In 1930, when cars first started coming equipped with radios, some states threatened to ban the receivers because they could be distracting to drivers. One news report from the era quoted an official from the Radio Manufacturers Association dismissing those claims, saying it wouldn’t be logical, anyway, for a motorist to use a radio unless traffic conditions permit.
That sounds naïve and a bit quaint today, when the radio is an accepted part of the dashboard and is used regardless of conditions. Even so, a recent study by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration found that adjusting the radio while driving increases the odds of an accident by 0.50.
If you have driven a late-model car recently, you probably couldn’t help noticing that the number of dashboard gadgets, from Bluetooth cellphone interfaces to onboard navigation systems, is proliferating. So, not coincidentally, are the odds of having an accident caused by distracted driving.
A new study by University of Utah researchers, conducted for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, found that many of these new gadgets take motorists’ eyes off the road too long to be considered safe. The worst of these are navigation systems, which took drivers participating in the study an average of 40 seconds to program.
Considering the NHTSA has estimated that the risk of an accident doubles for every two seconds a driver’s eyes are diverted from the road, this presents an unacceptable risk to public safety.
What good is an onboard navigation system when using it makes it hard to keep the car on the road?
Texting was found to be the second-most distracting activity, which should come as no surprise. State law already bans texting and driving in Utah, but that hasn’t kept many people from doing so.
The researchers compared the use of high-demand dashboard gadgets to mentally balancing a checkbook while driving. Interestingly, the research also found considerable differences in the amount of work needed to use in-dash systems depending on the make and model of the car.
This study will serve a useful public purpose if car manufacturers use it to design systems that are less distracting to use. Some features should not be available while the car is in motion. For instance, drivers should be forced to safely park somewhere before programming navigation — a minor inconvenience compared to the dangers of doing so on the fly.
Since the 1930s, onboard systems have been a mixed blessing. Back in the day, radio manufacturers argued that being able to listen while driving kept people more awake and attentive on long trips. Also, radio reports could alert them to approaching weather and traffic conditions.
By the same token, navigation systems may help people safely arrive at destinations. Voice-activated phones can help them communicate in emergencies. All such things should be used wisely and safely, however.
We prefer to see government refrain from intervening in this matter. Laws specifically governing types of onboard systems could stifle innovation. Instead, we appeal to drivers, all of whom should know better than to drive distract, and to manufacturers, who ought to see the marketing potential of offering features designed for safety as well as convenience.