Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Communications Transportation

Siri's Creator Challenges Texting-While-Driving Study 262

waderoush writes "A rash of media reports last week, reporting on a study released by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute, implied that using voice-to-text apps like Siri or Vlingo while driving is no safer than manual texting. But Adam Cheyer, the co-inventor of Siri, says journalists took the wrong message from the study, which didn't test Siri or Vlingo in the recommended hands-free, eyes-free mode. In the study, researchers asked subjects to drive a closed course while they held an iPhone or Android phone in one hand, spoke messages into Siri or Vlingo, proofread the messages visually, and pressed buttons to send the messages. Under these conditions, driver response times were delayed by nearly a factor of two, the researchers found. 'Of course your driving performance is going to be degraded if you're reading screens and pushing buttons,' says Cheyer, who joined Apple in 2010 as part of the Siri acquisition and left the company two years later. To study whether voice-to-text apps are really safer than manual texting, he says, the Texas researchers should have tested Siri and Vlingo in car mode, where a Bluetooth headset or speakers are used to minimize visual and manual interaction. 'The study seems to have misunderstood how Siri was designed to be used,' Cheyer says. 'I don't think that there is any evidence that shows that if Siri and other systems are used properly in eyes-free mode, they are 'just as risky as texting.''"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Siri's Creator Challenges Texting-While-Driving Study

Comments Filter:
  • by bloodhawk ( 813939 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:21PM (#43595687)
    I thought it has been long established through research that even a hands free cradle talking on the phone is a dangerous distraction while driving, Can't see how this can be less of a distraction than that even if it is better than manual texting. People have enough accidents without additional distractions.
  • Distraction. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MrL0G1C ( 867445 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:22PM (#43595701) Journal

    When you're driving you should be concentrating on driving, that's it, anything else can lead to an accident because your mind is not on the task at hand.

    So, no, you shouldn't be pissing about sending texts, if you don't like it, get a bus/train where you can text to your hearts delight.

    If you're so f**kin important that you need to text, then get a chauffeur.

  • Pros AND Cons (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ganjadude ( 952775 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:22PM (#43595703) Homepage
    they both exist. I can only speak for myself and people I know who have used voice commands while driving, however EVERYONE, myself included, will speak to their phone for the text, HOWEVER we all double check the msg before hitting send. I think that is where the issue lies. we simply dont trust siri or google voice or other text to type things to be 100% yet. and until that can be true (if it can ever be) it will never be as safe as simply driving and not doing other things.
  • by admdrew ( 782761 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:22PM (#43595705) Homepage
    I don't really agree with this guy, based on how texting is currently done. Most of us like reading their texts (or proofreading speech-to-texts), and few of us use text-to-speech, so the "eyes free" situation really isn't that common. I *really* don't think that using "Siri is just as risky as texting" is misleading at all, in our current accepted usage.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:26PM (#43595751)

    If the study tested Siri the way Siri is normally used, then how Siri was designed to be used is irrelevant.

  • Co-inventor? WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by stanlyb ( 1839382 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:28PM (#43595767)
    If you did invent 50% of the app, you could claim the "co-invent" title, but if it is about 0.0000000....1%, are you a thief or "co"-inventor?
  • Re:Distraction. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:32PM (#43595811)

    Sure, gramps. So you never listen to the radio, eat/drink, talk to any passengers, look at anything but the road, etc? Riiiight.

  • by prelelat ( 201821 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:35PM (#43595823)

    Yes and talking to someone in the car is distracting too. So is having kids kicking you in the back of the seat, changing radio stations. Billboards with flashy lights are distracting or they wouldn't have them. Oh I'm sure I'm missing a few more things.

    My point is, is that there are a ton of distracting things going on around us as we barrel down the road. The question is, is one more safe than the other. It would be logical that if you can speak to the device instead of type it would be safer. Having your head down and hand off the wheel or if your driving a standard no hand on the wheel or some form of wtf. Having these studies are important for trying to understand how safe something is so we can judge if it's within an acceptable margin. I think texting manually falls into being unsafe and I don't want to share the road with people that are doing it.

    It would appear speaking into Siri or other applications that do speech to text hasn't been studied enough to make a final decision, but I think it's going to end up OK. This study is a piece of garbage though and falls into bad research, as the software wasn't used as intended in the car.

  • by icebike ( 68054 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:50PM (#43595937)

    Yes and talking to someone in the car is distracting too.

    Actually, its not that distracting.

    Other people in the car are aware of traffic conditions, they actually stop talking, they even point out dangerous situations (even fi from the back seat). Talking to a person in the passenger seat may actually be beneficial to driver safety.

    Having a conversation on the phone, that requires concentration, can certainly be distracting, but even the simplest text message is far more distracting. All of the tests of this kind of stuff were done asking people to solve simple math problems or word games on the phone while driving over a challenging course in an unfamiliar vehicle.

    Yaking on the bluetooth about nothing in particular while stuck in stop and go traffic simply isn't that dangerous as long as its hands free. The studies suggesting talking on the phone (hands free) is dangerous simply isn't born out by accident statistics. Texting while driving is born out by accident statistics.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:52PM (#43595957)

    It would appear speaking into Siri or other applications that do speech to text hasn't been studied enough to make a final decision, but I think it's going to end up OK. This study is a piece of garbage though and falls into bad research, as the software wasn't used as intended in the car.

    The only valid study would evaluate the software being used as it is typically used, regardless of the manufacturers intent.

  • by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:57PM (#43596013)
    Merely having a conversation with someone impacts your driving; passengers tend to be aware of circumstances like intersections, onramps, cyclists, etc - but people on the other end of your call can't be. It's why Ray Lahood and NHTSA wanted cell phone calls by drivers to end, period. Then there's the issue of control of the car; regardless of whether or not you're "eyes free", if you're holding something in you hand, you're not able to control your vehicle as well as you can with two hands on the wheel. I attended a driving handling clinic (which was insanely fun) where they had you do a slalom course normally, and then do it holding a water bottle to the side of your head; the results speak for themselves.
  • Re:Distraction. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by icebike ( 68054 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @06:59PM (#43596031)

    People un-used to city traffic probably DO have to concentrate 100% on driving.

    However this is not the norm for most people. You can drive down the freeway in light to moderate traffic and not have much of your conscious brain involved at all. You can arrive at your destination and not recall a single thing about the trip.

    In anything but rush hour traffic or high density traffic on a crowded freeway, driving simply isn't that difficult. If it was, we wouldn't hand out driving licenses to anyone with a pulse. Because an awfully large percentage of people just don't have 100% to devote to the task.

    There are times when everyone has to pay attention. But the vast majority of my driving, and probably most people's driving, can be managed almost automatically, leaving plenty of time to listen to the radio, or the person on the next seat, or the person on the bluetooth.

    Anyone who claims you have to devote 100% of your faculties to driving probably doesn't drive much.

  • by blackraven14250 ( 902843 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @07:03PM (#43596067)
    It depends on the person talking too. 2 kids, or 2 individuals that have never driven, are likely to not be paying the kind of attention needed to give that feedback, while 2 experienced drivers will.
  • Re:Distraction. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by shawn(at)fsu ( 447153 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @07:31PM (#43596267) Homepage

    I'll agree that most of a trip you feel like you're on autopilot the problem arises when something unexpected happens. If you have your eyes off the road when that unexpected happens you're a lot worse off than had you been paying attention. So yeah if you get to your destination safely then you can look back and say man that didn't take any conscious effort at all but that's not why you need to pay attention. You need to be on your toes for when something novel or out of the ordinary happens.

  • by AaronLS ( 1804210 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @09:10PM (#43596855)

    " letting Texas A&M Transportation Institute do a study"

    What do you mean "letting"?

    Are you implying that our government should be in the business of banning universities from conducting experiments and studies?

    What does the FCC post have to do with a transportation study?

    That post is usually hand picked to be someone that will represent the elected president's agenda. For example, Bush picked Colin Powel's son as his FCC chairman, because of course they wanted hands off regulation, which is a bit ironic because that's what FCC does. Pretty much the Ron Swanson of FCC.

    Stop trying so hard. If you squint your eyes hard enough you will see a conspiracy in anything.

  • by fnj ( 64210 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @11:10PM (#43597487)

    The only valid study would evaluate the software being used as it is typically used, regardless of the manufacturers intent.

    No, that is complete bullshit. The only test whose results are of any interest at all would be a test which evaluates using the function PROPERLY, not in any onviouslly highly dangerous wrong manner. You could test the safety of some bird brain trying to drive his cars with his knees while woking on a rubik's cube, too, but that would be STUPID.

    Texting while driving by typing manually and/or using a screen to verify results is obviously INHERENTLY highly dangerous. On the other hand, using voice exclusively to do the job is no different than talking to somebody inside the car or hands-free talking to a voice on a phone.

    Now, the matter of getting some nut behind the wheel to use the proper and safe function in a proper and safe manner is another matter altogether. You could try to remove all driving distractions one by one, by taking out the builtin radio, outlawing the use of any radios or navigation devices or phones by the driver, putting soundproof walls between the driver and all occupants, trying to find some scientific method to suppress sexual thoughts when the driver sees someone attractive outside, or someone in the passenger seat is adjusting their bra, etc, etc - endlessly. I personally favor education instead. I know showing people how to live safely and relying on them to take safety seriously doesn't appeal to all mindsets.

    I LIKE your subject line. I wish your message reflected it.

  • Re:Distraction. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @11:12PM (#43597497) Homepage Journal

    You are not supposed to be looking out at infinity when you are driving.

    Um, yes you are. Infinity, as far as the human eye is concerned, is anything beyond about 20 feet, so except when you're looking in your mirrors (which you really don't need to do constantly, just occasionally), your eyes are almost always going to be at infinity while driving. Anything short of that means you're following too close behind the car in front of you.

    The true "ludditism" is the refusal to recognize that the more that distracted driving is studied, the more it is clear that thinking about anything other than driving is a hazard. Distraction by radio is bad enough as it is.

    First, that's the opposite of ludditism, which means rejection of technology, not rejection of scientific knowledge. Second, you can have my car radio when you pry it with a crowbar from my cold, dead dashboard. You can't eliminate all distractions, and it is stupid to try.

    The goal of any driving-related safety improvements should be to minimize the distraction without being so invasive that people work around whatever solution you put in place. Passing laws against texting causes people to hide their phones while they text, resulting in them looking down even farther from the road, and thus driving even more dangerously. Driving modes that prevent visually reviewing your text messages don't help either, because most people don't want to send out text messages that make them look functionally illiterate, as is often the case with voice dictation under even the best conditions (which a noisy automobile ain't). Using HUDs, by contrast, can dramatically decrease the risk of sending a single text message, mitigating it so much that for the sane 99.9% of drivers who would use such things fairly infrequently, the additional risk of texting in that manner is likely to be lost in the statistical noise.

    But of course, the best choice of all is to get the meatbag out from behind the wheel in the first place. That not only eliminates all risk from distractions, but also eliminates all risk from fatigue, illness, sudden cardiac arrest, seizures, sweat getting in your eyes, and probably hundreds of other risk factors.

  • by SkimTony ( 245337 ) on Tuesday April 30, 2013 @11:25PM (#43597553)

    I don't think the study was garbage, but I don't think it was all that helpful. They should've tested the recommended configuration and mode; if that turned out to be safer, then you could use the study to encourage people to change their behaviour. This study a) draws blanket conclusions it wasn't designed to test, and b) doesn't answer the most relevant question, i.e., "Is texting still bad if you don't have to look away from the road?"

  • Nanny Politics (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gd2shoe ( 747932 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2013 @12:27AM (#43597825) Journal

    They're doing it right... [L]etting Texas A&M Transportation Institute do a study... about texting in the driving environment produced findings they wanted.

    Removing the (well deserved) Obama bashing out of your post, and you beat me to the punch. There's a real drive in certain political circles right now to protect us from something that they perceive is dangerous (cell phones anywhere near a car). Any study that will "prove" their point is worth funding.

    The fact of the matter is, talking on a cell phone (even without hands free) is by far the least dangerous "distracted driving" activity that happens everywhere, all the time. For instance, eating behind the wheel is legitimately dangerous... but it has nothing to do with cell phones, it must be alright! Changing the station/CD/song in your car? Messing with the AC? Shaving? Messing with the GPS??? How about talking to someone in the backseat?!? That's more dangerous than talking on a cell phone!

    There is no logic to these people, only rotten/mishandled statistics. But we have to "protect people" from themselves through legislation. Otherwise how are they ever to survive?...

  • by emaname ( 1014225 ) on Wednesday May 01, 2013 @10:10AM (#43600101)

    Admittedly, I'm an "old guy" so maybe I'm way out of touch with the times, but I'm fairly tech-savvy, well-educated, so FWIW...

    I've had 4 very unsettling experiences of near head-on collisions. Each time I saw the other driver look up and get a very astonished look on their face after which they (thankfully) swerved back into their lane.

    Meanwhile I was slowing down while maneuvering for safety on the shoulder or sidewalk.

    I can only hope that the person who claims texting while driving is NOT a distraction has the same experience, at some point.

    As far as talking on a phone is concerned, I have my doubts about that, too.

    Again, this is from my personal experience, so YMMV.

    I deal with a wide variety of subjects. Some of them are design-oriented. While discussing a subject re the design of something, I find myself visualizing that which I'm attempting to describe. Those are the times I've found myself vulnerable to inattentive driving. For example, I've had some close calls rear-ending other vehicles or missed my turn-off. I DO make a point of getting over to the slow lane and dropping my speed, but I've been surprised by a semi or two that had changed into my lane further up the road in front of me. I missed it because I was... distracted. So I've been guilty, too. (Apparently, something is not happening between my visual cortex and other cognitive functions. Although, my friends from the 60's would probably say... well, never mind. That's for another post.)

    Now I hand my phone to my wife and ask her to take the call or exit or pull way off on the shoulder (which isn't all that safe either now-a-days). And when I get a call from someone whose name/cell number I recognize, I ask if they're driving first. I don't want to be the person on the other end of a phone call that contributed to an accident. Besides, I still think most of our phone calls can wait.

    Come to think of it, I've even had people walk into me or nearly walk into me in stores while talking/texting on their phones.

    Anyhow, please be careful, folks.

    Oh yeah... and get off my lawn, kid.

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Working...