One thing I’ve come to prefer in good driving commentary is statements like “1 behind, good gap” to a generic “mirror”. I’ve noticed even with myself it’s far too easy to look at the mirror, say “mirror” and not actually take account of what I’m seeing in it.
I think this is something that develops with standard driver training. When we learn to drive, we’re continually told to check our mirrors, so we move our heads, we look at the mirror… but that’s where it ends. It’s almost tokenistic. In fact there’s something a little wrong even with the idea of telling someone to check their mirror – the mirror is the means, not the end. The idea of checking mirrors in this manner is fundementally flawed.
Good driving, by contrast, incorporates use of the mirrors in no different way to looking forward out the windscreen. We look through the windscreen because we require information ahead; so, the same, we should use mirrors because we require information behind/beside. The use of the mirror is demanded by the information requirement, not performed robotically and then (in the better cases) the information digested.
The same can be said inversely for indicator use. The majority of drivers indicate prescribedly, just as they learned, through hard rules. Unfortuntely, this again becomes tokenistic. Over time, the indicator becomes a justification rather than information. In a typical motorway journey, it’s not unusual to see someone put their indicator on half way through changing lanes, as if to excuse themselves.
Information provided for the benefit of others is pointless unless actually digested. That means there’s no point indicating and then following with a manuvre, if the person who would benefit from the indication is not given enough time to take in the signal. It’s not possible t0 make other people pay attention, but you can at least give them a chance if they are.