Re: New Study Refutes Assumed Link Between Cell Phone Use and Auto Accidents

[David Farber <dfarber () cs cmu edu>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
Date: August 21, 2007 10:37:14 AM EDT
To: Roman Gollent <roman-ip () gollent com>
Cc: lauren () vortex com, dfarber () cs cmu edu
Subject: Re: [IP] New Study Refutes Assumed Link Between Cell Phone  
Use and Auto Accidents


Roman,

A message that I received directly (but that Dave apparently chose
not to post on IP) points out some of the problems with self-reported
experiences vs. rigorous analysis of statistics.  For example, was
the fact that they were on the phone actually a cause of the
accident?  No way to know.  We do know that there are a range of
apparently more serious distractions that are harder to adjust for.
Dealing with kids in the back seat is an obvious one that rates near
or at the top of the list, though outside-the-car distractions are
way up there too.  E.g., when talking on a phone, it's easy to say
"hang on a sec" while dealing with a tougher driving spot and then
continue the conversation afterwards -- many other distractions
cannot be put on hold that way.

But the bottom line I believe is that given that there haven't been
major changes in vehicles or roads that would have an offsetting
effect on this metric, we would have expected to see *clear* evidence
of major accident rate increases if cell phone use was as dangerous
as was being claimed, and apparently those increases just aren't there.

There are other examples of situations where people swear by
self-reported incidents that don't hold up to statistical scrutiny.
One classic example is nurses swearing there were more births
during full moons.  Even in the face of statistics showing this
just wasn't true, they still insisted it was.  Human nature.

--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren () vortex com or lauren () pfir org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
   - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com

 - - -



> Hi Lauren,
>
> While I respect your point of view (and thoroughly enjoy many of  
> your contributions),
> my personal experiences contradict whatever studies you might  
> cite.  Of the 3
> times that we've gotten rear-ended (two times while waiting for a  
> red light and a
> third time while stationary in a traffic jam on I-90), all 3  
> incidents involved
> people who had been on their cell phones.  Not people that had  
> dozed off, not
> people paying attention to their kids, not people fixing their  
> makeup, etc.
>
> In my case it's not conventional wisdom but unfortunate reality  
> that leads
> me to believe that it might make a difference.  By that same token,  
> and at the risk
> of making the strongly libertarian crowd roar, I wish that they  
> would ticket
> distracted drivers, period.
>
> Best Regards,
> Roman
>
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 07:50:23PM -0400, David Farber wrote:
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
> > Date: August 20, 2007 7:25:28 PM EDT
> > To: dfarber () cs cmu edu
> > Cc: lauren () vortex com
> > Subject: New Study Refutes Assumed Link Between Cell Phone Use and
> > Auto Accidents
> >
> >
> >   New Study Refutes Assumed Link Between Cell Phone Use and Auto
> > Accidents
> >
> >              http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000271.html
> >
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > As regular readers of my missives may know, I've long been a critic
> > of the conventional wisdom that the anti-cell phone laws becoming
> > increasingly common (including one here in California set to take
> > effect around a year from now) will reduce auto accidents -- the
> > science and statistics just never appeared to be there to support
> > the types of legislation passed, as far as I'm concerned.
> >
> > Now, a new U.C. Berkeley study appears to confirm that accident
> > rates simply have not behaved in a way that would validate the views
> > of those pushing these cell phone laws that affect the general
> > population:
> >
> > http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/ 
> > 2007/08/13_cellphone.shtml
> >
> > Laws passed on the basis of gut feelings, rather than hard facts,
> > are often the ones that make the least sense and do the least good.
> >
> > --Lauren--
> > Lauren Weinstein
> > lauren () vortex com or lauren () pfir org
> > Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
> > http://www.pfir.org/lauren
> > Co-Founder, PFIR
> >   - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
> > Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
> > Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
> > Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> > RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com