3 ms·
Nobody has access to that data, even if you're excluded it to extreme cases like "an at-fault crash happening as the user was manipulating the map software dire
by avar 3y ago
Nobody has access to that data, even if you're excluded it to extreme cases like "an at-fault crash happening as the user was manipulating the map software directly". We can't bridge the gap between that and accident reports.
And that doesn't get into the more subtle cases, e.g. a crash that happens later due to an earlier loss of situational awarenesses.
It's also hard to quantify the opposite. E.g. I sometimes have to manipulate the map while driving, and resent the distraction. But afterwards I'm more likely to be in the right lane earlier, not be distracted because I'm trying to read a traffic sign in the 1-2 second window I might have etc.
- gamepsys 3y agoThere are enough sensors in a car to know when a collision has occurred. The car is capable of capturing touchscreen use metrics. Bonus points if you can find metrics for the same region/timespan for cars with tactile controls. You can then do any year 1 statistics algorithm to see if using the touchscreen is correlated with collisions. Yes, this doesn't prove causation. A correlation is enough to raise the flag about a safety issue. EDIT: A decent statistical analysis will also uncover if using the touch screen is negatively correlated with accidents -- if people that use maps in general are less likely to get into an accident. This again won't prove causation but would be of interest to the general public and regulators.