Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Science
Newly licensed drivers who make sharp turns and come to sudden screeching stops are nerve-wracking. And now there’s evidence to confirm that erratic driving by teens predicts their odds of accidents.
Researchers installed computer and camera equipment on the cars of 42 newly licensed drivers to measure what they called "elevated g-force events," like quick turns and jamming on the brakes.
The researchers tracked the newbies for 18 months, and found that g-force event numbers let them make good bets on who was most likely to crash the car. Data showed that for every 100 miles on the road, elevated g-force events ranged from near zero for some drivers to as high as 50 for others. And drivers with the highest rate of g-force events showed greater instances of fender benders, crashes or close calls.
All told, 26 teens were involved in 37 impacts. The entire cohort experienced 242 near misses. The study is in the American Journal of Epidemiology. [Bruce G. Simons-Morton et al., "Do Elevated Gravitational-Force Events While Driving Predict Crashes and Near Crashes?"]
The research points to the need to monitor new drivers—and to better steer a heavy foot in the right direction.
—Amy Kraft
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
See what we're tweeting about
7 Comments
Add CommentThat is just common sense. Bad drivers have more accidents? Where do I get in on doing research like this?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat this study found is a correlation. Of course teens that have accidents will have g-force events.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is no more meaningful that the old statistic that the majority of accidents happen when approaching your own home. Of course they do, the vast majority of miles and time are near one's home.
Candide, read the actual AJE publication and you will see that the researchers found the g-force study to be predictive of crashes, whereas the "accidents near home" study was merely historical. The g-force researchers are saying that they... can predict which teens are going to get into crashes by counting high g-force incidents in advance. That's very useful information. The equivalent statement for the "near home" study would be... we can tell who is going to crash by how close they are to their home. That' not possible, and wasn't the goal of that particular study either. The crash/proximity-to-home study (National Highway Transportation Safety) sought to understand the dangers posed by unfamiliar roads and highway speeds. Their conclusions were mischaracterized by many in the media as "duh" research. In fact, it helped refocus how federal transportation safety funds were allocated to cities and states.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhat does the last sentence mean, "to better steer a heavy foot in the right direction"? Does "right direction" mean "accelerator"?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWow. "Elevated g-force events"? Why not simply call it what it is, and describe it as "unsafe driving"?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe subject of unsafe driving hardly warrants researchers to dedicate much time to this subject - one's common sense tells one that if they suddenly jam on their brakes for no good reason,that there could be potential ramifications for such an action, if there is someone driving a car right behind them - duh! They call this "news"?
Their conclusion of: "The research points to the need to monitor new drivers—and to better steer a heavy foot in the right direction." warrants an alternative.
It calls for implementation of better initial instruction; on the "do's" and "don'ts" of driving. Hey! Here's a concept: Why not instruct the little darlings the correct methods for driving a vehicle prior to them pulling that vehicle onto the public road? And, regarding the "heavy foot"? There is no "right direction" for a heavy foot pressed on the accelerator of a vehicle - the "heavy foot" should be stifled at the first indication by the driving instructor.
Instead of choosing to create a new descriptor for unsafe driving by calling it "elevated g-force events" - forget that, and describe it as "Unsafe Driving" so it will be readily understandable by the toddlers; and have better impact. I can just see the reaction of a current-day youngster, when you tell them that they're pulling off "elevated g-force events" due to their method of driving: they'd probably say, "COOL!"
And, why shouldn't they? It sounds like something really cool! Conversely, if you tell them their driving methods are unsafe, they get the message immediately; and 'unsafe' could never be interpreted as something good or cool.
The conclusion of the researchers is incredibly astounding - if we go with their suggestion, we'll be paying out the nose for the monitoring systems for all new drivers, just to watch how the poor driving technique that they were taught leads to accidents; which we already knew - what is the benefit from filming them? So we know who the bad drivers are, so we can then track down the miscreants that taught them these inadvisable driving practices? Teach them the right common-sense methods to begin with. What is wrong with you people? What kind of a show are you running here?
If this research is an example of the mainstream inquiry that is going on in our current-day arenas, it's good evidence of why our society and country
is going to hell in a hand basket.
I had this problem teaching my son. Yes - There IS an App for that: safeGdriver.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is EXCELLENT! It uses the accelerometer in the iPhone or the iTouch to monitor G-Force. Break too quickly or corner too hard and a bell warning tone sounds.
I put my iPhone in the cup holder, start the App and have son drive. My "new driver" learned amazingly quickly how to break and corner without making the warning sound. When he mastered one level we went to the next higher level.
No constant reminders from me. No nagging needed. When he drives smoothly, there are no warnings. Drive hard and a tone sounds. I don't have to say a thing!
It is a great teaching tool and it works works on both my iPhone and my son's iTouch.
good to hear your voice; do more podcast Amy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this