John T. Slania

Interview by

Journalist Tom Vanderbilt has made a career out of writing about topics from the mundane to the obscure, including sneakers, Quonset huts and nuclear fallout shelters. His writing is distinguished by its attention to detail, with exhaustive research used to explore every nuance of a given subject.

Vanderbilt does just that in latest book, Traffic, an eye-opening and entertaining journey into the experiences of driving. The book examines virtually every aspect of driving, from why traffic jams form to why the other lane always seems to be moving faster. BookPage asked Vanderbilt (who drives a 2001 Volvo V40) to serve as a tour guide in negotiating the challenges we face on the road – and in the parking lot.

What motivated you to write Traffic?

I've always been an "early merger" at places like highway work zones where you're forced to merge from two lanes of traffic into one. On one occasion, I became frustrated in a long queue as vehicles kept passing me in the "closing" lane. I jumped to the head of the queue and "late merged." I felt guilty about it, but as I began to study the literature, I found that if the system were set up the right way, more traffic would flow through the bottleneck if everyone did not get over sooner. What I had thought my whole driving life was the right thing to do was in fact wrong. That made me wonder what else I had misunderstood about this curious everyday environment.

Why do drivers take on different personalities when they get behind the wheel?

In traffic, we are largely anonymous, secure in our own enclosures, and there is little actual human contact or immediate consequence for our actions – at least until that guy with the gun rack on the pickup truck you gave the finger to pulls up alongside you at the traffic light! All of these factors lead us to behave in ways we might not otherwise. An interesting comparison is the Internet, whether it's "cyber-bullying" or flaming someone in a chat room. It's been called the "online disinhibition effect." Whether we are corrupted by the medium or expressing our true selves is another question altogether.

Why is it that drivers should take the first spot they see in a parking lot instead of circling for the best spot?

A couple of interesting studies have found that people who search for the "best" spot, i.e., the closest to the entrance of the building, often end up spending more time searching for a spot than it would have cost them to simply grab the first one they saw and walk; or sometimes, what people thought was the best spot was actually further away than a spot a few rows away from the entrance (but closer to the beginning of the row). This is a great example of how "heuristics" – our little rules of thumb that guide our decision-making – often trick us into not making the best decision.

What is distinctive about the way Americans drive?

We certainly drive more than anyone else in the world. No other country has as many SUVs or light trucks in its vehicle fleet. I've also not seen another place so disposed to putting bumper stickers on cars. There's another thing I've noticed in driving culture here that perhaps seems American: We all feel as if we have rights, but we also don't want our rights to be violated. Sometimes these bump up against each other in traffic; for example, some people feel they have the right to speed, some people feel they have the right to go the speed limit, and not be tailgated by someone behind. We say the left lane is for "faster traffic," but faster than what? To quote the late George Carlin, "Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?"

 

How do you think rising gas prices will change American driving habits?

As we're already seeing, people will drive less – cutting out so-called "discretionary" driving, switching to cycling or public transport for more trips. We'll also drive smaller cars – and better smaller cars, mind you, than those econo-boxes from the early 1970s. It might also cause people to "drive smarter" – not accelerating as quickly from a stop, trying to avoid stopping and starting all the time by timing traffic flow better, and just driving slower in general. Fuel consumption is nonlinear: it costs more to go faster, even after accounting for time savings, and the percentage increase rises with speed.

Americans are in love with drive-through restaurants. Do you have a favorite drive-through order?

That's easy. The "Double Double" with fries and a Coke at In-and-Out Burger, which sadly doesn't exist in New York. But please, park before you eat – and shut off the engine!

John T. Slania is a journalism professor at Loyola University in Chicago.

Journalist Tom Vanderbilt has made a career out of writing about topics from the mundane to the obscure, including sneakers, Quonset huts and nuclear fallout shelters. His writing is distinguished by its attention to detail, with exhaustive research used to explore every nuance of…

Interview by

Richard Whitmire is a longtime education reporter and editorial writer who has chronicled a critical shift in the national education debate: While it was once presumed that girls were falling behind in school, now it appears that boys are at greater risk. Exploring the issue has become his passion, both in his blog and in his new book, Why Boys Fail. BookPage asked Whitmire to provide a tutorial on a subject of interest to parents, teachers and employers.

You didn’t always believe it was boys who were in trouble in school.
I was an education reporter in the Washington bureau of Gannett News Service when the American Association of University Women released its research on girls getting shortchanged in school. As the father of two daughters, I quickly wrote that up—uncritically—as fact.

What made you change your mind?
In the years that followed, I realized I had made a mistake. That research was flawed. It first became obvious anecdotally, by watching my nieces and nephews and the other students in local schools. More importantly, it became obvious in the national data. The gender gaps we see in college are the most obvious evidence—nearly 58 percent of bachelor’s degrees and 62 percent of associate’s degrees go to women. Unlike two decades ago, when uneducated men could find good-paying work, men today need those degrees as much as women.

How did the researchers get it wrong?
It’s not so much a matter of getting it wrong as never trying to get it right. By choosing not to investigate the problem, the U.S. Department of Education ducks the politically sensitive issue. In Why Boys Fail, I lay out the history behind that sensitivity, which starts with conservatives blaming feminists (unfairly, from my perspective) for the problems boys were experiencing in school. The national feminist groups went into a defensive mode and countered that boys were not experiencing problems. When men rule the White House and Wall Street, that argument carries a lot of credibility, at least on the surface. But when you bore down to the community level, to the boys and girls in your local schools and men and women in the local economy, the reality is very different. Men are in trouble, and much of that trouble can be traced back to unequal educations.

Does the failure of boys in school cut across all races and income levels?
I would say yes, with the possible exception of those coming from the most elite families. (And even in the most expensive prep schools I hear college placement advisers remark that their girls perform better than the boys.) Among Hispanic and African-American boys, the gaps are huge: Twice as many black women as men earn bachelor’s degrees. Less obvious, however, are the gaps we’re seeing among the sons and daughters of blue-collar families, where the daughters are far more likely to enroll and graduate from college. This is a key question, and it gets at what may be the most important insight from the book: There’s a common thread (literacy skills) connecting the problems minority boys are having with what we’re seeing in blue-collar/white and middle-class suburban schools.

Could it simply be that boys traditionally have never liked school as much as girls?
Yes, but in years past the boys were given plenty of time to catch up. Reading experts tell me that by fourth grade boys should pull even with girls in literacy skills, but that’s not happening. There’s a second issue here. In years past it was OK for many boys to dislike school. Blue-collar jobs were plentiful. Today, however, college has become the new high school. Want to be a cop? Better have at least an associate’s degree.

What are the risks of having too few male college graduates?
There are some national economic considerations. Women are less likely than men to major in the hard sciences or launch risky business ventures. But the real implications are interpersonal—the so-called “marriageable mate” issue that has inflicted so much pain among African Americans. Women hesitate to “marry down” to someone with a lesser educational background. Hence, a lack of marriageable mates.

What solutions do you recommend?
The obvious solution is to start at the beginning with a federal investigation. Once the causes are pinpointed, the Department of Education can launch research into remedies that can be pioneered by interested school districts. Just as urgent is federally sponsored research into single-sex education. Do boys and girls really have gender-specific learning styles that teachers must master? Maybe, maybe not. Let’s find out.

Richard Whitmire is a longtime education reporter and editorial writer who has chronicled a critical shift in the national education debate: While it was once presumed that girls were falling behind in school, now it appears that boys are at greater risk. Exploring the issue…

Sign Up

Stay on top of new releases: Sign up for our newsletter to receive reading recommendations in your favorite genres.

Trending Features