Investigating evidence of mobile phone usage by drivers in road traffic accidents

The United Kingdom is witnessing some of the highest volumes of motor vehicle traffic on its roads. In addition, a large number of motor vehicle traffic accidents are reported annually, of which it is estimated that a quarter involve the illegal use of a hand-held mobile device by the driver. Establishing whether mobile phone usage was a causal factor for an accident involves carrying out a forensic analysis of a mobile handset to ascertain a timeline of activity on the device, focussing on whether the handset was used immediately prior to, or during, an incident. Previously, this involved identifying whether SMS messages have been sent or received on the handset alongside an examination of the call logs. However, with advancements in smartphone and application design, there are now a number of ways a driver can interact with their mobile device resulting in less obvious forms of evidence which can be termed as ‘passive activity’. This article provides an analysis of iPhone's CurrentPowerlog.powerlogsystem file and Android device ‘buffer logs’, along with their associated residual data, both of which can potentially be used to establish mobile phone usage at the time of, or leading up to, a motor vehicle accident

In traditionally male‐dominated fields, women are less willing to make sacrifices for their career because discrimination and lower fit with people up the ladder make sacrifices less worthwhile

Women's lower career advancement relative to men is sometimes explained by internal factors such as women's lower willingness to make sacrifices for their career, and sometimes by external barriers such as discrimination. In the current research, positing a dynamic interplay between internal and external factors, we empirically test how external workplace barriers guide individuals' internal decisions to make sacrifices for the advancement of their careers. In two high-powered studies in traditionally male-dominated fields (surgery, N = 1,080; veterinary medicine, N = 1,385), women indicated less willingness than men to make sacrifices for their career. Results of structural equation modeling demonstrated that this difference was explained by women's more frequent experience of gender discrimination and lower perceptible fit with people higher up the professional ladder. These barriers predicted reduced expectations of success in their field (Study 1) and expected success of their sacrifices (Study 2), which in turn predicted lower willingness to make sacrifices. The results explain how external barriers play a role in internal career decision making. Importantly, our findings show that these decision-making processes are similar for men and women, yet, the circumstances under which these decisions are made are gendered. That is, both men and women weigh the odds in deciding whether to sacrifice for their career, but structural conditions may influence these perceived odds in a way that favors men. Overall, this advances our understanding of gender differences, workplace inequalities, and research on the role of “choice” and/or structural discrimination behind such inequalities