Mythbusters Lab Report

In today’s society talking on the cell phone is an everyday ritual. But many people question whether or not talking on the phone impairs driving. To conduct an experiment researchers need to determine a controlled condition, assigning subjects to different conditions, and making sure the only difference between conditions is the use of a cell phone.

Driving Us to Distraction Summary-Response Paper The essay, ‘Driving us to Distraction’ by Gilbert Cruz is about the dangers of hands-free technology while driving. The author argues that while driving and talking on a cell phone is deadly, using hands-free technology is not that much better of a choice. He supports his argument by citing a 2003 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study that found cellphone use to be a serious hazard on the road and by mentioning a series of simulator tests conducted in 2007 by a psychology professor at the University of Utah named David Strayer.

The Mythbusters observed the myth that driving whilst talking on the phone is as dangerous as driving drunk. They formed their hypothesis that driving on the phone is as dangerous as driving drunk. Then, they tested their hypothesis. They created an experiment that would have participants drive a car through a course three times. Each time a participant went through the course, they experience different conditions. The first time, both participants drove through the course normally. This served as the control group for the experiment. The second time, participants were asked questions over the phone while they completed the course, and, the third time, they were drunk when they drove through the course. Throughout the experiment, there were several independent variables in place to ensure that only one variable was being tested.

In the first three minutes of the YouTube video, the Mythbusters conduct an experiment to observe a person’s driving ability while using a cell phone and while driving drunk. To do so, the experimenters come up with the hypothesis, “driving using a cell phone is just as dangerous as drunk driving.” There are two independent variables. One variable is the cell phone, and the other is the alcohol. On the other hand, the dependent variable is the instructor who is giving the driving test. They test this hypothesis using three experimental conditions. First, to get acquainted with the course, each of the two people drive cell phone free and sober. The next experimental condition consists of Jamie, one of the experimenters, distracting each driver with a phone

As technology becomes more and more advanced it becomes more and more of a distraction to drivers. Every day you see ads on TV, billboards, and the internet about the dangers of texting and driving and yet some of us still do it. According to USA Today, in America, more than 3,000 people died due to texting and driving. That is about one in 11 U.S. traffic deaths. If I was asked to create an experimental design to test the hypothesis that talking on a cell phone impairs driving skills, I would use a driving simulator to test accuracy of drivers when they drive while using a cell phone and when they aren’t using a cell phone.

It has been proven that driving and using phones at the same time is the same as being drunk and driving. Accidents occur daily because of this case. The distraction like looking for a number, trying to text while driving also checking our social media and trying to find your phone in your purse can cause accidents. We try to organize our calendar checking emails try to multitask all at one and don’t realize that we are putting our lives or someone’s else’s life in danger while being on your phone

Being the cause of a cell phone related accident can leave a person unable to handle the consequences of their actions. There is great concern regarding the dangers of distracted driving. This is made evident by legislation that has been put in place in the United States. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (2011), nationwide, 34 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam have enacted texting bans. Current data from the National Safety Council (2010) suggest that each year, at least 1.6 million traffic accidents (28% of all crashes) in the United States are caused by drivers talking on cell phones or texting. The U.S. Department of Transportation (2011) states that nine states, the District of Columbia, and

“A distracted driver may fail to see up to 50% of the available information in the driving environment. You may look but not actually “see” what is happening. Focus of the driver is not on the road or traffic and it becomes difficult to handle phone and vehicle at one time. Cell phones during driving also reduce the mental capacity of drivers as they fail to concentrate on minor or major activities happening around them. Cell phones distract drivers' attention resulting in comparatively slow response to traffic signals and other related traffic events. Studies have shown the fact that breaking reaction time is also slower while talking on a cell phone during driving. The perception, vision, general awareness, and concentration of the driver are impacted while communicating on a cell phone during driving. Especially during bad weather or driving on slippery roads, drivers engaging in conversation pay less attention to these areas increasing risks of fatal accidents.

In the short video we were presented with, Myth Busters were attempting to venture off and hypothesize whether or not driving while talking on a cell phone was just as dangerous, if not more, than driving while intoxicated. The conditions used to to test this hypothesis are two individuals who were given three driving tests all on the same course, followed by analyzing the results of the driving exams. After configuring the data that they had obtained, they came to the irrefutable conclusion that, although both highly menacing, driving while on a cellular device was much more perilous than driving impaired. Like every other experiment, this too has an independent and dependent variable. The independent variable in this observation are the drivers

C: Conclusion about this detail: It is very important to first acknowledge the dangerous impact of this distraction’s alarming statistics that shows about the safety of driving while texting. Many people don’t see and think about the consequences that can occur in this situation. More and more companies are implementing new strategies, for instance, signing a pledge not to use the phone while on the road, and these new changes are adding more responsible drivers. But it is still not enough to say that we have gained control over the problem.

In this episode of Mythbusters, Adam and Jemie were more than willing to test their new myth that the way that we actually board the plane are the most inefficient way to do it. Moreover, it also takes the longest boarding time. Therefore, they planned to test this out using the real size airplane with 173 seats that are an actual normal size plane used in the commercial. This Mythbuster airplane was separated into two sections, first class, and economy class. In order to make the scenario as realistic as possible, the team has invited the four real crews to help sorted the passengers out and but their luggage in the cabins.

Instead of a driving simulator that was used for the first two studies participants followed a car that would break at random. The ERPs were reduced by 50% when driver talked on the cellphones compared to the single task group. This supports the hypothesis that the participants are not encoding the information when distracted and less able to react. The fourth study looked and a hands free cell phone conversation but instead of the single task they had participants talking to a passenger when driving. The drivers with the passenger had about 88% of participants that completion and the dual task group had 50%. It is believed that the to people worked together to help the driver stay safe. It was hypothesized by the researchers that cell phones are distracting because of the idea that the central-processing bottleneck. The central-processing bottleneck is the idea that the brain has these two sources of information, and the brain is taking turns rather than doing two task at once. It implies that humans can not multitask, making phones and driving unsafe.

The overall purpose of the lab is to have the students practice designing an experiment, gathering data, and then analyzing that data to form a conclusion using the scientific method. It also served to understand key terms such as hypothesis, dependent variable, and independent variable. The specific objective of this lab is to determine whether certain human body parts experience allometric or isometric growth. Allometric growth defines when certain parts of an organism grow at unequal rates in comparison to its whole, while isometric growth is when all parts of an organism grow at the same rate in comparison to the entire organism. The specific purpose of the lab is to determine whether or not specific human body parts experience allometric or isometric growth by comparing the ratios of height to two specific body parts, in the students’ case the right hand length and head circumference, in students and newborns. The students formulated the tentative answer that if a team of four compared their height to right hand length ratio, as well as, their height to head circumference ratio, to those of a newborn’s, then the students will discover that the right hand and head experience allometric growth in humans.

Hands free cell phone usage should not be used while driving based on evidence that shows that the use a cell phone while driving leads to more driving mistakes and overall lack of awareness (Sanbonmatsu et al., 2015). Drivers that use cell phones make more serious and minor errors, but cannot recall making these errors due to a lack of awareness. These drivers are more unaware of their inconsistent speed, placement in lanes and near accidents than those that are not using a cell phone. Additionally, these drivers are less likely to self-regulate their driving efficiently like drivers not using cell phones because of this lack of awareness. This reduction in self-regulation moreover leads to an increase in both minor and major errors (Sanbonmatsu et al. 2015). To determine this, Sanbonmatsu et al. (2015) gathered participants and split them into either a control/no cell phone group and an experimental/cell phone group. These participants were then tested in a driving simulator with the control group simply running through the simulator while the cell phone group called a friend or family member and had a conversation on a hands free device. The results of this experiment indicated that even though the control group did still make errors, they had more awareness of those errors than the experimental group, and made less serious errors than the experimental group.

Although many of these new technologies are possible and useful because of the cell phone, there are some downsides that come with this device. One downside is the danger of cell phones usage while operating mechanical vehicles such as cars. Because cell phones let us be so mobile, they also let us talk in situations where we are doing something else. While a person is in the middle of a discussion, he can be distracted from anything else he is doing. According to study published in "the New England Journal of Medicine," the chances of getting into an accident while on a cell phone are increased by "four hundred percent (qtd. in Hua)." Another study that was done by scientists in the "transport research laboratory" suggested that driving while using a cell phone is more hazardous then driving under the influence of alcohol at the permitted blood alcohol content level. The study says that a person on the cell phone reacts half a second slower than an alert driver (qtd. in Wrolstad). Considering the results of the research, more legislation is needed for cell phone usage, possibly banning or limiting the usage of cell phones during situations calling for a person's full attention.