Running Head: EFFECT OF CELL PHONE USE

Effect of Cell Phone Use

Name

Institution
 EFFECTS OF CELLPHONE USE 2

Effect of Cell Phone Use

Apparently, there has been having been an increasing focus on the matter concerning drivers'

inattentiveness as well as the role of their destructions in road safety. The reason behind this increased focus is

mainly as a result of new in-vehicle technologies such as advanced drivers support system and the entertainment

system, whose fame is on the rise, nonetheless whose implementation is as well accompanied by the looming fear

of their destructions ability and related impacts on the road safety (Stutts et al., 2005). Even though people are

continually reminded of paying full attention to driving, most people are always involved in various multitasking

activities while driving. In fact, data from 2000 census shows that most drivers spend about 25.5 minutes every

day travelling to work, and they have the tendency of trying to make the time devoted to the road worthwhile by

making phone calls (Stutts et al., 2005). Unfortunately, due to the inherent nature of human being of having a

limited capacity of attention-getting involved in this kind of multitasking activities leads to diverting the attention

of human being from the primary task of driving.

Carpenter, C. S., & Nguyen, H. V. (2015). Effects of a Driver Cellphone Ban on Overall, Handheld, and Hands‐Free

Cellphone Use While Driving: New Evidence from Canada. Health Economics, 24(11), 1452-1467.

These authors highlight how destruction has appeared to be a very significant contributor accident on the road

as well as fatalities. Moreover, Carpenter & Nguyen (2015) say that texting is the most important form of

destruction on the road which is increasing tremendously. This article articulates that the disruptions contributed

by handheld and hands-free cell phones are not considerably different. The reports says that these are in relation

to the study which was carried out by Carpenter,& Nguyen(2015) which suggests that the laws which limit the use

of handheld cell phones while permit the use of hands-free are not likely to control or eliminate accidents that are

connected to the use of cell phone while behind the wheels. Carpenter & Nguyen (2015) says that people presume

that texting is the most generators of accidents, however comparable; both are equal about the manner in which

they contribute accidents since all results in the destruction of drivers' attention. However, according to Carpenter

& Nguyen (2015) who compared handheld with hand free and discovered that the former is likely to be answered

very fast, can be dialled faster and is not prone to frequent dialling errors compared to the latter.
 EFFECTS OF CELLPHONE USE 3

Stutts, J., Feaganes, J., Reinfurt, D., Rodgman, E., Hamlett, C., Gish, K., & Staplin, L. (2005). Driver's exposure to

distractions in their natural driving environment. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(6), 1093-1101.

This article plays a greater role in this research since it says that there are some many traditional sources which

act as destructors to drivers. They include eating, drinking, listening to music talking to a passenger, lighting a

cigarette. The author says that says among these, applying makeup and attending to kids while driving by women

are the highest contributors to accidents by women drivers. Thus, the article suggests that as much as the

traditional distracters cause accident, cell phone use is the leading factor in accidents compared to the latter.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during

simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9(1), 23.

Just as the objective f this research, the author of this article was determined to find out the relative implements

that are connected to conversing while behind the wheel. Hence, the author says that the relative risk that getting

involved in the traffic accident is just similar to the peril associated with being behind the will driving while blood

alcohol level is above the legal limit.

This article is significant for this research since it highlights how drunk drivers perform in different ways from as

base given the baseline and that the driving profiles of these two scenarios are entirely different. It says that the

drivers that use cell phones show a delay about their response to the cell phone in the process of driving is likely to

be involved in accidents. Nonetheless, drivers that are under the influence of alcohol exhibit more insistent driving

style, by being closer to the vehicle that appears to be in front of them, calling for the backing with the gear force.

About traffic regulations, the article postulates that the impairment linked with the cell phone could just be as

significant as those that are commonly associated with intoxicated drivers.

Drews, F. A., Pasupathi, M., & Strayer, D. L. (2008). Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving.

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(4), 392.

 EFFECTS OF CELLPHONE USE 4

Moreover, as depicted in the article, cell phone drivers shows slower reaction, and they take the longer time to

recover the speed lost in the event of braking hence get involved in more accidents compared to their

counterparts. Drews, Pasupathi & Strayer, (2008) say that in the case of cell phone drivers, the accident seems to

be attributed by a diversion of the attention from the course of the information responsible for the secure

operation of the vehicle. This attention associated deficit take place while the driver is on the phone and

dissipating very fast while when the attention is back to the driver. Hence, by contrast, the impacts of alcohol

continue for an extended period are very systematic, thus results in chronic impalement.

Ferguson, S. A. (2003). Other high-risk factors for young drivers—how graduated licensing does, doesn't, or could

address them. Journal of safety research, 34(1), 71-77.

This article points out that the potential impairment cell phone use while driving vary about age. It points out

that the younger people, of age 18 to 35 tend to use the phone more while driving hence are more prone to

accidents. Comparably, the older, generation of age 45 and above tend to observe the traffic safety rules and do

not use a cell phone while driving as much as their counterparts do. Ferguson (2003) says that the destructive

impacts of mobile phones use depend on the transitory context of driving. Phone use by youths while driving does

not appear to be a problem to them, however, the process of using the cell phone while driving and escape danger

depends on the cognitive maturity. Therefore, Ferguson (2003) says that adults and mature people tend to use the

cell phone while driving and escape danger at the same time due to their cognitive maturity.

To conclude, accidents which result from the use of cell phone while driving are more compared to accidents

caused by other factors on our roads. Hence, traffic rules which are very strict on the use of mobile phones while

driving should be enacted and implemented as fast as possible.

References
 EFFECTS OF CELLPHONE USE 5

Carpenter, C. S., & Nguyen, H. V. (2015). Effects of a Driver Cellphone Ban on Overall, Handheld, and Hands‐

Free Cellphone Use While Driving: New Evidence from Canada. Health economics, 24(11), 1452-

1467

Drews, F. A., Pasupathi, M., & Strayer, D. L. (2008). Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving.

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(4), 392.

Ferguson, S. A. (2003). Other high-risk factors for young drivers—how graduated licensing does, doesn't, or could

address them. Journal of safety research, 34(1), 71-77.

Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during

simulated driving. Journal of experimental psychology: Applied, 9(1), 23.

Stutts, J., Feaganes, J., Reinfurt, D., Rodgman, E., Hamlett, C., Gish, K., & Staplin, L. (2005). Driver's exposure to

distractions in their natural driving environment. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(6), 1093-1101.