The research questions discussed in the article is the effects of hand-free cellphone conversation on simulated driving. The significant findings related to the problem are that cellphone conversations impair driving. The conversation induces a form of inattention blindness whereby the driver becomes unable to see objects within the driving environment. Driving while having a conversation leads to the need for the driver to multitask while driving without knowing. The experiment's collected data indicated that cellphone conversations while driving places particular demands against the driver that are different from other audio, verbal, and vocal tasks that they indulge in while driving. Drivers often fail to see and memorize the objects they gaze at while driving and conversing on a cellphone. This occurs as a result of the diverted attention to the cellphone conversation while driving.
The importance of the issue and the scientific evidence presented by the article is how driving while concentrating on a cell phone conversation can easily block and interfere with the brain's process to process information within the driving environment. This occurs due to the central processing bottleneck, which forces a variety of information processing of the two sources of information, including the required information to enhance safety in driving and the conversation conducted through the cell phone. The article highlights that cell phone conversation cannot be considered as parsing incompatible driving ways. Additionally, the cell phone conversation can hardly be broken into arbitrary units. It is still comprised of several turns that engage the central processing bottleneck over long periods. For instance, when an individual pauses in the middle of a conversation for a long time, the action interferes with the flow of information. Taking turns in a conversation is always asynchronous with the processing demands involved in driving. However, the other in-vehicle audio instruments such as the radio do not interfere with driving as much as the cellphones do. When it comes to in-vehicle conversations, there is hardly any interference with the driving process. A driver has a more remarkable ability to synchronize such discussions with the driving process demands, unlike when holding a phone conversation (Strayer & Drews, 2007).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The research discussed in the article relates to society at large. It provides the essential finding bout how driving while talking over the cellphone interferes with the brain's ability to process the information found in the surrounding environment. Most people who drive while holding such conversations do not know the dangers associated with the whole process. The demands that a cell phone conversation puts on the driver make it impossible for them to make critical decisions in driving. Such instances can lead to accidents due to the brain's inability to multitask. It is challenging for a driver to identify and navigate hazards on the road while speaking on a cellphone, making such drivers more likely to get involved in an accident. The information can help drivers understand that they cannot make real-time adjustments based on traffic demands when holding cellphone conversations (Strayer & Drews, 2007).
The issues and scientific evidence provided in the article indicate the topics discussed in the lecture. The study provides evidence on the dangers of driving and holding a cellphone conversation. Drivers who try to multitask are most likely to cause accidents as they are not aware of the surrounding environment when speaking over the phone. Such actions can easily lead to accidents resulting from the lack of concentrating fully on the surrounding environment. The case highlights the dangers of driving while speaking on the phone, and the article provides adequate evidence through experiments of the disruption caused to the brain when multitasking.
Reference
Strayer, D. L., & Drews, F. A. (2007). Cell-phone–induced driver distraction. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 16 (3), 128-131.
