There have been quite a few simulator studies that have shown significantly worse driving for cell phone users. Granted it's a jump from that to the real world. I remember one from a while back that showed that cell phone users were as bad as drunk drivers with a relatively low intoxication but they were bad in different ways (distraction vs. aggression). I'm sure there must be similar studies in real world settings or at least fenced of tracks or something (I only remember because I researched 3d simulation and these studies showed up).

Figuring out the cause of an accident post accident in a methodically clean (and legal) way is probably non-trivial though. I don't think it's horrible to hypothesize that more accidents could be related to some recent tech trend. I'd say texting would be a good variable conduct some research on (as opposed to cell phone calls etc.). Obviously the author went beyond formulating a hypothesis though.

> Granted it's a jump from that to the real world.

Not that much of a jump though.

I wonder how much more evidence is needed for people to accept that having an active smartphone within range of your eyes and ears while driving is a major risk factor? You don't even have to use the thing; just knowing that notifications can show up any time now is enough to distract our primate brain. We've evolved to be able to detect and act on minute movements spotted in the corners of our eyes on the grassy plains, because it might just be a tiger lurking there. It's a (very effective, if you are a hunter-gatherer on a steppe) survival mechanism.

By now there are plenty of studies performed in driving simulators that proof that smartphones distract you significantly. Of course hard empiric real world data is hard to get by, because people involved in a crash will tend to deny or downplay the use or presence of a smartphone, so data from real world accidents is of limited use. What we do have is a lot of anecdotal real world observations by participants and traffic experts, where people conclude that a smartphone did indeed distract them to the point of (near) accidents, or where police officers on highway patrol can pick out someone texting based purely on the swerving of their vehicle (which they then confirm when the overtake them). But the point is that real world data cannot be ethically obtained in a controlled scientific manner for this topic — you can't let one group drive using their smartphone and another not.

Even here on HN it seems like a lot of people are downplaying the risk of smartphones in traffic, despite ample evidence pointing to just that conclusion. Is this one of those inconvenient truths?

If we're talking about the same studies, then they also found that it was equally distracting to be talking to a passenger. God knows how dangerous it must be to go on a family outing.

In short, I'm skeptical about what those results really tell us.

Having said that, I have some sympathy with the article. I fundamentally don't like touch screens in cars (it stops me from considering a Tesla). They require all of your attention when you're using them and this is a bad thing imo.

Everything I've ever read indicated talking with a passenger was distracting but not as distracting as a cell phone. And cell phones are still distracting even of they are hands free. The most distracting activity is math problems.