Many studies have proven that driving while talking on your cell phone increase your likelihood of getting in an accident — to the same levels as drunk driving. In response, state governments did the responsible thing and passed laws against cell phone driving. After the laws went into effect, drivers were mostly compliant, and law enforcement noted a sharp decrease in cell phone use while driving. What they did not observe, however, was the expected corresponding decrease in accidents.
In fact, drivers continued to crash at the same rate as before, whether or not they were on their cell phones. We gave up freedom in the name of safety, except we didn’t get any safer!
If A=B, and B=C, we expect A=C. But now we have to go back and consider that maybe A didn’t really equal B after all; that driving while talking on the phone does not really increase your chances of getting in an accident.
It’s the argument tobacco execs have been making for years, that correlation does not prove causation. Sure, smoking is correlated with lung cancer, but does that mean smoking causes lung cancer? Sure, talking on your phone is correlated with increased accidents, but does that mean cell phone driving caused those accidents? Since the accident rate did not decrease after the ban went into effect, something else must have been causing those accidents, right? (The tobacco execs face a much harder battle.)
I have a theory. Well two theories. The first is that a certain percentage of people are just bad drivers. They’ll wreck at the same rate whether they’re on their phones or not.
The second is about risk tolerance. Everyone has a different risk tolerance, but it is largely unconscious. It has to do with what you’re inherently comfortable with. One driver might cruise by doing 80 mph, talking on his cellphone, eating a cheeseburger, radio blaring, sticking his head out the window, carrying a dog on his lap. He’s comfortable and confident or else he wouldn’t be doing it. Another might drive 55 mph, hands at “10 and 2″ in complete silence and concentration. Both drivers have the same goal: get to their destination safely. Both are driving to the limit of their risk tolerance.
They’re called “accidents” for a reason. Nobody crashes on purpose. Think of risk tolerance as a bucket that needs to be filled. Now that cell phones have been taken out of that bucket, drivers are filling it with something else. I don’t know what that “something else” is but it must be pretty significant to keep crashing at the same rate.
This concept was discussed in Superfreakonomics, where the authors argued that there is an equilibrium accident rate, and that changes to driving laws (side of the road, speed limit, cell phones) and car safety features (seat belts, child’s seats) might have an initial positive impact in reducing that rate, but over time, drivers will return to their “natural” risk tolerance and get back to the equilibrium. (They also use available data to explain that “drunk walking” is actually riskier than “drunk driving.”)
I’ve gotten in a couple car accidents, neither of which I was on my phone. I do miss having Sync though.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
