Safe Speed Forums

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

The assumption that ability to drive safely is measureable in terms of reaction time is pretty absurd isn't it?

Two of the big problems with alcohol are lack of caution and lack of attention. I bet you can't say that about dyslexics.

When are we going to read about road safety research that's properly thought through?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I didn't think it was at all convincing either.

A lot of people drive (whether legally or illegally) without being able to read.

I don't think this makes them intrinsically unsafe.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Dyslexics typically have better spatial awareness and memory.

At the end of the day experienced drivers and riders are far less likely to pass the current hazard perception test than new drivers. Yet we know that experienced drivers are far less likely to have an hazard perception accidents.

I think the key word in this boll** is 'simulated'

secondly we'd have to have a national dyslexic test to work out who was dyslexic (noting that it isn't a switch the are levels)

thirdly, surely if a dyslexic has passed the 2 - 3 levels of testing required to obtain a licence, then they qualified to drive.

Forthly, perhaps the flaw is in the design of road signs rather than the mind of the dyslexic.

"The control group took an average of around 0.6 seconds to respond to the signals. Those with dyslexia took on average 0.13 seconds".

Now I'm no proff of maths, but isn't 0.13 (just over 1/10th) seconds faster than 0.6 (more than 1/2)?

17 people is not a study - even the scamerati ask more than 17 people when they do their studies.

It's badly quoted in the above report. The 'study' showed the allegedly dyslexic subjects took on average 0.13-0.19 seconds longer to react.

Still proves no causal link between being dyslexic and being a more dangerous driver. The fact that this study is being reported at all is appalling.

The unasked question seems to be how many people are being prosecuted for drunk driving when they are more functionally capable than other sober drivers?

_________________
Alan Wilkinson (at http://www.fastandsafe.org)

There are different degrees of dyslexia in any case . The problem is with the written word in any case. They'd probaby struggle to read a sign which read "School" and would see this word with letters written upside down, as mirror image, backwards, jumbled, " tnorf ot kcab" ie (loohcs) - but would recognise the shap of the triangle, amber lights and the school kids. In fact - they would probably read the road signs and would understand the meaning as this is how it usually appears to them.

As for the hazard perception test - we are used to dealing with the hazard whilst at control of the vehicle and seeing an image on a computer screen is not the same thing as actually controlling and reacting - which most of us expereinced old fogies would do instinctively as reasoned folks in any case. Like anything else - reacting to a "virtual hazard" is a learned skill which improves the more you do.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

"It's not what you are, it's what you do".

If a dyslexic has taken a driving test and demonstrated the required level of proficiency in order to obtain a driving licence then that's it as far as I'm concerned.

If anyone on the road (dyslexic or not) is inherently incapable of driving to the required standard of proficency yet has passed the test, then that would seem to demonstrate a shortcoming of the testing system first and foremost.

Is this part of a bigger hidden agenda? It is plain common sense to us that the best measure of people's safety is simple observation of how they drive, but of course this can only really be judged by another human, and specifically one with a relatively high degree of driver training themselves.

But if we can all be conned into thinking that it is possible to judge people's safety in terms of measurements of their various potential abilities / disabilities, then it naturally follows that an automated system of metrics can determine who is safe and who isn't.

This is of course the exact process by which we ended up saddled with the speed camera...

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Yep, saw this mentioned here too:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php? ... adid=52265

As pointed out, 17 is a pathetic sample size, and even if there is a correlation, dyslexia may not be the cause of the slower reaction. The two could have a common cause.