This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2006, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
A driver talking on a cell phone, who was not paying attention to the road, nearly ran Frank Drews off a Utah highway last week.
Drews, a University of Utah researcher, knows something about the dangers of driving and yakking on a cell phone simultaneously. He and other U. scientists have a report out today in the journal Human Factors suggesting that people who talk on the cell phone while driving seem to be as impaired as drunk drivers.
"The risk of getting into an accident is probably comparable," said Drews, a study author, of cell talkers and drunk drivers.
Shortly after his recent close call, Drews found himself at a red light idling in front of the other driver, who was still on his cell phone. Drews exited his car and walked back.
The driver, looking somewhat alarmed, paused his conversation and rolled down the window. Drews asked if the driver had any idea how close to an accident he had come and launched into a summary of the cell phone driving research. A green light, sparking a chorus of honks from other cars, cut short the lecture, but Drews felt he had to say something.
After several papers in recent years on the dangers of cell phone driving and discussing the preliminary findings from this latest study three years ago, the message seems to be stuck in traffic, Drews says. On any given day on Interstate 15 - or any road - you can spot drivers with cell phones glued to their ears or using hands-free devices. There is no state law in Utah regulating the use of cell phones while driving.
The authors said they hope this study will encourage legislation and raise awareness for drivers.
To test the level of distraction, U. scientists put 40 volunteers in a driving simulator to test response times. One part of the experiment involved volunteers drinking vodka and orange juice until reaching a blood alcohol level of 0.08, the minimum for drunk driving in Utah and other states. The inebriated subjects stepped behind the wheel of the simulator.
On other days, volunteers received cell phones and sat in the simulator to drive while someone else spoke with them. In both circumstances, drivers had to follow a simulated pace car and react to intermittent braking.
Cell drivers - holding the phone or using a hands-free set - tended to have delayed braking reaction as compared to undistracted drivers. Drivers on cell phones also took longer to recover their speed after braking.
The drunk volunteers drove more aggressively and followed the pace car more closely than other drivers and hit the brakes harder.
During the cell phone phase, three drivers got into fender benders, while the drunk drivers avoided any such collisions. But in the paper, the authors suggest that since the drunk drivers hit the brakes harder than others, along with other poor reaction issues, they might have been involved in more accidents in the long run.
While cell drivers and drunk drivers exhibited different problems, both experienced trouble in overall traffic safety, the authors wrote.
David Strayer, another U. researcher studying the subject, acknowledged his doubts about an early report that did not involve a controlled study from another researcher suggesting drunk driving and cell phone driving were equally dangerous.
"It seemed like a little bit of hype," he said.
So Strayer and company set out to create their controlled experiment. Today's Thursday paper is the official publication of the team's findings, which they have reinforced since their preliminary reports three years ago.
"You just don't know how impaired you are," Strayer said.
As the evidence grew in the laboratory, Drews made it a point to not drive and talk on the cell phone. If he calls someone he suspects is driving, he will hang up and let them drive.
Strayer also tries to set an example. During an interview on a cell phone in Sweden, Strayer mentioned he was about to get into a car.
"But it's OK," he explained Monday. "I'm not driving."
Drews said for drivers, the person on the other phone can create a dangerous situation. If the driver becomes silent because of a traffic emergency, the other person on the phone often tries to bring them back into the conversation, causing a distraction.
It is the act of conversing with someone elsewhere that is more of a problem than physically holding the phone. Drivers who held their cell phones drove as poorly as those who had hands-free devices, the authors said.
This led the authors to suggest that some states that require hands-free devices if drivers want to use cell phones may be missing the point.
"We overestimate our ability to handle dual tasks," Drews said.
As part of the study, the Drews and Strayer looked at whether talking on a cell phone and driving is something that can be learned, like rubbing your stomach and patting your head at the same time.
"There is not some sort of super multi-tasker who can drive and talk on the cell phone," Strayer said.
Well, people try everyday. But they might be putting themselves and others at more risk than they thought.
glavine@sltrib.com" Target="_BLANK">glavine@sltrib.com
Failed Utah Cell Phone Driving Laws
2004
House Bill 258 Prohibiting Cell Phone Use for New Drivers
Rep. Carol Moss, D-Holladay, introduced a law to prohibit drivers under 17 from using a call phone while driving, except in certain emergencies.
House Transportation Committee voted against sending it on to the full House for a vote.
2001
House Bill 182 Use of Mobile Phones in Vehicles
Rep. Kory Holdaway, R-Taylorsville, introduced a law to prohibit cell phone use, unless a hands-free device was used or in certain emergencies.
House defeated the bill 38-33
2000
House Bill 142 Inattentive Driving Offense
Rep. Ralph Becker, D- Salt Lake City, introduced a law to require drivers to keep a "reasonable and proper lookout" while driving.
House defeated the bill 48-22.