The book I am reading is called Traffic by Tom Vanderbilt, and it's incredible how in depth Vanderbilt gets into the way we behave on the road. He explains the important role eye contact plays in traffic People are cooperative by nature, which is why the human eye is designed to be showing more white than the eyes of animals. This immediately brings your attention to people's eyes. As observed by Vanderbilt, "The eyes, one might argue, help reveal what we would like; eye contact is also a tacit admission that we do not think we will be harmed or exploited if we disclose our intentions" (31). It's amazing how simply looking at someone can clearly let others around you know what you are about to do. That is why eye contact is so necessary at intersections. However, by making eye contact one also takes on responsibility. At least according to Vanderbilt: "Look at another driver and he will know that you have seen him, and thus dart ahead of you. Not looking at a driver shifts the burden of responsibility to him (assuming he has actually seen you), which allows you to proceed first- if, that is, he truly believes you are not aware of him" (32-33). I have noticed many times that people will deliberately not look at me at an intersection and go when it's legally my right of way. If those people had made eye contact with me, they probably wouldn't have gone ahead. I think it's interesting that a person is far less likely to cut someone off if they have made eye contact because they feel accountable to that person even if they know they will probably never see them again.
This sense of accountability also carries over to stereotypes. A study done by Ian Walker, he observed that if a cyclist wore a helmet, passing cars gave them significantly less space than if they didn't wear a helmet (38). This reveals the common stereotype that cyclists wearing their helmets must more rational and safe to drive past. This relieves a driver's sense of accountability for the cyclist's safety. Whereas, if a cyclist is not wearing a helmet, a driver will feel like they would be responsible if they hit the cyclist, and they give them more space. The same thing goes for children. "A driver who sees a small child standing on the roadside may make a stereotypical judgment that 'children have no impulse control' and assume that the child may dash out. The driver slows" (39). Because of the idea that children cannot be trusted with their own safety, the buck is passed to the driver. If an adult is standing at the side of road, the driver is glad not to assume responsibility.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Interesting about the eye contact-- I didn't know human eyes were designed that way. That really emphasizes the point they make in drivers ed about making eye contact with the other driver.
The novel explores the interesting fact on the road and how everything is not the way we would expect it to be. One may think this is safe on the road, while it may not be safe because many expect it to be safe. It is interesting because the road is psychologically difficult to understand unless we can see the mind of the people on the road, just like the example with the eye contact and the example of children on the road.
Psychology is a study that I find very interesting, and I can make sense of what the author talks about when he states that once making eye contact with someone we feel accountable to them. It also makes sense that the human eye is made to express much more than the animal eye. If my dog was able to clearly communicate with me simply with his eyes (more than a normal puppy dog look) I would probably be frightened unto fainting. Good posting.
I agree with Ngoc. It's interesting how such a common/simple thing like driving can be so psychologically complex. As you're driving, you don't realize a lot of these things, but when you think about things like making eye contact, it makes sense.
Post a Comment