Impact of distracted driving on safety and traffic flow

Studies have documented a link between distracted driving and diminished safety; however, an association between distracted driving and traffic congestion has not been investigated in depth. The present study examined the behavior of teens and young adults operating a driving simulator while engaged in various distractions (i.e., cell phone, texting, and undistracted) and driving conditions (i.e., free flow, stable flow, and oversaturation). Seventy five participants 16–25 years of age (split into 2 groups: novice drivers and young adults) drove a STISIM simulator three times, each time with one of three randomly presented distractions. Each drive was designed to represent daytime scenery on a 4 lane divided roadway and included three equal roadway portions representing Levels of Service (LOS) A, C, and E as defined in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Participants also completed questionnaires documenting demographics and driving history. Both safety and traffic flow related driving outcomes were considered. A Repeated Measures Multivariate Analysis of Variance was employed to analyze continuous outcome variables and a Generalized Estimate Equation (GEE) Poisson model was used to analyze count variables. Results revealed that, in general more lane deviations and crashes occurred during texting. Distraction (in most cases, text messaging) had a significantly negative impact on traffic flow, such that participants exhibited greater fluctuation in speed, changed lanes significantly fewer times, and took longer to complete the scenario. In turn, more simulated vehicles passed the participant drivers while they were texting or talking on a cell phone than while undistracted. The results indicate that distracted driving, particularly texting, may lead to reduced safety and traffic flow, thus having a negative impact on traffic operations. No significant differences were detected between age groups, suggesting that all drivers, regardless of age, may drive in a manner that impacts safety and traffic flow negatively when distracted.     

Stuck in the 70s: The role of social norms in distracted driving

Successful campaigns to end distracted driving must understand prevailing social norms for behaviors such as texting and phoning while driving. The current work examined this issue by asking younger drivers to read car crash scenarios and rate the responsibility of the driver for the crash, and to levy fines and assign jail time, as a function of whether the driver was attentive, had been drinking, or was distracted by phoning or texting. In the first experiment, ratings were performed in the absence of injunctive norm information (laws against drunk and distracted driving). In the second experiment, injunctive norm information was included. Impaired drivers were viewed as more responsible in both experiments, with texting drivers viewed as the most responsible. However, drunk drivers received the most fines and jail time. When compared to data from the 1970s, the results show that anti-drunk driving campaigns have changed how younger drivers view drunk driving, but that norms have not yet changed for distracted driving, despite consistent results showing they know the risk of driving distracted. Implications for social norm distracted driving campaigns are discussed.     

The choice to text and drive in younger drivers: behavior may shape attitude

Following a previous study that reported a large number of young adult drivers text and drive, the current study investigated this behavior by looking at patterns of use and driver assessment of the risk of the behavior. The data from the current study converge with and extended the previous work showing 70% of the 348 young adult drivers surveyed report initiating texts while driving while higher numbers reply to texts (81%) and read texts (92%) while driving. Additional drivers also report doing these behaviors, but only while stopped in traffic, showing only 2% never text and drive under any circumstances. The drivers indicated that they perceived these behaviors to be very risky and riskier than talking on a cell phone while driving, but perception of risk was a very weak predictor of behavior (for initiating texts) or had no effect on texting (for replying or reading texts while driving). In addition, a factor analysis of the perception of road conditions while texting revealed that making the choice to engage in texting (initiating) led drivers to perceive road conditions as being safer than if they replied to a text or read a text, suggesting that choosing to engage in the behavior itself changes attitudes toward risk.     

Pedestrian injuries due to mobile phone use in public places

Research shows that pedestrians, similar to drivers, experience reduced situation awareness, distracted attention and unsafe behavior when talking or texting on their mobile phones. The present study centered on injuries related to mobile phone use among pedestrians. It used data from the US Consumer Product Safety Commission on injuries in hospital emergency rooms from 2004 through 2010. It found that mobile-phone related injuries among pedestrians increased relative to total pedestrian injuries, and paralleled the increase in injuries for drivers, and in 2010 exceeded those for drivers. Pedestrian injuries related to mobile-phone use were higher for males and for people under 31 years old. Using a mobile phone while walking puts pedestrians at risk of accident, injury or death.     

Safety-critical event risk associated with cell phone tasks as measured in naturalistic driving studies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis of naturalistic driving studies involving estimates of safety-critical event risk associated with handheld device use while driving is described. Fifty-seven studies identified from targeted databases, journals and websites were reviewed in depth, and six were ultimately included. These six studies, published between 2006 and 2014, encompass seven sets of naturalistic driver data and describe original research that utilized naturalistic methods to assess the effects of distracting behaviors. Four studies involved non-commercial drivers of light vehicles and two studies involved commercial drivers of trucks and buses. Odds ratios quantifying safety-critical event (SCE) risk associated with talking, dialing, locating or answering, and texting or browsing were extracted. Stratified meta-analysis of pooled odds ratios was used to estimate SCE risk by distraction type; meta-regression was used to test for sources of heterogeneity. The results indicate that tasks that require drivers to take their eyes off the road, such as dialing, locating a phone and texting, increase SCE risk to a greater extent than tasks that do not require eyes off the road such as talking. Although talking on a handheld device did not increase SCE risk, further research is required to determine whether it indirectly influences SCE risk (e.g., by encouraging other cell phone activities). In addition, a number of study biases and quality issues of naturalistic driving studies are discussed.     

Prevalence of texting while driving and other risky driving behaviors among young people in Ontario,Canada: Evidence from 2012 and 2014

This paper reports on the prevalence of texting while driving and other risky driving behaviors by age and gender in two large samples of youth aged 16–19 years in Ontario, Canada. In Study 1 (N = 6133), we found that males reported more frequent texting while driving and speeding than females and, in terms of age, sixteen year olds reported frequent texting while driving than older participants. In Study 2 (N = 4450), which was conducted two years later, males again reported more frequent texting while driving, however there was no difference in the rate of talking on the phone while driving among males and females. Participants also reported on experiences that led to a significant reduction in their texting while driving. The most common reasons were the perceived danger of texting while driving, laws and fines against texting while driving, and observing close-calls and accidents experienced by other people. The results of both studies suggest that driving-related risk-taking behaviors co-occur and that young passengers in vehicles, including 14 and 15 year olds, are bystanders to texting while driving. Finally, there was a substantial decline in the prevalence of texting while driving across the studies. In Study 1, 27% of participants reported “sometimes” to “almost always” texting while driving compared to 6% of participants in Study 2. Limitations and implications for public campaigns targeted youth distracted driving are discussed.     

Concealing their communication: Exploring psychosocial predictors of young drivers’ intentions and engagement in concealed texting

Making a conscious effort to hide the fact that you are texting while driving (i.e., concealed texting) is a deliberate and risky behaviour involving attention diverted away from the road. As the most frequent users of text messaging services and mobile phones while driving, young people appear at heightened risk of crashing from engaging in this behaviour. This study investigated the phenomenon of concealed texting while driving, and utilised an extended Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) including the additional predictors of moral norm, mobile phone involvement, and anticipated regret to predict young drivers’ intentions and subsequent behaviour. Participants (n = 171) were aged 17–25 years, owned a mobile phone, and had a current driver's licence. Participants completed a questionnaire measuring their intention to conceal texting while driving, and a follow-up questionnaire a week later to report their behavioural engagement. The results of hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed overall support for the predictive utility of the TPB with the standard constructs accounting for 69% of variance in drivers’ intentions, and the extended predictors contributing an additional 6% of variance in intentions over and above the standard constructs. Attitude, subjective norm, PBC, moral norm, and mobile phone involvement emerged as significant predictors of intentions; and intention was the only significant predictor of drivers’ self-reported behaviour. These constructs can provide insight into key focal points for countermeasures including advertising and other public education strategies aimed at influencing young drivers to reconsider their engagement in this risky behaviour.     

Distraction and pedestrian safety: How talking on the phone,texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street

As use of handheld multimedia devices has exploded globally, safety experts have begun to consider the impact of distraction while talking, text-messaging, or listening to music on traffic safety. This study was designed to test how talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music may influence pedestrian safety. 138 college students crossed an interactive, semi-immersive virtual pedestrian street. They were randomly assigned to one of four groups: crossing while talking on the phone, crossing while texting, crossing while listening to a personal music device, or crossing while undistracted. Participants distracted by music or texting were more likely to be hit by a vehicle in the virtual pedestrian environment than were undistracted participants. Participants in all three distracted groups were more likely to look away from the street environment (and look toward other places, such as their telephone or music device) than were undistracted participants. Findings were maintained after controlling for demographics, walking frequency, and media use frequency. Distraction from multimedia devices has a small but meaningful impact on college students’ pedestrian safety. Future research should consider the cognitive demands of pedestrian safety, and how those processes may be impacted by distraction. Policymakers might consider ways to protect distracted pedestrians from harm and to reduce the number of individuals crossing streets while distracted.     

Crash risk and aberrant driving behaviors among bus drivers: The role of personality and attitudes towards traffic safety

Several studies have shown that personality traits and attitudes toward traffic safety predict aberrant driving behaviors and crash involvement. However, this process has not been adequately investigated in professional drivers, such as bus drivers. The present study used a personality–attitudes model to assess whether personality traits predicted aberrant self-reported driving behaviors (driving violations, lapses, and errors) both directly and indirectly, through the effects of attitudes towards traffic safety in a large sample of bus drivers. Additionally, the relationship between aberrant self-reported driving behaviors and crash risk was also assessed.     

Personality domains and traits that predict self-reported aberrant driving behaviours in a southeastern US university sample

Personality traits are meaningful predictors of many significant life outcomes, including mortality. Several studies have investigated the relationship between specific personality traits and driving behaviours, e.g., aggression and speeding, in an attempt to identify traits associated with elevated crash risk. These studies, while valuable, are limited in that they examine only a narrow range of personality constructs and thus do not necessarily reveal which traits in constellation best predict aberrant driving behaviours. The primary aim of this study was to use a comprehensive measure of personality to investigate which personality traits are most predictive of four types of aberrant driving behaviour (Aggressive Violations, Ordinary Violations, Errors, Lapses) as indicated by the Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ). We recruited 285 young adults (67% female) from a university in the southeastern US. They completed self-report questionnaires including the DBQ and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5, which indexes 5 broad personality domains (Antagonism, Detachment, Disinhibition, Negative Affectivity, Psychoticism) and 25 specific trait facets. Confirmatory factor analysis showed adequate evidence for the DBQ internal structure. Structural regression analyses revealed that the personality domains of Antagonism and Negative Affectivity best predicted both Aggressive Violations and Ordinary Violations, whereas the best predictors of both Errors and Lapses were Negative Affectivity, Disinhibition and to a lesser extent Antagonism. A more nuanced analysis of trait facets revealed that Hostility was the best predictor of Aggressive Violations; Risk-taking and Hostility of Ordinary Violations; Irresponsibility, Separation Insecurity and Attention Seeking of Errors; and Perseveration and Irresponsibility of Lapses.     

To call or not to call—That is the question (while driving)

We studied whether decisions to engage in cell phone conversation while driving and the consequences of such decisions are related to the driver's age, to the road conditions (demands of the driving task), and to the driver's role in initiating the phone call (i.e. the driver as caller vs. as receiver). Two experiments were performed in a driving simulator in which driver age, road conditions and phone conversation, as a secondary task, were manipulated. Engagement in cell phone conversations, performance in the driving and the conversation tasks, and subjective effort assessment were recorded. In general, drivers were more willing to accept incoming calls than to initiate calls. In addition, older and younger drivers were more susceptible to the deleterious effects of phone conversations while driving than middle aged/experienced drivers. While older drivers were aware of this susceptibility by showing sensitivity to road conditions before deciding whether to engage in a call or not, young drivers showed no such sensitivity. The results can guide the development of young driver training programs and point at the need to develop context-aware management systems of in-vehicle cell phone conversations.     

An observational study of driving distractions on urban roads in Spain

The present research investigated the prevalence of driver engagement in secondary tasks and whether there were any differences by age and gender, as well as day of the week and time of the day. Two independent researchers observed 6578 drivers at nine randomly selected urban locations in Girona, Spain. Nearly 20% of the drivers observed were engaged in some type of secondary task, with the most common being: conversing with a passenger (11.1%), smoking (3.7%) and talking on a handheld mobile phone (1.3%). Surprisingly there were no differences by gender, but there were age-related differences with younger drivers being more frequently observed engaged in a number of different types of secondary tasks while driving (i.e. drinking, talking on a handheld mobile phone, and texting or keying numbers). Logistic regression showed that younger drivers, and to a lesser extent middle-age drivers, were significantly more likely to be observed engaged in a technological distraction than older drivers. Conversely, non-technological distractions were significantly predicted by day of the week, time of the day and location. A substantial number of the drivers observed in this study were putting themselves at an increased risk of becoming involved in a crash by engaging in non-driving related tasks at the same time as driving. Furthermore, the higher crash rate among young drivers may be partially accounted for by their more frequent engagement in some types of secondary tasks while driving.     

Effects of practice, age, and task demands, on interference from a phone task while driving

Experimental research on the effects of cellular phone conversations on driving indicates that the phone task interferes with many driving-related functions, especially with older drivers. Unfortunately in past research (1) the dual task conditions were not repeated in order to test for learning, (2) the 'phone tasks' were not representative of real conversations, and (3) most often both the driving and the phone tasks were experimenter-paced. In real driving drivers learn to time-share various tasks, they can pace their driving to accommodate the demands of a phone conversation, and they can even partially pace the phone conversation to accommodate the driving demands. The present study was designed to better simulate real driving conditions by providing a simulated driving environment with repeated experiences of driving while carrying two different hands-free 'phone' tasks with different proximities to real conversations. In the course of five sessions of driving and using the phone, there was a learning effect on most of the driving measures. In addition, the interference from the phone task on many of the driving tasks diminished over time as expected. Finally, the interference effects were greater when the phone task was the often-used artificial math operations task than when it was an emotionally involving conversation, when the driving demands were greater, and when the drivers were older. Thus, the deleterious effects of conversing on the phone are very real initially, but may not be as severe with continued practice at the dual task, especially for drivers who are not old.     

Effect of North Carolina's restriction on teenage driver cell phone use two years after implementation

A majority of states now restrict teenagers from using a mobile communication device while driving. The effect of these restrictions is largely unknown. In a previous study, we found North Carolina's teenage driver cell phone restriction had little influence on young driver behavior four months after the law took effect (Foss et al., 2009). The goal of the present study was to examine the longer-term effect of North Carolina's cell phone restriction. It was expected that compliance with the restriction would increase, as awareness of the restriction grew over time. Teenagers were observed at high schools in North Carolina approximately two years after the law was implemented. Observations were also conducted in South Carolina, which did not have a cell phone restriction. In both states, there was a broad decrease in cell phone use. A logistic regression analysis showed the decrease in cell phone use did not significantly differ between the two states. Although hand-held cell phone use decreased, there was an increase in the likelihood that drivers in North Carolina were observed physically manipulating a phone. Finally, a mail survey of teenagers in North Carolina showed awareness for the cell phone restriction now stands at 78% among licensed teens. Overall, the findings suggest North Carolina's cell phone restriction has had no long-term effect on the behavior of teenage drivers. Moreover, it appears many teenage drivers may be shifting from talking on a phone to texting.     

Personality traits and executive functions related to on-road driving performance among older drivers

The present study investigated how executive functions and personality traits are related with driving performance among older drivers. Forty-two participants aged 60 and over were recruited to complete a battery of cognitive tests, measures of personality traits and an on-road driving test. Significant correlations were found between poor driving performances and low scores on tests assessing shifting and updating functions. In addition, extraversion had a negative relation with driving performance and made the only contribution, among the psychological factors, to the prediction of driving performance. Finally, gender and age emerged as the best predictors of on-road driving performance. Gender, personality traits and executive functions should be taken into account when studying safety among older drivers.     

Personality and attitudes as predictors of risky driving among older drivers

Although there are several studies on the effects of personality and attitudes on risky driving among young drivers, related research in older drivers is scarce. The present study assessed a model of personality-attitudes-risky driving in a large sample of active older drivers. A cross-sectional design was used, and structured and anonymous questionnaires were completed by 485 older Italian drivers (Mean age = 68.1, SD = 6.2, 61.2% males). The measures included personality traits, attitudes toward traffic safety, risky driving (errors, lapses, and traffic violations), and self-reported crash involvement and number of issued traffic tickets in the last 12 months. Structural equation modeling showed that personality traits predicted both directly and indirectly traffic violations, errors, and lapses. More positive attitudes toward traffic safety negatively predicted risky driving. In turn, risky driving was positively related to self-reported crash involvement and higher number of issued traffic tickets. Our findings suggest that theoretical models developed to account for risky driving of younger drivers may also apply in the older drivers, and accordingly be used to inform safe driving interventions for this age group.     

A parametric duration model of the reaction times of drivers distracted by mobile phone conversations

The use of mobile phones while driving is more prevalent among young drivers—a less experienced cohort with elevated crash risk. The objective of this study was to examine and better understand the reaction times of young drivers to a traffic event originating in their peripheral vision whilst engaged in a mobile phone conversation. The CARRS-Q advanced driving simulator was used to test a sample of young drivers on various simulated driving tasks, including an event that originated within the driver's peripheral vision, whereby a pedestrian enters a zebra crossing from a sidewalk. Thirty-two licensed drivers drove the simulator in three phone conditions: baseline (no phone conversation), hands-free and handheld. In addition to driving the simulator each participant completed questionnaires related to driver demographics, driving history, usage of mobile phones while driving, and general mobile phone usage history. The participants were 21–26 years old and split evenly by gender. Drivers’ reaction times to a pedestrian in the zebra crossing were modelled using a parametric accelerated failure time (AFT) duration model with a Weibull distribution. Also tested where two different model specifications to account for the structured heterogeneity arising from the repeated measures experimental design. The Weibull AFT model with gamma heterogeneity was found to be the best fitting model and identified four significant variables influencing the reaction times, including phone condition, driver's age, license type (provisional license holder or not), and self-reported frequency of usage of handheld phones while driving. The reaction times of drivers were more than 40% longer in the distracted condition compared to baseline (not distracted). Moreover, the impairment of reaction times due to mobile phone conversations was almost double for provisional compared to open license holders. A reduction in the ability to detect traffic events in the periphery whilst distracted presents a significant and measurable safety concern that will undoubtedly persist unless mitigated.     

The effects of perception of risk and importance of answering and initiating a cellular phone call while driving

Recent data suggest that laws banning cellular phone use while driving may not change use patterns, especially among young drivers with high rates of mobile phone adoption. We examined reasons younger drivers choose or do not choose to talk on a phone while driving among a sample of young drivers (n = 276) with very high ownership of cellular phones (over 99%) and a very high use of cellular phones while driving (100% for those that were primary operators of an automobile). Respondents were surveyed for patterns of use, types of call, perceived risk, and motivations for use. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) to explore the relationships between perceived risk of the behavior, emotionality of the call, perceived importance of the call, and how often calls were initiated versus answered. The model suggests that even though people believe that talking on a cellular phone while driving is dangerous, they will tend to initiate a cellular conversation if they believe that the call is important.     

Gender differences in psychosocial predictors of texting while driving

A sample of 158 male and 357 female college students at a midwestern university participated in an on-line study of psychosocial motives for texting while driving. Men and women did not differ in self-reported ratings of how often they texted while driving. However, more women sent texts of less than a sentence while more men sent texts of 1–5 sentences. More women than men said they would quit texting while driving due to police warnings, receiving information about texting dangers, being shown graphic pictures of texting accidents, and being in a car accident. A hierarchical regression for men’s data revealed that lower levels of feeling distracted by texting while driving (20% of the variance), higher levels of cell phone dependence (11.5% of the variance), risky behavioral tendencies (6.5% of the variance) and impulsivity (2.3%) of the variance) were significantly associated with more texting while driving (total model variance = 42%). A separate regression for women revealed that higher levels of cell phone dependence (10.4% of the variance), risky behavioral tendencies (9.9% of the variance), texting distractibility (6.2%), crash risk estimates (2.2% of the variance) and driving confidence (1.3% of the variance) were significantly associated with more texting while driving (total model variance = 31%.) Friendship potential and need for intimacy were not related to men’s or women’s texting while driving. Implications of the results for gender-specific prevention strategies are discussed.     

The impact of personality on driving safety among Chinese high-speed railway drivers

This study explored the impact of personality traits on driving safety in high-speed railway drivers. A sample of high-speed railway drivers in Beijing (N = 214) completed a questionnaire, including information on personality traits and background variables. The NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) was administered to characterize participants based on five personality traits: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness. The survey data were combined with naturalistic data of accident involvement and risky driving behavior in China. Poisson regression results show that drivers with high Conscientiousness and Extraversion caused fewer accidents. Higher Conscientiousness and lower Agreeableness were related to less frequent risky driving behavior. Education level and age negatively moderated the relation between certain personality traits and driving safety. The findings suggest that personality traits should be considered when selecting and training high-speed railway drivers.