7 ms·

But another article on HN says "Emptier US roads more lethal in coronavirus pandemic, report says (bbc.com)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23257790 http

But another article on HN says "Emptier US roads more lethal in coronavirus pandemic, report says (bbc.com)" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23257790 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23257790 UPDATE: The other article states "14% jump in fatality rates PER DISTANCE DRIVEN." So the roads are more deadly per mile, but the number of drivers has decreased so much that the overall harm is down.

leetcrew 6y ago
fatalities per mile can go up while having a much lower absolute number of fatalities.
whafro 6y ago
Both can be true – roads can be more lethal on a per-mile-traveled (or per-minute traveled) basis, but with many fewer miles/minutes traveled overall, total cumulative fatalities are down. That seems to be the case in these articles.
- microcolonel 6y ago
  Also it's possible that local travel restrictions have shown that per-mile injury and fatality rates are biased by trip distance.
- Mirioron 6y ago
  This sounds like it's in line with the theory of risk homeostasis or at least the Peltzmann effect.[0] The theory states that as people feel safer they will take riskier actions. In this case the roads are emptier so people feel that they can drive faster, which leads to more accidents. Note that the theory does not have much support, but there seems to be some kind of an effect like this. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
piinbinary 6y ago
I wonder if that could be due to a mix-shift in who is driving (perhaps the safest drivers are disproportionately spending less time driving compared to the less safe drivers)
- antoineMoPa 6y ago
  More uber eats drivers are rushing the streets.
- cma 6y ago
  Probably not significant to the increase, but night shift people are usually essential workers and get in more crashes.
- sitkack 6y ago
  Speeds could be up due to less traffic density, people even more distracted. Could also be the same base rate suicide by car crash. I'd be interested to know if the fatality rate involving big trucks and passenger vehicles has changed. It could be that the fatality rate per truck mile is a constant independent of the number of passenger vehicles on the road. With proper data sets, all of this should just fall out.
  - ken 6y ago
    Speeds are definitely up. There's a "30 mph" road near me with a stretch that's as long and straight and remote as any highway, and even the cops are driving >50mph there now. Normally it's packed (it connects two high-density areas) so you're lucky to get near 30mph.
    - brewdad 6y ago
      Sounds a bit like my street. It isn't remote, but originally developed as large 2 acre lots with far setbacks. Now a lot of infill has occurred but most homes still sit farther from the road than a typical residential neighborhood, so it feels more rural than it is. It's signed 25mph. Normal speeds are about 30-35mph. Now, every morning starting about 5:30am, drivers are using it as their own personal drag strip trying to lay down their best 0-60 times. Police don't really seem to care.
- clairity 6y ago
  you're making a fundamental attribution error[0]: that people are fixed in their predisposition for safe driving rather than being situationally influenced. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error
SkyBelow 6y ago
I think this serves as a great lesson in statistics being converted into news stories. The roads are safer. The roads are deadlier. Both are true and both are false depending upon if you are looking at the total or the per driver (and perhaps even if you are looking at per driver per minute or per driver per mile).
- brenden2 6y ago
  That's why everyone need to learn to separate fact and opinions. Ignore the conclusions, instead look at the data. Critical thinking skills are in short supply. The news is pretty bad in that it's mostly opinions pretending to be facts/information, with occasional data sprinkled in to support their conclusions.
  - yazboo 6y ago
    But isn't the issue here that both points of view are fact/information-based?
    - brenden2 6y ago
      Yes, but what people pay attention to are the conclusions, not the facts.
      - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
        But those are both facts - less people are driving, but if you do drive you're more likely to be in an accident. Are those conclusions? Would a presentation of facts just be the data itself?
        sokoloff 6y ago
        Are you more likely to be in an accident? Or are you more likely to be in an accident with a fatality? It seems like heavy rush-hour traffic is prone to creating a large number of accidents with a low total number of fatalities. When I drive around now, I believe the risk of accident per mile is significantly lower (city dweller used to typically packed city roads), but due to higher speeds, I can’t make the same claim about lower fatality risk.
spacephysics 6y ago
Another factor could be the delay between drives; For myself, going from commuting daily to driving once or twice a week, it feels weird and I’m on more alert than usual when driving. As if I have to relearn the car is an extension of myself (in a spacial sense) So perhaps people are essentially less used to driving, and therefore, more prone to error or less comfortable (which may increase anxiety, or hesitation for in the moment decisions)
- jacoblambda 6y ago
  As someone who tries to avoid driving where possible (I prefer walking, biking, public transit for reasons), driving after not having done so for several weeks or even days definitely has a noticeable degradation in skill. The few times I've been out recently, I've definitely noticed that the other drivers on the road do not appear nearly as confident or comfortable. Just another point of anecdotal data for what it's worth.
robhunter 6y ago
Presumably there are fewer accidents when there is gridlock. There is no / minimal gridlock right now.
- jandrese 6y ago
  Heavy traffic dramatically increases the accident rate but decreases the fatality rate because it prevents people from building up enough speed to overcome their vehicle's safety features. However, there is a hidden fatality rate in slow traffic. The number of person-hours wasted waiting for the traffic to move. It can build up to a lifetime pretty easily with enough traffic, so cumulatively the traffic jams in a major metropolitan area can waste the 750,000 hours or so of people's lifetime and virtually kill a person. In short, commuting sucks.
  - r00fus 6y ago
    Are those hours commuting completely wasted? I listen to far fewer audiobooks/podcasts...
caseysoftware 6y ago
The denominator decreased much more than the numerator.
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  Precisely, it's a rate. People are driving shorter distances on average and that number dropped less than the number of fatalities.
grumple 6y ago
Maybe all the responsible drivers are staying home and the assholes are still driving around like nothing's wrong?
snthd 6y ago
Different road types have different fatality rates. Per mile driven, generally motorways are the safest by a significant margin. You would expect freeways to have disproportionally less traffic than other routes due to CORVID precautions. So really the question is if fatality rates for different road types have changed.

leetcrew 6y ago

fatalities per mile can go up while having a much lower absolute number of fatalities.

whafro 6y ago

Both can be true – roads can be more lethal on a per-mile-traveled (or per-minute traveled) basis, but with many fewer miles/minutes traveled overall, total cumulative fatalities are down. That seems to be the case in these articles.

microcolonel 6y ago
Also it's possible that local travel restrictions have shown that per-mile injury and fatality rates are biased by trip distance.
Mirioron 6y ago
This sounds like it's in line with the theory of risk homeostasis or at least the Peltzmann effect.[0] The theory states that as people feel safer they will take riskier actions. In this case the roads are emptier so people feel that they can drive faster, which leads to more accidents. Note that the theory does not have much support, but there seems to be some kind of an effect like this. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation

piinbinary 6y ago

I wonder if that could be due to a mix-shift in who is driving (perhaps the safest drivers are disproportionately spending less time driving compared to the less safe drivers)

antoineMoPa 6y ago
More uber eats drivers are rushing the streets.
cma 6y ago
Probably not significant to the increase, but night shift people are usually essential workers and get in more crashes.
sitkack 6y ago
Speeds could be up due to less traffic density, people even more distracted. Could also be the same base rate suicide by car crash. I'd be interested to know if the fatality rate involving big trucks and passenger vehicles has changed. It could be that the fatality rate per truck mile is a constant independent of the number of passenger vehicles on the road. With proper data sets, all of this should just fall out.
- ken 6y ago
  Speeds are definitely up. There's a "30 mph" road near me with a stretch that's as long and straight and remote as any highway, and even the cops are driving >50mph there now. Normally it's packed (it connects two high-density areas) so you're lucky to get near 30mph.
  - brewdad 6y ago
    Sounds a bit like my street. It isn't remote, but originally developed as large 2 acre lots with far setbacks. Now a lot of infill has occurred but most homes still sit farther from the road than a typical residential neighborhood, so it feels more rural than it is. It's signed 25mph. Normal speeds are about 30-35mph. Now, every morning starting about 5:30am, drivers are using it as their own personal drag strip trying to lay down their best 0-60 times. Police don't really seem to care.
clairity 6y ago
you're making a fundamental attribution error[0]: that people are fixed in their predisposition for safe driving rather than being situationally influenced. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error

SkyBelow 6y ago

I think this serves as a great lesson in statistics being converted into news stories. The roads are safer. The roads are deadlier. Both are true and both are false depending upon if you are looking at the total or the per driver (and perhaps even if you are looking at per driver per minute or per driver per mile).

brenden2 6y ago
That's why everyone need to learn to separate fact and opinions. Ignore the conclusions, instead look at the data. Critical thinking skills are in short supply. The news is pretty bad in that it's mostly opinions pretending to be facts/information, with occasional data sprinkled in to support their conclusions.
- yazboo 6y ago
  But isn't the issue here that both points of view are fact/information-based?
  - brenden2 6y ago
    Yes, but what people pay attention to are the conclusions, not the facts.
    - SketchySeaBeast 6y ago
      But those are both facts - less people are driving, but if you do drive you're more likely to be in an accident. Are those conclusions? Would a presentation of facts just be the data itself?
      - sokoloff 6y ago
        Are you more likely to be in an accident? Or are you more likely to be in an accident with a fatality? It seems like heavy rush-hour traffic is prone to creating a large number of accidents with a low total number of fatalities. When I drive around now, I believe the risk of accident per mile is significantly lower (city dweller used to typically packed city roads), but due to higher speeds, I can’t make the same claim about lower fatality risk.

spacephysics 6y ago

Another factor could be the delay between drives; For myself, going from commuting daily to driving once or twice a week, it feels weird and I’m on more alert than usual when driving. As if I have to relearn the car is an extension of myself (in a spacial sense) So perhaps people are essentially less used to driving, and therefore, more prone to error or less comfortable (which may increase anxiety, or hesitation for in the moment decisions)

jacoblambda 6y ago
As someone who tries to avoid driving where possible (I prefer walking, biking, public transit for reasons), driving after not having done so for several weeks or even days definitely has a noticeable degradation in skill. The few times I've been out recently, I've definitely noticed that the other drivers on the road do not appear nearly as confident or comfortable. Just another point of anecdotal data for what it's worth.

robhunter 6y ago

Presumably there are fewer accidents when there is gridlock. There is no / minimal gridlock right now.

jandrese 6y ago
Heavy traffic dramatically increases the accident rate but decreases the fatality rate because it prevents people from building up enough speed to overcome their vehicle's safety features. However, there is a hidden fatality rate in slow traffic. The number of person-hours wasted waiting for the traffic to move. It can build up to a lifetime pretty easily with enough traffic, so cumulatively the traffic jams in a major metropolitan area can waste the 750,000 hours or so of people's lifetime and virtually kill a person. In short, commuting sucks.
- r00fus 6y ago
  Are those hours commuting completely wasted? I listen to far fewer audiobooks/podcasts...

caseysoftware 6y ago

The denominator decreased much more than the numerator.

three_seagrass 6y ago
Precisely, it's a rate. People are driving shorter distances on average and that number dropped less than the number of fatalities.

grumple 6y ago

Maybe all the responsible drivers are staying home and the assholes are still driving around like nothing's wrong?

snthd 6y ago

Different road types have different fatality rates. Per mile driven, generally motorways are the safest by a significant margin. You would expect freeways to have disproportionally less traffic than other routes due to CORVID precautions. So really the question is if fatality rates for different road types have changed.