cotton wool and fairies, therefore im going to expose you in front of me to the forces of blind happenchance and i really dont care'

Posted 2 years ago #
Denno17 - Member

It does hit home and make you think about your actions. If it was a real incident then the driver has to live the rest of her days with the knowledge of all the family's she has destroyed. I was in Ireland on a holiday and remember seeing a saftey advert for speeding which is hard hitting, I was one of the guilty ones for pushing my luck always using the excuse it's only 5 - 10 mph i'd be able to stop.. I saw the advert and it changed my mind. Have a look http://www.10ad.org/road-safety-irish-awareness-campaign/

Posted 2 years ago #
2hottie - Member

Needs to be harder. There is no mention of the legal stuff ie, points on licence and insurance and so on. I do however like the fact that it's a group of young girls. The majority of people I see texting whilst driving are girls!!?

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

Indeed that is a film that makes you think, and as said it's long enough to really hit home, if you dont flick the channel.

I've been known to text while driving in the past, not that I think it's a clever thing to do in any way and I no-longer do so after a near-miss that I'll explain below... but as I can actually write and send a text message without ever needing to look at the phone it really didn't seem that much of a distraction, and I assume this is what most people think - my eyes never left the road once during the whole process and it takes no more thought than typing does - if the thought is in my head it comes out my fingers without aid, I dont need to think how many clicks I'm doing, what order etc. If the phone threw up the odd fault (mis-keyed a word not coming up on predictive text) it beeps and I'd put it down and ignore it until I was stopped, say at a junction in traffic. Same with reading them, I'd not read while driving but I'd always read when I was stopped in a junction, it takes what, 2 seconds to look through the message?

However I did, eventually, succumb to temptation and look when it beeped an error at me. Now in actual fact it's no more dangerous than looking at your stereo to change channels, but in that split second the car in front slammed on for an animal and I (fortunately at a decent distance) had to emergency stop in order to not hit him. Would have had to do the same anyway even if I hadn't looked down at the phone, but the fact that I DID look down at the phone made me question whether it was a cause (which on later reflection I realise it wasnt, but it was a lot closer than it needed to be), but by habit I just leave the phone in my pocket now.

The anti-texting people suggest that it takes a lot of concentration to text, lots of looking down and typing - it really isnt the case for a large number of people, and anyone with any sense can wait until they're stopped in traffic to read a message. However it seems theres also a large number of people for whome texting takes a lot of effort, though they don't realise it, I've almost been victim to these people myself - people staring at their phone while driving and drifting about the lane - these people should not be allowed to, as they are incapable of doing the two things at once. However in the end since you cant do a test to see who is capable of texting without losing concentration on the road, and you have no way of knowing who is sensible enough to priorities driving and ignore the phone when it's not safe to use it, their banning is a great idea and this vid highlights the reasoning to those who are tempted.

Posted 2 years ago #
scaredypants - Member

Hands-free affects concentration too, as MUST texting, whether or not you look down a lot. Govt chickened out of banning all calls.

IMO they should install a jammer into all cars, operational as long as the engine's on / car's moving - or an unstoppable voice prompt saying "switch it off you tosser"

Passengers using phones? - tough shit

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

Not entirely sure about that scaredypants, and I think I'm going to have to disagree with you - handsfree doesnt affect you any more than a passenger having a conversation with you would. The reasoning they gave for handsfree affecting concentration is that for some reason you pay more attention to answering questions on the phone than you would answering questions to a passenger. When talking to a passenger I go quiet if I reach a complex/dangerous spot or if I spot a hazard ahead, I'd do exactly the same on a handsfree phone. Suggesting it is any different to a normal conversation is a bit odd to me - in what way is it more distracting?

Posted 2 years ago #
scaredypants - Member

Why (or at least THAT) it affects driving

Also noteworthy was the fact that the driving
impairments associated with handheld and handsfree
cell phone conversations were not significantly
different. This observation is consistent with
earlier reports (e.g., Patten et al., 2004; Redelmeier
& Tibshirani, 1997; Strayer & Johnston,
2001) and suggests that legislative initiatives that
restrict handheld devices but permit hands-free
devices are not likely to eliminate the problems
associated with using cell phones while driving.
This follows because the interference can be
attributed in large part to the distracting effects
of the phone conversations themselves, effects
that appear to be attributable to the diversion of
attention away from driving.

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

scaredypants - thats not what I asked, I asked how it's any different to a normal conversation with a passenger? Sure, if you're concentrating 100% on driving with zero other distractions in a clinical test environment you're going to be better than if you're talking on a phone in the same test. But is that any different from a passenger, should we ban passengers in cars, or at least stop them from talking too?

Results:When drivers were conversing on either a handheld or hands-free cell phone, theirbraking reactions were delayed and they were involved in more traffic accidents thanwhen they were not conversing on a cell phone. By contrast, when drivers were intox-icated from ethanol they exhibited a more aggressive driving style, following closerto the vehicle immediately in front of them and applying more force while braking

So what they gleaned from their research was that people conversing on a phone are more likely to crash than those that are not, and that drunk drivers are more aggressive. Thats more of a statement of the obvious.

The question of the content of the phone message and required brainpower are also important. In the online test the DVLA gave, you had to count objects, answer definitive question in a set space of time etc. None of these are realistic driving or phone experiences. Whether there were 4 or 5 kids crossing the road is irrelevant providing you expect them and dont run them over, and them making you answer numerical questions within a 2 second timeframe is also unrealistic - when having any conversation in a car, be it on the phone or with a passenger, if I have to make complex decisions or do mental maths I'll just call them back later or wait until I'm stopped to answer. As do most people, if you call someone who is driving the conversation is scattered with long pauses while people navigate complex locations etc.

The whole basis of the testing is flawed. I'm not saying its a good idea to text or use a handheld phone and drive, but I am saying their tests and adverts are flawed and the public can see it and therefore duly ignore it.

Posted 2 years ago #
scaredypants - Member

This study examines how conversing with passengers in a vehicle differs from conversing on a cell phone
while driving. The results show that the number of driving errors was highest in the
cell phone condition; in passenger conversations more references were made to traffic, and the production
rate of the driver and the complexity of speech of both interlocutors dropped in response to an increase
in the demand of the traffic.

Posted 2 years ago #
Nick - Member

That video puts me off driving let alone texting whilst doing so.

Posted 2 years ago #
D0NK - Member

Good film hope everyone gets to see it, mucking about with your phone IS dangerous and the film should make you think of your mortality, unfortunatley it makes you worry about being out on your bike on the roads and some idiot texting wiping you out, but most of us here are drivers too so tough.

I like (ie hate with a passion) the people who hold their phones infront of their mouth using the speaker function while driving. No it's still not hands free you dimwitted cretin as it's in your hand, duh, now put it down you scrote!

Posted 2 years ago #
alpin - Member

a mate rolled her car a few weeks after passing her test because she was trying to send a text. she was lucky.

i agree with coffeeking, most kids can write a short message withot having to look at their phone. i've done it in the past, i'm no angel.

incidently we broke down the other night on the Autobahn. i was driving and the clutch went. wouldn't go back in gear after coming out of 4th. a little scary trying to get across to the hard-shoulder without any power as cars rocketed past, beeping and flashing.

it was also quite shocking to sit on the side of the road and see just how fast the cars were moving. especially when you see a 15-20 cars, vans and bikes stretched out over four lanes and prehaps 100m all moving along at 90mph. one false move by one person will result in a big fegging mess.

the text 'n drive ad isn't as hard hitting as it could be due to the cheap, CGI crash scenes inside the car.

i think generally the british road safety ads are good, especially the drink drive. several of the ads have been stuck up on german video sites. you don't see anything similar on german tv. but then they all believe they are good drivers.

this one from australia is pretty shocking too........... smoking and driving.

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

scaredy - good find. Interesting but also odd - personally I never find my in-car discussions change in complexity to match the situation any more than they do when on the phone, I'm the driver, I dictate the pace and content of the conversation depending on the surroundings, not the passenger? Unless of course the passenger is my mother, who gets nervous about anyone driving.

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

Wouldnt say the CGI was that bad actually.

Used to get a lift with a chap who drove while stoned (slightly different from driving while smoking as I thought you meant at first) - he was a nightmare, drifted all over the road, totally unaware of half the things around him.

Posted 2 years ago #
scaredypants - Member

coffee - trouble is, you're unlikely to be able to assess this objectively for yourself

Don't get me wrong, I've answered my (handheld, like it makes a difference ) phone in the car before now & probably will do so again. My lame excuse is that I hardly ever get a call and it just might be very important (and I actually don't know how to see who rang me if a call is missed - unless they leave a message ). I answer, say "I'm driving, hold on while I pull over" and then I talk. I REALLY try not to listen even to who it is before then.

... but I habitually speed on derestricted roads and I'm probably quicker off the mark at junctions etc than some people would like. I think I concentrate harder than most drivers, but then so does everyone else

Posted 2 years ago #
0091paddy - Member

Watched both the videos on here, and they're both shocking.

Boils my blood to see people still texting or on the phone at the wheel.

I went to the same school as these two, terrible event: http://www.expressandstar.com/2007/01/24/drivers-must-stop-mobile-use/

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

scaredy - my comments were based on the views of my other half who is a definite phone-off-in-car person, so slightly more objective than I would be but still ideal I am aware. I'm also aware that everyone probably thinks the same etc. What I simply mean is that the tests and ads used don't ring true with the younger phone user as the level of additional concentration is portrayed as being huge and the drivers portrayed as acting stupidly. The first vid, as an example, shows the girls diving for the phone as the driver tries to send it, and shows the driver holding the phone up in front of them to see the numbers. This just doesnt happen with most of the <30s - I only ever see over 30s driving struggling to operate the phone, and the girls diving for the phone is a dangerous thing anyway!

The problem is we're talking fairly small increases in likelyhood of accidents, accidents which are relatively rare in our day to day life. Its a relatively small increase in something already tiny - people dont take any notice and dont perceive the risk increase as worth taking note of.

I have no problems with someone being on the phone if they are clearly using their space on the road well, progressing well and not doing anything (other than using the phone) dangerous I dont really mind. It's when you see people staring at their phone, doing 30 in a 60 because they missed the sign as it takes them that much concentration to use etc that my blood boils.

Posted 2 years ago #
simonfbarnes - Member

The difference between a phone conversation and one with a passenger is interesting, and I think it's to do with context. I've noticed that when I'm talking to a driver, they become less responsive when the traffic conditions require attention, and since I'm there I'm aware of this and back off. On the phone, the remote person cannot tell this, and the driver is aware of that and more likely to try to keep up their end of the conversation resulting in inattentive driving.

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

the phone, the remote person cannot tell this, and the driver is aware of that and more likely to try to keep up their end of the conversation resulting in inattentive driving.

They are, the driver says "hang on a mo".... "carry on"

Posted 2 years ago #
scaredypants - Member

They are, the driver says "hang on a mo".... "carry on"

but if the driver is inattentive they may not notice the altered conditions ?

I take your point about the portrayed level of attention though - it's like telling schoolkids that ecstasy will kill them; largely untrue and self-defeating tactic (It's an underestimate of how I do txting though !)

Trouble is that small risks are hard to portray - guess you could show a similar crash, followed by the girl in court, barrister arguing that texting with the phone on her lap didn't contribute and then some stats plus some footage of funerals/family statements to the press etc. Maybe they should video the research simulations & then interview the volunteers afetrwards, put that on tv ?

Maybe they could then interview the transport minister & ask why they don't ban all phones in cars?

(I wonder about satnav too sometimes )

Posted 2 years ago #
D0NK - Member

don't think it works like that CK, I have trouble concentrating on a conversation when the TV is on, I won't be watching it and it could be really crap TV I have no interest in but it still distracts me and I lose the thread. On a car phone someone could still talk to you and distract you when traffics busy/dodgy, something a passenger is much less likley to do.

the text 'n drive ad isn't as hard hitting as it could be due to the cheap, CGI crash scenes inside the car

Yeah enough of this CGI bolx strap some cameras to a teenagers car hand them a phone and film it for real

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

but if the driver is inattentive they may not notice the altered conditions ?

Well yes, but I thought the onus was on the driver to maintain concentration on the road primarily. If you assume they can concentrate OK normally, then they should be able to realise when something is taking that concentration and tell it to shut up, or call them back later. Thats just my view I suppose, I imagine there may well be a middle ground and by the time you're aware of your distraction it may be too late, but then you have to decide how that compares to other risks etc.

I wonder about loads of things and see loads of risks out there, but at the end of the day I realise that driving on the road is a risk, and some people are just damned aweful at concentrating - I mean I know some drivers who I'd say were worse when concentrating than those who drive with their ear glued to the phone! While I can see it's to minimise risks, which is commendable, I find it a bit rediculous when it's pushed too far. I mean if we conducted a study and found that a passenger talking to the driver was worse than no-one talking to him, would they want to minimise that risk too and ban passengers? Or compartmentalise the driving area?

At the end of the day phone conversations are rarely important and so rightly are considered an unneccesary risk, I'm glad they're illegal, I wish they'd do more policing it, but I find the basis on which they do these things is just a tad shaky (shakey?) when viewed against other risks.

ah well, work calls.

Posted 2 years ago #
coffeeking - Member

D0NK - works that way for me. It might not for others though. Certainly at the extreme end, autistic people find it hard to cope with busy places due to too many noises and the inability to filter the junk out when needed, there will obviously be people at the other end of the scale. I've had some dodgy officemates who talked constantly at me, I could easily filter them out while writing code and controlling robots so maybe I'm just practiced!
Plus the driver has the choice to just put the phone into mute if they wish, or hang up. No-one is forcing you to participate.

Posted 2 years ago #
firestarter - Member

last big crash i went to was caused by some dickhead hit a family of five killed all bar one i'll spare the details it wasnt pleasant. sky tv turned up with the air ambulance but stopped filming after a few mins as its not what the viewers want to see . if they could show the aftermath of a real accident like that it would put some off im sure

Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine

Chat Forum

Scare tactics - texting whislt driving...effective or not?

Topic Closed

Don't miss…

Singletrack

Website & Forums

Exits