Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun May 05, 2024 03:33

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:41 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
Article from the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/scie ... sking.html

The Telegraph wrote:
Serial multitaskers end juggling two activities at once not because they are good at it but because they are easily distracted and cannot concentrate on the job at hand, researchers said.

Conversely, the people who are the most adept at multitasking are the least likely to do so because they are better at focusing on doing one thing at a time.

The study also found that 70 per cent of people believe they are better than average at multitasking, which is statistically impossible.

Prof David Strayer, senior author of the study, said: "The people who are most likely to multitask harbour the illusion they are better than average at it, when in fact they are no better than average and often worse."

The researchers, from the University of Utah, subjected 310 volunteers to tests and questionnaires designed to measure their actual multitasking ability against their imagined multitasking ability.
Related Articles

Proven: men worst multitaskers
17 Jul 2010

Scientists discover why multitasking is so difficult
16 Apr 2010

They also recorded how likely the participants were to use their mobile phone while driving or use a wide array of electronic media, and personality traits like impulsivity.

People who scored highly on the multitasking test tended not to multitask as much as others because they were better at focusing on completing one job at a time, results showed.

In contrast those who scored poorly at multitasking were more likely to end up doing so because they were more impulsive and easily distracted, and had an inflated sense of their ability to carry out two jobs at once.

"If you have people multitasking a lot, you might come to the conclusion that they are good at multitasking. In fact, the more likely they are to do it, the more likely they are to be bad at it," Prof Strayer said.

"The people who multitask the most tend to be impulsive, sensation-seeking, overconfident of their multitasking abilities, and they tend to be less capable of multitasking."

Overestimating one's own capacity to perform multiple jobs at once could lead to dangerous consequences, the researchers warned.

Prof David Sanbonmatsu, who co-wrote the paper published in the Public Library of Science Journal, said: "What is alarming is that people who talk on cell phones while driving tend to be the people least able to multitask well."



Interesting that they specifically mention using a mobile and driving as being incompatible.

So basically if you find yourself multi tasking a lot. Stop. It's ineffective anyway.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 17:30 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
As Mole recently said, it may not be possible, (if not very unlikely), to devote 100% to everything and certainly not for prolonged periods. But, and here’s my logic, let’s say your concentration diminishes to say 80%, it still has to be better to devote that 80% to one important task rather than divide it between two or more?

Actually, that’s the very definition of a distraction I would have thought and distractions are not good. Not unless you’re in a jungle making love and you catch a lion out the corner of your eye. :o

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 19:40 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
I wish for all these research trials they specified ALL the criteria they start with !
After all 'what is' multi-tasking.
How do you 'measure' a successful task accomplished and one that is less than 'perfect', satisfactory achieved or a 'failure to achieve ?

I can walk along a road observe all the things around me maybe even film some video, I could also be sucking on a sweet, and chat to a friend. Might even be able to listen to a radio show too while I was at it.
That is a lot of things! All of which could be achieved in a satisfactory & successful manner.
I might not win any prizes for my sucking sweet chit-chat and slightly wobbly camera control but it could all happen and would 'work'.

They have just said in so many words. No one can ever multi-task ! Really? So from a mere 340 volunteer (already a bias group) people, out of a World population of 6,973,738,433 they can now state that not a single person can multi-task ! ???
That is ridiculous and unbelievable. How are women supposed to be better than men? They think everyone is incapable ! :scratchchin:

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 20:53 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Come to think of it, I guess you could say we are multitasking as we drive anyway because driving isn't one task but a series of them. We're steering in the right direction while pressing any one, (or two), of three pedals while changing gear while using the indicators while pressing a button or two and, hopefully, being very observant.

I still say, however, if your brain has drifted down to 80% and you have several tasks going on I, for one, still wouldn't add to them unnecessarily.

I agree these surveys leave a lot to be desired Claire. It's just like the U-turns we see in health, for example. I could mention many but one which I found out about most recently was when I went to the G.P to have my cholesterol level checked.

My friend was told his was too high, at a figure of 8. Mine was the same, by coincidence, yet I had the ok because its now about the relative level of bad verses good cholesterol; not just whether the bad one is high. My friend said that wasn't mentioned at all to him and was told "It's too high and needs to be lower".

Makes you wonder just who and what you can believe these days? :doh:

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 21:00 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9263
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
To my mind this is not a very scientific study ( like a lot of things intended to portray "bad " driving) .
If it's a scientific study , where are the definitions, assumptions , research and sources. All we have is a conclusion ,with little or no truth .
Perhaps Dom should start a new series "Cowboy surveys"

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 02:18 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
One would assume they'd use tasks where you can measure success eg correct answers to questions. Carrying out multiple automatic tasks is going to give completely different results and not what they're going to be testing. They'll be testing tasks that require full attention and the effect of splitting that attention between tasks that require full attention not between automatic tasks like walking. That study in the telegraph today isn't one of the better ones but there seem to be a few that have come to broadly similar conclusions with different methodologies and brain theories etc.

http://mashable.com/2012/08/13/multitas ... fographic/

http://lifehacker.com/5922453/what-mult ... our-brains

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2009/augu ... 82409.html

It's an interesting point the last study makes about filtering information. The heavy multi taskers were worse at filtering 'irrelevant' information but that begs the question in driving, what is irrelevant?

Lack of concentration/distraction are large factors in accident causation so it seems pertinent to find out which type of distraction/lack of concentration associated with multi tasking behaviour is detrimental and which is actually of benefit or whether they just cancel each other out somehow and it makes no difference.

The utah study also suggested again that driving and cell phones don't mix and that using a phone creates inattention blindness so someone using a phone doesn't actually see what they miss.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j& ... 2k&cad=rja

Quote:
In one such study, we observed over 1700 drivers as they approached a residential intersection with four-way stop signs. We deter- mined through observation whether the drivers were or were not using their cell phone as they approached the intersection and whether they came to a complete stop (as required by law) before proceeding through the intersection.1 The resulting data are presented in Table 1.
For drivers not using a cell phone, the majority stopped in accordance with traffic laws. By contrast, for the drivers who were observed talking on their cell phone as they approached the intersection, the majority failed to stop in accordance with traffic laws.


Seems to me that using a handheld phone causes an issue if users are just driving through stop signs. It would be interesting to see what the levels of violations of the stop signs were with drivers talking to passengers, using handsfree devices etc were and whether it is just a problem peculiar to physically holding a phone.

I think they point they are trying to make is that with safety critical activity like driving the multi tasking can cause a problem. If you have a wobbly video or wobbly walk there is little consequence. If you see that child step out half a second later because you were mentally occupied with something else, it is. It's also whether the lizard brain that is peculiar to driving snaps you out of the 'distracted' a lot faster than with artificial activities.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 03:02 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
On the face of it I'm inclined to agree with the research. But tbh the main thrust to my objection of them being used in cars is simply based on the effect I have personally seen on driving. I can't and won't claim I've seen an accident, yet, but I have seen and experienced near misses - such things as :-

1) Unintentionally wandering from lane; including clipping the curb.
2) Indicator left flashing, on motorway for minutes at a time, although they're not changing lanes. (Lost count of that one).
3) last second panick breaking! :shock:
4) Haven't noticed all the vehicles in front move off from a traffic jam. (Too busy texting)

Anyway, ya know what I think about it all; no point me raking it up :wink:

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:28 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
I've seen the same thing too. I can't see how handsfree can be much safer either as you can still end up drawn into potentially complicated or argumentative conversations which will cause a distraction.

Everyone has followed a car with an arguing couple in it and seen it all over the road. I don't see how if the same people were arguing via the phone the results would be much different!

I don't know how robust handsfree users are in cutting off/ignoring arguing people/difficult subjects and not being affected by it either. I suspect the subject of the conversation would have a lot of bearing on how distracting it was found. I also wonder whether if the driver initiates the phone call whether that would be less distracting than responding to one?

I need to find some research on it...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 13:48 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
But that, is precisely why I have a problem with the "binary" argument about it either being "safe" or "dangerous". In just the same way as there is a world of difference between doing 71MPH on a dry empty motorway and doing 69 on a foggy, frozen densely-trafficked motorway, so there is a world of difference between the mobile conversation (hands-free or otherwise) along the lines of "I'll be home for tea about 7.00" and the one that goes "...what do you mean I'm sacked and you're running off with my wife?!" conversation!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 17:04 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Well yes, I do agree with you Mole and understand how it’s not purely a black & white situation. But my point is the same as before. I’ve never known any urgent or vital conversation or text which couldn’t wait until I’m not driving or which, if I’m really that desperate and curious, couldn’t wait until I can pull over somewhere safe. (And I’ve had some pretty bad and important news via texts and calls, but nothing which I couldn’t pick up later, as in fact I did :( )

So I’d still rather have my spare hand available for matters related to driving when I’m driving, like gear changing, holding the wheel, pulling the visor down in the sun, altering the vents on the windscreen etc. These tasks are all subsets of the overall driving mission, the mobile isn’t.

I’d call it what’s known as ‘best practice’; in the same way I wouldn’t want to be operated on by a surgeon who thinks he can also listen to the radio and work just as well on my hernia. I’d rather he saved his multitasking for when he’s making a cake - and it wouldn't make any difference to my pain if I find out in the next lay-by that my wife has been a swinger behind my back after our 30 years of marriage, as opposed to ten minutes earlier when I'm driving. :wink:

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 00:23 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
When Mrs M was expecting our first sprog, it ended up being a caesarean, and the first thing the obstetrician asked was what music we fancied listening to on the radio!

On Monday I had to go to Glasgow and it was quite snowy. It's a trip I've made dozens of times but I was absolutely whacked when I got back that night because I'd had to concentrate so much harder. At the time, it struck me that I couldn't possibly have been devoting 100% concentration to that trip all the other times - else I wouldn't have had any "extra" to give it on this occasion! I then started wondering how on earth, in fact, any of us know what 100% concentration feels like? It seems a very "elastic" concept, to be honest. Apparently my mouth hangs open and I sometimes dribble a bit when trying to play the guitar. :oops: so I guess that must be pretty close to 100%, in which case, heaven help me when I'm driving!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 01:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
There is also the problem that when you start to observe and measure things, (often for the 'first time') we are at risk of thinking all sorts of conclusions when in fact all we have done is observed something that many successfully achieve. So to properly understand all the aspects can take more time and observations before proper conclusions can truly be drawn and understood.
Hence why doctors think along difference lines and hence why many areas of Health & Safety change regularly.

Road Safety is no different and this is part of my point. Just observing something doesn't mean that it is now fully and properly researched, and so if anyone ever totally concludes that 'that' research must be the whole truth is rare. It may draw certain attention to certain areas or find certain apparent truths, but usually years later it all becomes better understood and other aspects have developed to show another possible conclusion etc.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 02:17 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
Another point is that we can all be distracted (putting aside the mobile etc argument for the sec) ... even if we are not 'doing' any of the extra things that are not strictly driving / riding.
It's more than about the precision of what we are doing, but what we are thinking about and level of concentration - as Mole says.
I too have had long runs in the snow but the snow is white and that in itself is tiring on the eyes and puts a strain on them. That causes a level of tiredness. With few stops available in snow driving often it is harder to take the breaks one might otherwise chose to have.
I think the level of concentration has to be measurable, but it has to be a range as we are all different and especially with driving there seem to be a host of abilities and so too with concentration levels.
A concentration level of 'not crashing' has to be the minimum before 'crashing' has to be the worst fail ?
So then the top level of concentration has to be one who is like a ghost on the road, they might pass you by but they do so efficiently, effectively and with you barely noticing them, in other words with full attention and sufficient ability.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.025s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]