Cell phone use while driving laws and motor vehicle driver fatalities: differences in population subgroups and location

Rudisill, Toni Marie; Chu, Haitao; Zhu, Motao

doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.07.015

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additional studies have shown differences in use rates across races and ethnic groups (2, [18][19][20][43][44][45][46]. Several of these studies found use rates to be highest among white drivers (19,20,44), while others showed that handheld talking or texting were more common among drivers identified as black or Hispanic (2, 18,43,45).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparisons in Cell Phone Use Rates between Talking and Manually Manipulating the Handheld Device

Fakhrmoosavi

Kavianipour

Savolainen

et al. 2020

Transportation Research Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cell phone use is among the most prevalent types of in-vehicle distractions. Studies have shown cell phones to have a negative impact on driving performance, with the magnitude of these impacts varying based on the level of engagement required for phone use, as well as the complexity of the driving environment. The development of effective policies and programs to mitigate distracted driving is contingent on an improved understanding of the nature of these relationships. To this end, this study investigates the rate of cell phone use under various settings through a statewide direct observation survey. Data were collected from 200 roadside locations throughout the State of Michigan and a random effects multinomial logit model was estimated to assess how the prevalence of cell phone use varies across drivers. While several studies have investigated the prevalence of cell phone use, this study distinguishes differences in the manner of cell phone use (i.e., talking on a handheld device versus manual manipulation of the device) across drivers while controlling for important contextual factors. The results show cell phone use is generally higher among female drivers and use rates consistently decrease with age. The prevalence of cell phone use is also shown to vary significantly depending on the manner of use. Use rates are shown to differ based on changes in the driving environment, suggesting potential risk compensation on the part of motorists. The results also show a significant correlation in use rates at the same sites over time, which is reflective of important unobserved site-specific factors.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparisons in Cell Phone Use Rates between Talking and Manually Manipulating the Handheld Device

Fakhrmoosavi

Kavianipour

Savolainen

et al. 2020

Transportation Research Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To assess the effectiveness of these laws, studies have investigated the association between cellphone-related laws and driving outcomes including driver cellphone use and fatal crash rates (McCartt et al 2006 ; McCartt et al 2014 ). When specifically looking at young drivers, previous research has found that handheld calling bans were related to a 55% reduction of self-reported calling while driving (Rudisill et al 2018a ), a 58% decrease of roadside-observed phone conversations (Zhu et al 2016 ), and significant reductions in driver fatalities and the rate of involvement in fatal crashes (Lim and Chi 2013 ; Rudisill et al 2018b ). When assessing texting bans, studies have reported no significant associations between the enactment of texting bans and the reduction of self-reported engagement in texting (Rudisill et al 2018a ; Rudisill and Zhu 2015 ), and have seen inconclusive findings with reducing crash fatalities among young drivers (Rudisill et al 2018b ; Ferdinand et al 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When specifically looking at young drivers, previous research has found that handheld calling bans were related to a 55% reduction of self-reported calling while driving (Rudisill et al 2018a ), a 58% decrease of roadside-observed phone conversations (Zhu et al 2016 ), and significant reductions in driver fatalities and the rate of involvement in fatal crashes (Lim and Chi 2013 ; Rudisill et al 2018b ). When assessing texting bans, studies have reported no significant associations between the enactment of texting bans and the reduction of self-reported engagement in texting (Rudisill et al 2018a ; Rudisill and Zhu 2015 ), and have seen inconclusive findings with reducing crash fatalities among young drivers (Rudisill et al 2018b ; Ferdinand et al 2014 ). Furthermore, studies have found young driver bans lack effectiveness in reducing both short-term (5 months after enactment) and long-term (2 years after enactment) observed cellphone use (Foss et al 2009 ; Goodwin et al 2012 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cellphone laws and teens’ calling while driving: analysis of repeated cross-sectional surveys in 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2019

Pope

Andridge

et al. 2020

Inj. Epidemiol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Distracted driving among teens is a public health and safety concern. Most states in the U.S. have sought to restrict cellphone use while driving by enacting laws. This study examines the difference in prevalence of self-reported calling while driving (CWD) between states with different cellphone bans. Methods Demographics and CWD data were extracted from state Youth Risk Behavior Surveys (YRBS) from 14 states in 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2019. The state YRBS is conducted every 2 years with a representative sample of 9th through 12th grade students attending public school. States were grouped by type of cellphone law(s): no ban (the absence of both handheld calling ban and young driver ban), young driver ban (a ban on all forms of cellphone use while driving, for young drivers only), or concurrent ban (a young driver ban plus a ban on handheld calling for all drivers irrespective of age). Poisson regression models with robust variance were used to estimate prevalence ratios comparing CWD prevalence across ban types. Results In total, 157,423 high school students participated in the surveys, and 65,044 (45%) participants reached the minimum age to obtain an intermediate license and drove during the 30 days prior the survey. Approximately 53% of participants reported CWD at least once during the previous 30 days, and the percentages varied widely by states (range: 51–55%). Compared to students from states with no ban, those from states with concurrent bans were 19%(95% CI: 14–24%) less likely to engage in CWD. Students in states with concurrent bans were 23% less likely to engage in CWD compared to students in states with young driver bans (95% CI:17–27%). Conclusions Engaging in CWD is common among teen drivers. The concurrent implementation of a handheld calling ban and a young driver ban was associated with a lower prevalence of CWD.

show abstract

“…4,23 When speci cally looking at young drivers, previous research has found that handheld calling bans were related to a 55% reduction of self-reported calling while driving, 24 a 58% decrease of roadside-observed phone conversations, 25 and signi cant reductions in driver fatalities and the rate of involvement in fatal crashes. 26,27 When assessing texting bans, studies have reported no signi cant associations between the enactment of texting bans and the reduction of self-reported engagement in texting, 24,28 and have seen inconclusive ndings with reducing crash fatalities among young drivers. 27,29 Furthermore, studies have found young driver bans lack effectiveness in reducing both short-term ( ve months after enactment) and long-term (two years after enactment) observed cellphone use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26,27 When assessing texting bans, studies have reported no signi cant associations between the enactment of texting bans and the reduction of self-reported engagement in texting, 24,28 and have seen inconclusive ndings with reducing crash fatalities among young drivers. 27,29 Furthermore, studies have found young driver bans lack effectiveness in reducing both short-term ( ve months after enactment) and long-term (two years after enactment) observed cellphone use. 30,31 None of these studies assessed the combined effect of a handheld calling ban and a young driver ban in reducing self-reported talking on a phone while driving among teen drivers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cellphone laws and teens’ calling while driving: analysis of repeated cross-sectional surveys in 2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019

Pope

Andridge

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Distracted driving among teen is a public health and safety concern. Most states in the U.S. have sought to restrict cellphone use while driving by enacting laws. This study examines the difference in prevalence of self-reported calling while driving (CWD) between states with different cellphone bans.Methods: Demographics and CWD data were extracted from state Youth Risk Behavior Surveys (YRBS) from 14 states in 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2019. The state YRBS is conducted every two years with a representative sample of 9th through 12th grade students attending public school. States were grouped by type of cellphone law(s): no ban (the absence of both handheld calling ban and young driver ban), young driver ban (a ban on all forms of cellphone use while driving, for young drivers only), or concurrent ban (a young driver ban plus a ban on handheld calling for all drivers irrespective of age). Poisson regression models with robust variance were used to estimate prevalence ratios comparing CWD prevalence across ban types.Results: In total, 157,423 high school students participated in the surveys, and 65,044 (45%) participants reached the minimum age to obtain an intermediate license and drove during the 30 days prior the survey. Approximately 53% of participants reported CWD at least once during the previous 30 days, and the percentages varied widely by states (range: 51%-55%). Compared to students from states with no ban, those from states with concurrent bans were 19%(95% CI: 14%-24%) less likely to engage in CWD. Students in states with concurrent bans were 23% less likely to engage in CWD compared to students in states with young driver bans (95% CI:17%-27%). Conclusions: Engaging in CWD is common among teen drivers. The concurrent implementation of a handheld calling ban and a young driver ban was associated with a lower prevalence of CWD.

show abstract

Cell phone use while driving laws and motor vehicle driver fatalities: differences in population subgroups and location

Abstract: The relationships between cell phone laws and non-alcohol-related driver fatalities are modified by driver demographics, particularly for universal hand-held bans. Universal hand-held calling bans may benefit more types of drivers compared to texting bans.

Cited by 14 publications

References 33 publications

Comparisons in Cell Phone Use Rates between Talking and Manually Manipulating the Handheld Device

Comparisons in Cell Phone Use Rates between Talking and Manually Manipulating the Handheld Device

Cellphone laws and teens’ calling while driving: analysis of repeated cross-sectional surveys in 2013, 2015, 2017, and 2019

Cellphone laws and teens’ calling while driving: analysis of repeated cross-sectional surveys in 2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About