Fatal Distraction? A Comparison of the Cell-phone Driver and the Drunk Driver

We used a high-fidelity driving simulator to compare the performance of cell-phone drivers with drivers who were legally intoxicated from ethanol. When drivers were conversing on either a hand-held or hands-free cell-phone, their reactions were sluggish and they attempted to compensate by driving slower and increasing the following distance from the vehicle immediately in front of them. By contrast, when drivers were legally intoxicated they exhibited a more aggressive driving style, following closer to the vehicle immediately in front of them and applying more force while braking. When controlling for driving difficulty and time on task, cell-phone drivers exhibited greater impairment than intoxicated drivers

Crash dieting: The effects of eating and drinking on driving performance

Previous research suggests that compared to mobile phone use, eating and drinking while driving is more common and is seen as lower risk by drivers. Nevertheless, snacking at the wheel can affect vehicle control to a similar extent as using a hands-free phone, and is actually a causal factor in more crashes. So far, though, there has not been a controlled empirical study of this problem. In an effort to fill this gap in the literature, we used the Brunel University Driving Simulator to test participants on a typical urban scenario. At designated points on the drive, which coincided with instructions to eat or drink, a critical incident was simulated by programming a pedestrian to walk in front of the car. Whilst the driving performance variables measured were relatively unaffected by eating and drinking, perceived driver workload was significantly higher and there were more crashes in the critical incident when compared to driving normally. Despite some methodological limitations of the study, when taken together with previous research, the evidence suggests that the physical demands of eating and drinking while driving can increase the risk of a crash

Dialing While Fishtailing: How Mobile Phones, Hands-Free Laws, and Driving Conditions Interact to Affect Traffic Fatalities

Most rich countries in the world and four US states require drivers talking on mobile phones to use hands-free devices. However, previous research has failed to arrive at a consensus on the effect of mobile phones on traffic accidents yet has concluded that the effect of hands-free and hand-held phones on accidents is similar. This paper uses state-level data from 1997-2005 on mobile phone ownership, traffic fatalities, and hands-free laws and finds that (1) mobile phones contribute to traffic fatalities and (2) hands-free laws appear to reduce fatalities. Specifically, mobile phone ownership results in a large and statistically significant increase in traffic fatalities in bad weather or wet road conditions, with no effect in good weather or dry road conditions. Laws requiring drivers to use hands-free technologies while talking reduce traffic fatalities in adverse conditions, and the effect grows stronger and becomes statistically significant the longer the law is in effect, although these longer-term effects are based solely on New York, which in 2001 became the first state to have a hands-free law. The analysis relies on microdata from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System to estimate effects for traffic fatalities in different conditions and to isolate fatalities unlikely to be affected by confounding changes in alcohol policies or graduated licensing laws.mobile phones; cell phones; traffic fatalities; hands-free laws; driving; safety; accidents

Telephone conversation impairs sustained visual attention via a central bottleneck

Recent research has shown that holding telephone conversations disrupts one's driving ability. We asked whether this effect could be attributed to a visual attention impairment. In Experiment 1, participants conversed on a telephone or listened to a narrative while engaged in multiple object tracking (MOT), a task requiring sustained visual attention. We found that MOT was disrupted in the telephone conversation condition, relative to single-task MOT performance, but that listening to a narrative had no effect. In Experiment 2, we asked which component of conversation might be interfering with MOT performance. We replicated the conversation and single-task conditions of Experiment 1 and added two conditions in which participants heard a sequence of words over a telephone. In the shadowing condition, participants simply repeated each word in the sequence. In the generation condition, participants were asked to generate a new word based on each word in the sequence. Word generation interfered with MOT performance, but shadowing did not. The data indicate that telephone conversation disrupts attention at a central stage, the act of generating verbal stimuli, rather than at a peripheral stage, such as listening or speaking

Indiana’s Texting-While-Driving Ban: Why Is It Not Working and How Could It Be Better?

This Note will identify and examine obstacles standing in the way of more effective enforcement of Indiana’s texting while driving ban and make recommendations on how to achieve greater success. Part I will take a closer look at what makes texting while driving so dangerous, situating it within the larger context of distracted driving. Part II will then focus on Indiana’s legislative response in particular, breaking down the texting-while-driving laws and discussing impediments to widespread and consistent enforcement. Part III explores alternative strategies for combating those impediments to enforcement, drawing from the approaches of other areas of law and extralegal alternatives, and finally recommending a strategy for incorporating both statutory and nonlegal adjustments that will best allow Indiana law enforcement to police and deter texting while driving

California Traffic Safety Survey 2018: Data Analysis and Comparison with 2010-2017 Survey Data Results

The 2018 California Traffic Safety Study is the ninth wave of a statewide representative survey of California vehicle drivers on traffic safety perceptions, distracted driving and level of awareness of traffic safety media outreach campaigns. The following data analyses is based on 1,395 survey responses collected in August and September of 2018.The analyzed data only includes the valid answers for survey items, while excluding all reported “Don’t know” responses as well as response refusals. For this reason, the valid percentage of responses differs for each question due to the number of valid answers given to a particular question. The total answer per survey question is reflected in the total number of completed surveys, which are listed in each table. In addition, some questions are skipped based on selected answer and the sample sizes for each survey item vary accordingly. Due to rounding to one decimal point, some percentages presented do not always add up to the exact value of 100.0%.All comparisons to previous years’ data refer to the comparable longitudinal field surveys conducted with California vehicle drivers since 2010. The scope and overall sample size of the 2018 survey was comparable to the sample size of the 2017 data collection.In total, 1,395 vehicle drivers were intercepted for the study, resulting in an overall confidence interval of +/- 2.63, at a confidence level of 95%

Psychophysiological measures of driver distraction and workload while intoxicated

The crash risk associated with cell phone use while driving is a contentious issue. Many states are introducing Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) that may be accessed with cell phones while driving (e.g., 511 Traveler Information Services). In these contexts, there is a need for relevant research to determine the risk of cell phone use. This study compared driver performance while conversing on a hands-free cell phone to conditions of operating common in-vehicle controls (e.g., radio, fan, air conditioning) and alcohol intoxication (BAC 0.08). In addition, the study examined the combined effects of being distracted and being intoxicated given that there may be a higher risk of a crash if the driver engages in a combination of risk factors. During simulated traffic scenarios, resource allocation was assessed through an eventrelated potential (ERP) novelty oddball paradigm. Intoxicated drivers were less attentive to all stimuli and drivers engaged in secondary tasks had weaker responses to unexpected novel sounds in brain regions associated with evaluative processing. Drivers conversing on the cell phone and in-vehicle tasks while sober had lower accuracy during the target tone task than intoxicated drivers not completing any secondary task

Psychophysiological Measures of Driver Distraction and Workload While Intoxicated

The crash risk associated with cell phone use while driving is acontentious issue. Many states are introducing Advanced Traveler InformationSystems (ATIS) that may be accessed with cell phones while driving (e.g., 511Traveler Information Services). In these contexts, there is a need for relevantresearch to determine the risk of cell phone use. This study compared driverperformance while conversing on a hands-free cell phone to conditions ofoperating common in-vehicle controls (e.g., radio, fan, air conditioning) andalcohol intoxication (BAC 0.08). In addition, the study examined the combinedeffects of being distracted and being intoxicated given that there may be a higherrisk of a crash if the driver engages in a combination of risk factors. Duringsimulated traffic scenarios, resource allocation was assessed through an eventrelatedpotential (ERP) novelty oddball paradigm. Intoxicated drivers were lessattentive to all stimuli and drivers engaged in secondary tasks had weakerresponses to unexpected novel sounds in brain regions associated with evaluativeprocessing. Drivers conversing on the cell phone and in-vehicle tasks while soberhad lower accuracy during the target tone task than intoxicated drivers notcompleting any secondary task