StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Hands-free Mobile Conversation vs Passenger Chatting - Essay Example

Cite this document
Summary
The essay "Hands-free Mobile Conversation vs Passenger Chatting" focuses on the critical, and multifaceted analysis of whether or not having a hands-free mobile conversation is more or less likely to distract the driver compared to chatting with a passenger…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER96.9% of users find it useful

Extract of sample "Hands-free Mobile Conversation vs Passenger Chatting"

Is Having a Hands Free Mobile Conversation More or Less Distracting Than Chatting to a Passenger in the Car? Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Introduction The number of car crashes as well as accidents has been overwhelming since the invention of mobile phones (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). While manufacturers factored in the effects of hand-held mobile phones and risk on the roads and thus developed hands-free devices, there is still a concern with their use when driving. People love mobile phones and carry it along with them as they undergo their daily activities driving inclusive. There has been a heavy debate that has drawn the interest of policy makers and researchers as well as law enforcement agencies. From a layman’s point of view the two actions are more or less alike (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). This is not the case either as the controlling factor here is the cognitive ability of the brain to handle each. Most people have argued that talking to the passenger as well as having a conversation with a hands free mobile phone has the same risk levels to the driver and the passengers (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). However, recent studies have indicated that the risk is higher when having a hands free conversation than when chatting with a passenger This paper seeks to find out whether or not having a hands free mobile conversation is more or less likely distract the driver compared to chatting with a passenger. Hands Free Vs. Conversation with a Passenger Hands free mobile conversation unlike hand held mobile phone involves the use of mobile phone while not holding it on the hands (Adams, 2014). When driving, one requires high levels of attention. Attention refers to a cognitive as well as behavioral process where an individual selectively concentrates on a distinct piece of information keeping at bay all the other perceivable information (Stevenson, 2010). Distraction on the other hand refers to anything that has the ability to shift the attention of someone from one action to the other and is normally agitating to the mind and emotions as well. Simply put, when attention is divided one ends up being distracted (Gaspar et al., 2014). The performance of the driver is reduced when using a hands free mobile phone (Gaspar et al., 2014). Studies have indicated that the attention of the driver during such circumstances is reduced to a point where the hands free mobile conversation itself is a distraction to the driver. There has been a common argument that accepting hands-free mobile telephone conversation impairs driving capabilities just the same way as conversation with the passenger. However, this is not the case because of a number of reasons (Gaspar et al., 2014). First off, the nature of the two conversations differs in that there are two different modes involved. Mobile conversation is very intense and direct compared to chatting that is casual in nature (Gaspar et al., 2014). This means that high levels of attention and thus cognitive abilities must be attached to hands-free mobile phone conversation (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). Second, passenger-driver conversation can easily be modified to suit the situation (Stevenson, 2010). This is because both participants are in the same conditions and are therefore able to judge visually, and thus suspend the conversation if need arises (Hartzell, 2012). This is not the case with hands-free mobile conversation as the participants have to accord mush attention to the conversation while at the same time concentrate on the road (Hartzell, 2012). The moment a driver engages in a hands-free mobile conversation all their attention is shifted to the conversation (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). The drivers become less attentive, make gap measurements, swerve off their lanes, and look at the vehicles behind them and also the surroundings of the road (Adams, 2014). As such, the drivers end up being disconnected to the traffic conditions. On the contrary, passengers are likely to alert the driver when they sense that the driver is not paying attention (Gaspar et al., 2014). At times when the passenger is also an experienced driver, they are likely to halt the talk so that the traffic rules are adhered to by the driver and initiate them when the conditions are suitable for conversation (Hartzell, 2012). But when the conversation in both scenarios needs in depth concentration, the effects could be the same as there will be a shift of attention (Hartzell, 2012). Even in-car conversation requires attention in that the non-verbal cues also count and face to face conversation may cause distraction to the driver (Hartzell, 2012). A good case is where the passenger is behind the driver and the driver cringes to see their reaction or facial expression (Stevenson, 2010). When the two cases involve emotional conversations, they are likely to elicit the same emotional response such that the driver is distracted (Stevenson, 2010). However, because the driver and the other participant are not in the same place as is the case of in-car conversation, the response may cause high levels of distraction (Adams, 2014). As such, both cases present distraction, with in-car conversation posing fewer risks compared to hands-free communication. Meta-analysis, case-cross over, and epidemiological studies indicate that there is more of cognitive workload when having a conversation over a hands-free mobile device than in-car conversation (National Safety Council, 2012). The brain shifts its focus to the person on the other end thus distracting the driver (Gaspar et al., 2014). Answering the phone slows down the reaction time as well as lowers the response time of the drivers and thus they are highly likely to cause crashes (Stevenson, 2010). The reaction time in this case refers to the attention resources and processing of information (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). On the other hand, movement time that is also a function of reaction time refers to the activation of muscles (Hartzell, 2012). The drivers are therefore least reactive to imperative events thus reducing the performance of the driver (National Safety Council, 2012). This is evident in both, when the driver is in either forms of conversation they are alert to the information over the phone other than the road and are likely to crash. However, there is a high risk of crashing when on a hands-free mobile conversation compared to chatting with a passenger (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). Drivers on phone often miss the small signals such as billboards, banners, and traffic signs because their attention is somewhere (National Safety Council, 2012). Drivers chatting with the passengers are likely to note the traffic signs and act proactively. Research has indicated that when the driver and the passenger are conversing, the dyad cooperate in observing the situation and thus the performance of the driver (Cornell University, 2015). The driver is this case is more situational aware and is able to take the necessary precautions (National Safety Council, 2012). A good example is when the driver breaks in traffic that is moving. Here the passenger is able to inform the driver to take necessary actions. On the other hand, when on phone, the driver will concentrate only on the vehicles ahead of them and thus their levels of alertness are affected. Hands-free mobile conversations cause inattention blindness where the driver becomes insensitive to vision (Cornell University, 2015). The drivers will be looking but not exactly seeing the road scene. Much of the incoming information is sent to the working memory and thus the drivers are unable to act on the information that is filtered from the memory (Cornell University, 2015). Consequently, this form of cognitive distraction causes the drivers to be inattentive and respond slowly (National Safety Council, 2012). Additionally, when chatting with a passenger the driver is less likely to be disconnected from realities. On the other hand, when on the hands-free phone, the driver is disconnected from realities and is more concerned with decoding the information rather than paying attention to details on the road. These facts are supported by various researches by different independent bodies indicating truly that the two have contribution to distraction (National Safety Council, 2012). However, as with the case of hands-free conversation, the levels of distraction are high as indicated by large number of accidents recorded annually. On the other hand, however much a distraction chatting with the passenger is the danger it poses on the attention of the driver is nearly negligible but still counts (National Safety Council, 2012). The latter happens so because passengers and the driver are in one environment. Conclusion There is a connection between the distraction and conversation whether be it hands-free mobile conversation or the casual talk between the driver and the passenger. The only difference comes in the mode and the risk levels that each poses. As evident in the paper, a driver with a passenger is likely to perform better above a driver on hands-free mobile conversation. Among the issues that propagate this are slow response time and increased reaction time, inattention blindness, and lack of concentration; all which are forms of distraction. While the two forms of conversation are similar in terms of cognitive workload, the environment in which each is propagated differs and thus the effect on drivers. Greater disconnection to reality and cognitive distraction is connected with hands-free conversation albeit the message or information that is being passed. When the attention of the driver is divided, they pay little attention to detail such as traffic signs, the road conditions and the weather conditions altogether. It then follows that such drivers are unlikely to observe general traffic rules since their movement time is also affected in the process. References Adams, J. U. (2014, February 10). Talking on a cellphone while driving is risky. But simpler distractions can also cause harm. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/talking-on-a-cellphone-while-driving-is-risky-but-simpler-distractions-can-also-cause-harm/2014/02/07/49675ce8-8cf2-11e3-95dd-36ff657a4dae_story.html Cornell University. (2015). The evidence on hands-free cell phone devices while driving. Retrieved from http://evidencebasedliving.human.cornell.edu/2013/06/17/the-evidence-on-hands-free-cell-phone-devices-while-driving/ Faulks, I. J., & Irwin, J. (2013, November 22). Is it time to ban hands-free mobile phones while driving?. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/is-it-time-to-ban-hands-free-mobile-phones-while-driving-20426 Gaspar, J. G., Street, W. N., Windsor, M. B., Carbonari, R., Kaczmarski, H., & Mathewson, K. E. (2014). Providing views of driving scene to drivers’ conversation partners mitigates cell-phone-related distraction. Psychological Science, 25(12), 2136-2146. Hartzell, D. (2012, February 23). Driver Cell Phone use more Dangerous than Talking to Passenger. Retrieved from http://articles.mcall.com/2012-02-23/news/mc-cellphone-driving-passenger-talk-20120223_1_hands-free-distraction-cellphone-chatter National Safety Council. (2012). Understanding the distracted brain: Why driving while using hands-free cell phones is risky behavior. Retrieved from http://www.nsc.org/DistractedDrivingDocuments/Cognitive-Distraction-White-Paper.pdf Stevenson, M. (2010, July 21). Can you drive safely and talk on a hands-free mobile phone? - Health & Wellbeing. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/health/talkinghealth/factbuster/stories/2010/07/21/2960092.htm Read More

This means that high levels of attention and thus cognitive abilities must be attached to hands-free mobile phone conversation (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). Second, passenger-driver conversation can easily be modified to suit the situation (Stevenson, 2010). This is because both participants are in the same conditions and are therefore able to judge visually, and thus suspend the conversation if need arises (Hartzell, 2012). This is not the case with hands-free mobile conversation as the participants have to accord mush attention to the conversation while at the same time concentrate on the road (Hartzell, 2012).

The moment a driver engages in a hands-free mobile conversation all their attention is shifted to the conversation (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). The drivers become less attentive, make gap measurements, swerve off their lanes, and look at the vehicles behind them and also the surroundings of the road (Adams, 2014). As such, the drivers end up being disconnected to the traffic conditions. On the contrary, passengers are likely to alert the driver when they sense that the driver is not paying attention (Gaspar et al., 2014). At times when the passenger is also an experienced driver, they are likely to halt the talk so that the traffic rules are adhered to by the driver and initiate them when the conditions are suitable for conversation (Hartzell, 2012).

But when the conversation in both scenarios needs in depth concentration, the effects could be the same as there will be a shift of attention (Hartzell, 2012). Even in-car conversation requires attention in that the non-verbal cues also count and face to face conversation may cause distraction to the driver (Hartzell, 2012). A good case is where the passenger is behind the driver and the driver cringes to see their reaction or facial expression (Stevenson, 2010). When the two cases involve emotional conversations, they are likely to elicit the same emotional response such that the driver is distracted (Stevenson, 2010).

However, because the driver and the other participant are not in the same place as is the case of in-car conversation, the response may cause high levels of distraction (Adams, 2014). As such, both cases present distraction, with in-car conversation posing fewer risks compared to hands-free communication. Meta-analysis, case-cross over, and epidemiological studies indicate that there is more of cognitive workload when having a conversation over a hands-free mobile device than in-car conversation (National Safety Council, 2012).

The brain shifts its focus to the person on the other end thus distracting the driver (Gaspar et al., 2014). Answering the phone slows down the reaction time as well as lowers the response time of the drivers and thus they are highly likely to cause crashes (Stevenson, 2010). The reaction time in this case refers to the attention resources and processing of information (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). On the other hand, movement time that is also a function of reaction time refers to the activation of muscles (Hartzell, 2012).

The drivers are therefore least reactive to imperative events thus reducing the performance of the driver (National Safety Council, 2012). This is evident in both, when the driver is in either forms of conversation they are alert to the information over the phone other than the road and are likely to crash. However, there is a high risk of crashing when on a hands-free mobile conversation compared to chatting with a passenger (Faulks & Irwin, 2013). Drivers on phone often miss the small signals such as billboards, banners, and traffic signs because their attention is somewhere (National Safety Council, 2012).

Drivers chatting with the passengers are likely to note the traffic signs and act proactively. Research has indicated that when the driver and the passenger are conversing, the dyad cooperate in observing the situation and thus the performance of the driver (Cornell University, 2015). The driver is this case is more situational aware and is able to take the necessary precautions (National Safety Council, 2012).

Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(Hands-free Mobile Conversation vs Passenger Chatting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words, n.d.)
Hands-free Mobile Conversation vs Passenger Chatting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words. https://studentshare.org/information-technology/2065646-is-having-a-handsfree-mobile-conversation-more-or-less-distracting-than-chatting-to-a-passenger-in
(Hands-Free Mobile Conversation Vs Passenger Chatting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words)
Hands-Free Mobile Conversation Vs Passenger Chatting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words. https://studentshare.org/information-technology/2065646-is-having-a-handsfree-mobile-conversation-more-or-less-distracting-than-chatting-to-a-passenger-in.
“Hands-Free Mobile Conversation Vs Passenger Chatting Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 Words”. https://studentshare.org/information-technology/2065646-is-having-a-handsfree-mobile-conversation-more-or-less-distracting-than-chatting-to-a-passenger-in.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Hands-free Mobile Conversation vs Passenger Chatting

Mobile phone uses & gratification

Exploring how to manage the distractions by creating an application for the mobile that moderately controls the media.... The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) reported in 2002 that there were already about one billion mobile phone users around the world.... hellip; The popularity of mobile phones, however, was attributed to wireless technology as telephone applications empower peoples from all walks of lives to use it anywhere and anytime (Bates et al....
12 Pages (3000 words) Literature review

Using Cell Phones While Driving

The distraction of conversation prevents them from processing what they see.... hellip; mobile phones have been with us for quite awhile, however, it wasn't until the 1990s that third generation cell phones with roaming networks made it possible for us to talk and drive.... 8; this was in the drivers with hands-free sets....
5 Pages (1250 words) Essay

Should Drivers of Automobiles Be Prohibited from Using Cellular Phones

Apart from cell phones, the driver could be distracted by other sources such as speed driving, engaging in a conversation or driving under the influence of alcohol or other drugs that would affect the concentration.... The use of hands-free has still not come under any regulation and the NTSB wants states to also address this issue as it believes that engaging in any form of conversation while driving is a source of distraction that could have a negative impact on the driver's concentration....
6 Pages (1500 words) Essay

Cellular Phone Usage while Driving

Driving distraction has been a focus of study since the early1900's when researchers examined the 'hypnotic effect' of windshield wipers (Curry 2002).... The concept of safety and 'paying attention' then is not a new concept, it has been a focus of research since the use of vehicles began.... hellip; In the multi-media age, people use cell phones and personal hand held computers to stay connected to work, friends and family while they are away from the home and office....
10 Pages (2500 words) Essay

An Airplane Ride from the Vantage Point of a Pensive Passenger

This experience can only be felt by the person being transported, by the passenger.... or the philosophizing passenger, who seats by window of a vehicle and watches the changes of the scenery outside happening in rapid succession, a vehicle provides him something more than just a travel through space and time.... his paper provides a description and analyses of what the airline passenger or experiences as he takes a flight from an airport to another....
13 Pages (3250 words) Essay

Mobile phone dependency

Communication is the process of exchanging facts between two or more parties and is said to be effective when the message been passed fully understood, and the expected action is carried out by the parties involved.... Communication involves encoding of the message in the… When the message is encoded, it is sent through a given medium to the receiver....
24 Pages (6000 words) Research Paper

Usage of Cellular Phones While Driving Increases the Risk of Road Accidents

ellular phone conversation induces driver inattention in which the drivers fail to see objects in their driving environment (Strayer & Drews, 2007).... When the driver becomes involved in the cell phone conversation, attention is withdrawn from processing the information in the driving environment, which is necessary for the safe operation of the motor vehicle.... In fact, even when the driver may be physically looking at an object, the mind does not register it, because the mind is preoccupied with the cellular phone conversation and thus decreasing detection of visible stimuli....
8 Pages (2000 words) Essay

The Ability of a Person to Perceive Changes and Find Objects in Visual Fields

It was also predicted that students allocated in the control group would have a faster reaction time incorrectly detecting changes than for students in the conversation group and the mobile group.... Also, it was hypothesized that students in the mobile group would experience slower reaction times than students in the conversation condition group.... The results in this study supported the hypotheses, which indicated that the flicker tasks performed by the students experience slower reaction times in detecting changes than for the no flicker tasks; the students in the control group demonstrated faster reaction times than for students in the conversation and mobile groups; and lastly, students in the mobile group displayed low accuracy and slower reaction times than for students in the conversation group....
11 Pages (2750 words) Essay
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us