Proceed to our Distracted Driving Resources page for links to sources for further information.

1)  Traffic Safety Facts
2)  Driver Attitudes & Behaviors
3)  Teens, Millennials & Young Drivers
3 A) GDL – Graduated Driver Licensing
4)  Parents & Adults
5)  Cognitive Distractions: “Hands Free", Voice Activated and Infotainment Systems
6)  Cell Phone Conversation vs. Talking With Passenger
7)  Cell Phone Driver vs. Drunk Driver
8)  Text Messaging
9)  Effectiveness of Bans on Texting and Hand-held Use of Cell Phones
10) Seat Belts
11) Pedestrians & Bicyclists
12) Evaluating the Effectiveness of Distracted Driving Initiatives

1) Traffic Safety Facts

NHTSA’s Report “The True Cost of Economic and Societal Impacts of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2019, (February 2023) indicated that rather than 3,100 deaths per years, distracted driving fatalities were likely in excess of 10,000 per year. Accordingly, the % of traffic fatalities caused by distracted driving was likely to be about 29% as opposed to 10%.

New GHSA Report Finds That Traffic Crash Fatalities Disproportionately Affect Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC),  June 2021. The study found that traffic deaths overall increased during the pandemic despite less miles driven, with blacks being involved in fatal crashes at about 20% higher rate than whites. Suggested reasons for the disparity include black communities are crisscrossed by more dangerous roads, and during the pandemic, people of color were more likely to have been deemed “essential workers” without an option to stay home. The GHSA committed to working on a long-term plan to correct the inequity, including analyzing whether traffic enforcement inequities were contributory.

Cox, A. “A brief review of distracted driving research”. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety(IIHS), October 2021. This is a great summary of distracted driving research covering a wide range of topics, including driver typography, the prevalence of distracted driving, perceptions about the safety of driving distracted and messaging and intervention strategies. It was prepared by the IIHS in support of the National Coalition on Distracted Driving(NCDD).

Distracted Parents -Survey Results, March 2021. National Safety Council and Cumberland Valley Firemen’s Association/Emergency Responder Safety Institute. The survey revealed that nearly all parents will alter their behaviors to reduce distracted driving when children are present in the car. Specifically a 44% decrease in manipulating GPS devices; 34% decrease in using digital music devices or apps; 21% decrease in glancing at or reading notifications. Parents reported that the largest deterrents to phone use while driving included having child(ren) tell them they felt scared when parents used phone while driving.

Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities for the First Half (Jan–Jun) of 2020, October 2020. A statistical projection of traffic fatalities for the first half of 2020 shows that an estimated 16,650 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes. This represents a decrease of 2 percent as compared to the 16,988 fatalities reported to have occurred in the first half of 2019.  Preliminary data reported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) shows that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the first 6 months of 2020 decreased by about 264.2 billion miles, or about a 16.6-percent decrease. Accordingly, the fatality rate for the first half of 2020 increased to 1.25 fatalities per 100 million VMT, up from the 1.06 fatalities per 100
million VMT in the first half of 2019.

2109 Fatal Motor Vehicle Crash Data, December, 2020.  There were 36,096 fatalities in motor vehicle traffic crashes in 2019, a 2% reduction from 2018 and the lowest rate for vehicle miles travelled since 2014. There was however, a 9.9% increase in distracted driving fatalities to 3,142 (284 more than 2018), representing 8.7% of all fatalities in 2019. Fatalities decreased in most other traffic categories compared to 2018 including an 11.2% decrease in drowsy driving fatalities, a 2.7% reduction in pedestrian fatalities (169 fewer), a 2.9% decrease in bicycle fatalities and a 5.3% decrease in alcohol impaired driving fatalities, the lowest percentage since 1982 when NHTSA began reporting alcohol data.

Status Report -Distracted Driving, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Vol. 54, No. 1 | January 24, 2019 -This IIHS Report has a number of useful findings including the frequency with which observed drivers are distracted, in 2018 57% more likely to be manipulating a cellphone than in 2014, and drivers much more likely to be actively manipulating a cellphone as opposed to talking on a hand-held cell phone. Additionally, it was determined from a survey that only 1 in 5 iPhone owners of newer iPhones had Apples’ “Do Not Disturb While Driving” feature set to automatically turn on while driving.

2018 Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview, DOT HS 812 826, NHTSA, October, 2019 -Distracted driving deaths fell in 2018 by the largest percentage in 10 years. In 2017 3,242 people were killed in distracted driving crashes and in 2018, 2,841, an overall approximate 12% decrease. There were 36,560 total people killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes on U.S. roadways during 2018, a 2.4% decrease from 37,473 in 2017.  However, pedestrian and bicyclist deaths increased to a combined total of about 7,000 for the highest annual totals since 2009. Pedestrian and bicyclist deaths now account for about 20% of all highway fatalities.

U.S. DOT Announces 2017 Roadway Fatalities Down, NHTSA, Oct. 2018 — After two years of large increases, deaths caused by motor vehicles decreased by 2% for 2017. While the decrease is an improvement and appears to be a continuing trend for 2018, many of these deaths are still preventable. Of the 37,133 lives that were lost due to vehicle crashes in 2017, 8.5% (3,166) were due to distracted driving. Irresponsible behaviors such as distracted, drowsy, and reckless driving should be eliminated in order to ensure that these numbers continue to go down for following years.

NHTSA 2016 Fatal Traffic Crash Data (Oct. 2017)  – 37,461 lives were lost on U.S. roads in 2016, an increase of 5.6 percent from 2015. Distracted driving fatalities declined by 2.2% , drowsy driving fatalities declined by 3.5%, while deaths related to other reckless behaviors – including speeding, alcohol impairment, and not wearing seat belts – continued to increase. Pedestrian deaths increased 9% to 5,987 (the highest number since 1990) and bicyclist deaths increased by 1.3% to 840 (the highest number since 1991).

University of Iowa, Why talking on cell phones adversely affects driving performance, June 2017 – Researchers  used computerized experiments that tracked eye movements while asking subjects to answer true or false questions to mimic having a cell phone conversation or even a conversation with a passenger. Doing so caused participants to take about twice as long to direct their eyes to a new object than those who were not asked to respond. This phenomenon is referred to as “attentional disengagement.”  And, the more the brain was distracted the worse participants performance became, a “snowball effect.”

NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, Distracted Driving 2015, DOT HS 812 381, March 2017 – In 2015, there were 3,477 people killed and an estimated additional 391,000 injured in motor vehicle crashes involving distracted drivers; 10% fatal crashes, 15% of injury crashes, and 14% of all police-reported traffic crashes were reported as distraction-affected; 9% of all drivers 15 to 19 years old involved in fatal crashes were distracted at the time of the crashes. This age group has the largest proportion of drivers who were distracted at the time of the fatal crashes; there were 551 nonoccupants (pedestrians, bicyclists, and others) killed in distraction-affected crashes.

NHTSA 2015 Motor Vehicle Crashes Overview, NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts, DOT HS 812 318, August 2016.  The nation lost 35,092 people in traffic crashes in 2015, ending a 5-decade trend of declining fatalities with a 7.2% increase in deaths from 2014. The final data released  by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration showed traffic deaths rising across nearly every segment of the population. The last single-year increase of this magnitude was in 1966, when fatalities rose 8.1% from the previous year. Distracted driving fatalities rose at a greater percentage than those for drunk or drowsy driving, speeding and failing to wear a seatbelt.

Motor vehicle crash fatalities in the U.S. could drop by half with proven strategies according to a July 2016 CDC report comparing fatality rates between US and other high-income countries. The US had quadruple the fatality rate of Sweden and the UK and is about double that of France, Germany and Canada. Speeding, using seat belts and  booster seats, drunk and distracted driving were all areas where the UCS could improve and save lives. Average seat belt use for the countries in the survey was 94% while the US is still under 90% seatbelt compliance.

NJ State Police Year to Date Statewide Fatal Crash Statistics for December 31, 2014 – 3.9%  increase in highway fatalities in 2013 by 21 victims, bringing the total to 563, up from 542 in 2013;  driver, passenger and pedacyclists fatalities all decreased from 2013; # of pedestrians killed spiked by 28%; in 2013, 132 pedestrians were killed and in 2014, 170

Traffic Safety Facts 2013 NHTSA, 2014 (DOT HS 812 101) – A compilation of motor vehicle crash data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the General Estimates System – data shows a 3.1% decrease from 2012 and a nearly 25% decline in overall highway deaths since 2004; in 2013, 32,719 people died in traffic crashes; estimated number of people injured in crashes also declined by 2.1%.

“The Economic and Societal Impact Of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010”, NHTSA, 2014 (DOT HS 812 013) – Distracted driving crashes responsible for $129 billion in societal costs in 2010

“Traffic Safety Facts 2012”, NHTSA (DOT HS 812 032) – A compilation of motor vehicle crash data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the General Estimates System

“Traffic Safety Facts 2011”, NHTSA (DOT HS 811 754) –  A compilation of motor vehicle crash data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the General Estimates System

“Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes as a Leading Cause Of Death in the United States, 2008 and 2009”,  NHTSA, 2012  (DOT HS 811 620) – Fatalities in motor vehicle crashes have declined by 25%  since 2005, yet remained the leading cause of death  for 8 to 34 year-olds in 2008 and for 8 to 24 year- olds in 2009; 2nd leading causes of death for 25 to 34 year- olds in 2009

“Crashes Involving Cell Phones: Challenges of Collecting and Reporting Reliable Crash Data”, NSC, 2013 – cell phone distracted driving crashes “vastly under-reported”; review of 180 fatal crashes from 2009 to 2011, where evidence indicated driver cell phone use –  in 2011 only 52% were coded in the national data as involving cell phone use;  in 2012, highway fatalities increased for the first time in seven years;  estimate that 25% of all crashes involve cell phone use

“Distracted Driving 2011”, NHTSA, 2013 (DOT HS 811 737) – In 2011: 3,331 people killed in crashes involving distracted drivers and 387,000 injured, representing 10% of all fatal crashes and 17% of all accidents that caused injuries; 12% of fatalities involved the use of a cell phone (talking/listening to a cell phone, dialing/texting or other cell-phone-related activities); 5% of those injured involved a cell-phone; for 15 – 19 yr.old drivers involved in fatal crashes, 21% were distracted by the use of a cell phone

“An Evaluation of the Visual Demands of Portable Telematics Technologies Among Young Adult Drivers”, Mehler, et al., (MIT Age Lab White Paper) 2012 – Study examines NHTSA’s 2012 proposal limiting glances away from the road to use electronic devices to no more than 2 seconds for any single glance and 12 seconds total to complete the task. Studied were times to dial a flip phone, input phone number using a touch screen, using a portable navigation device and for comparison purposes manual interaction with radio at three levels of complexity. All three radio tasks and flip phone dialing came closest to meeting the proposed standard, while touch phone entry and using navigation system did not.

“Distracted Driving 2009", NHTSA, 2010 (DOT HS 811 379)  – over 5,000 people killed and over 440,000 injured in motor vehicle accidents connected to distracted driving, representing 16% of all fatal crashes and 20% of all accidents that caused injuries

“Driver Distraction in Commercial Motor Vehicle Operations”, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 2009 – Increase likelihood of crashing while engaged in specific tasks: text messaging – 23 X, rummaging through grocery bag – 10 X, writing on pad or notebook – 9 X, using calculator – 8 X, looking at a map – 7 X, dialing a cell phone – 6 X, personal grooming – 4 X, reaching for object in vehicle – 3 X

“The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment," NHTSA 2006 – Observations recorded by in-vehicle instrumentation show that almost 80% of all crashes and 65% of all near-crashes involved the driver looking away from the roadway just prior to the event

“Distracted Driving and Risk of Road Crashes among Novice and Experienced Drivers”, Klauer, SG, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (N Engl J Med) 2014 – Data collected from recording devices installed in participants’ vehicles from 2003-04  (experienced drivers – average age 36.2 ) and 2006-08 (novice drivers – average age 16.4 );  actual crashes and near-crashes measured  and related to performance of secondary tasks including reaching for cell phone, dialing cell phone, talking on cell phone, texting, reaching for other objects, eating or drinking and adjusting vehicle controls –  secondary tasks requiring drivers to look away from the road ahead,  are significant risk factors for crashes and near-crashes, particularly among novice drivers

2) Driver Attitudes & Behaviors

Cox, A. “A brief review of distracted driving research”. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety(IIHS), October 2021.
This is a great summary of distracted driving research covering a wide
range of topics, including driver typography, the prevalence of
distracted driving, perceptions about the safety of driving distracted
and messaging and intervention strategies. It was prepared by the IIHS
in support of the National Coalition on Distracted Driving(NCDD).

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 2019 Traffic Safety Culture Index, June 2020—An overwhelming number of drivers view typing (96.2%), reading (94.3%), and talking (79.7%) on a hand-held cellphone while driving to be very or extremely dangerous. Despite that, 43.2% of drivers report having driven while talking on a hand-held cellphone, having read (38.6%) and typed a text/e-mail (29.3%) on a hand-held cellphone while driving at least once in the past 30 days. Reported distracted driving behaviors were as follows, grouped by age: reading a text or e-mail and sending a text or e-mail,  respectively, 16-18 year-olds (46 and 35%);19-24 year-olds (54 and 50%); and 25-39 year-olds (56 and 49%.)

The Harsh Realities of Phone Distraction, Cambridge Mobile Telematics, November, 2020. This white paper looks at distracted driving using the company’s data from millions of miles of users of its telematics devices. Its data suggests that the true scope of distracted driving has been underestimated by traffic authorities and that the problem is much worse than generally believed to be. CMT references NHTSA data that about 10% of drivers are distracted at any given moment during daylight hours. However, its data revealed that in 2019, 37% of car trips involved at least 20 seconds of cumulative phone distraction, and that during daytime hours, that number rose to 41%. They concluded that “when looking at the average number of distractions per 100 miles, distraction has increased by 15% in three years across the U.S.” The Report provides a different look at distracted driving, statistics, and solutions.

Status Report -Distracted Driving, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Vol. 54, No. 1 | January 24, 2019 -This IIHS Report has a number of useful findings including the frequency with which observed drivers are distracted, in 2018 57% more likely to be manipulating a cellphone than in 2014, and drivers much more likely to be actively manipulating a cellphone as opposed to talking on a hand-held cellphone. Additionally, it was determined from a survey that only 1 in 5 iPhone owners of newer iPhones had Apples’ “Do Not Disturb While Driving” feature set to automatically turn on while driving.  Only 1 in 5 iPhone owners of newer iPhones had Apples’  “Do Not Disturb While Driving” feature set to automatically turn on while driving.

“2019 Distracted Driving Statistics", The Zebra, March 2019—survey of 2,000 Americans – 37% of respondents aged 18 to 34 said they felt a high degree of pressure to respond to work-related messages while driving, compared to 25% of the national average among all age groups; parents with young children were 13% more likely to be distracted behind the wheel as opposed to drivers with no children; iPhone users repeatedly had a significantly higher trend of participating in distracting activities behind the wheel as opposed to Android users

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 2018 Traffic Safety Culture Index, June 2019 — While 75% of drivers support a law against holding and talking on a cell phone, over half admit to driving while talking on a handheld device in the past 30 days; similarly, 88% of drivers support a law against typing, reading, or sending a text/email while driving, yet 41.3% admit to reading and 32.1% admit to typing while operating a motor vehicle in the past month. Although many confess to participating in distracted driving, 95.9% of drivers believe reading and 96.7% believe typing a text is very or extremely dangerous while driving a vehicle. Typically, talking on a handheld phone is believed to be less dangerous as that percentage decreases to 79.8%.

Parents of 4–10-Year-Olds Report on Their Distracted Driving Behaviors with Children in the Car. Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 2018. Despite well-known risks to driving distracted, many parents of 4–10-year-olds will still drive distracted. 

“2019 Distracted Driving Statistics", The Zebra, March 2019 — survey of 2,000 Americans – 37% of respondents aged 18 to 34 said they felt a high degree of pressure to respond to work-related messages while driving, compared to 25% of the national average among all age groups; parents with young children were 13% more likely to be distracted behind the wheel as opposed to drivers with no children; iPhone users repeatedly had a significantly higher trend of participating in distracting activities behind the wheel as opposed to Android users

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 2017 Traffic Safety Culture Index, March, 2018 – Reveals that drivers have a “do as I say, not as I do" attitude.  Most drivers (87.5%) perceive that distracted drivers are a bigger problem today than in past years. Moreover, distracted driving outpaced all other issues as a growing concern. It was followed by traffic congestion at 74.5%, aggressive drivers at 68.1%, drivers using drugs at 54.9% and drunk driving at 43.4%. Despite those feelings, 45% read a text and 34% sent a text in the 30 days prior to the survey.

Travelers Insurance Company poll, Sept. 2017 – Of those who drive to or for work, 43% will answer or make work-related communications while driving, including texting, emailing and calling. The reasons those drivers gave for doing so were 38% felt they needed to always be  available, 37% feared missing out on something important at work and 17% did not want to upset the boss. By age groups, 18-34 and 35-44 year olds were tied at 54% for the largest percentage of drivers engaged in work-related communications while driving.

State Farm Distracted Driving Survey 2016, March, 2017 –  revealed that  after several years of steady increases in self-reported distracting cellphone activities, only two distracted driving behaviors involving cell phones (taking pictures and recording video) increased this year. Drivers continued to engage in various cellphone activities while driving despite finding these activities distracting and despite thinking that those  behaviors increased the likelihood of a crash. The most cited reasons why drivers engaged in these risky behaviors were as follows: text messaging (habit, staying in touch, efficiency), accessing the internet (search for answer, habit, boredom), updating social media (habit, boredom, staying in touch).

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 2016 Traffic Safety Culture Index, February, 2017 – While texting while driving remained about the same for 16-18 year olds at 34%, it skyrocketed to 60 % for 19-24 year olds and remained at  50% for 25-39 year olds. 88% of young millennials engaged in at least one risky behavior behind the wheel in the past 30 days, earning the top spot of worst behaved U.S. drivers. These  behaviors included texting while driving, red-light running and speeding.

DISTRACTED DRIVING TRENDS: USE OF HAND-HELD CELLPHONES FOR TALKING DECREASING, INCREASING FOR INTERNET AND SOCIAL MEDIA, State Farm Insurance, Dec. 2015  (Full report here) – 7th annual online survey of 1,000 U.S.  consumers ages 18+. Accessing the internet while driving has more than doubled since 2009; texting has stayed nearly the same and talking on a hand-held cell phone has decreased

“Smartphone Use Behind the Wheel Survey“, AT&T, April 2015 – Telephone survey of 2,000 + respondents aged 16 to 62: 62% keep phone within easy reach while driving; texting ranks the highest of all smartphone activities behind the wheel; Facebook tops the list of social platforms used while driving; 30% of people who post to Twitter while driving do it “all the time”; habit, the perception of being able to safely do 2 things at once and fear of missing something important are the primary reasons for smartphone activities behind the wheel

“2014 Traffic Safety Culture Index,”  AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2014 – An attitude of “Do as I say, not as I do” continues to persist among drivers.  85% of respondents stated that distracted drivers were a safety concern.  While 78.6% say texting and e-mailing are a very serious threat and 84.4% say it is completely unacceptable, more than one-third read a text or e-mail while driving, with 27% admitting to typing one.  Two-thirds say hand-held cell phone use is unacceptable, while two-thirds also say hands-free phone is acceptable. Nearly half (46.6%) who use speech-based in-vehicle systems do not believe they are distracting.  Support for bans is as follows – Texting at 89.3%,  hand-held mobile devices at 67.8% and bans of both hand-held and hands-free devices is 40.2%.

“Driver Electronic Use in 2012“, NHTSA, 2014 (DOT HS 811 884) – The percentage of drivers text-messaging or visibly manipulating hand-held devices increased from 1.3 percent in 2011 to 1.5 percent in 2012; held cell phone use continued to be higher among females, highest among 16 to 24 year-olds and lowest among drivers 70 and older

“2012 Traffic Safety Culture Index”, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2013 –  More than 2 in 3 drivers report talking on their cell phone while driving at least once in the past month, and nearly 1 in 3 say they did so fairly often or regularly; more than 26.6% admit to typing or sending a text message or email while driving in the past month and 34.7%, reading a text message or email

“Driver Electronic Device Use in 2011",  NHTSA, 2013 (DOT HS 811 719) – % of drivers text-messaging or visibly manipulating hand-held devices increased significantly for a second year in a row from 0.9% in 2010 to 1.3% in 2011; 660,000 vehicles driven by people using hand-held cell phones at a typical daylight moment in 2011; higher among females and higher among 16-24 year- olds than older drivers

“Self-reported and Observed Risky Driving Behaviors Among Frequent and Infrequent Cell Phone Users”, Zhao, N., et al, (Accident Analysis & Prevention) 2012 – 2013   –  Study results revealed that those who use cell phones while driving more frequently are also likely to engage in other driving behaviors that increase overall crash risk, including driving faster, changing lanes more frequently and hard braking

“Stuck in the 70s: the Role of Social Norms in Distracted Driving” , Atchley, P.et al.,  Accident Analysis Prevention 2012 –  Participants were asked to rate responsibility for crash scenarios and to levy fines and jail time –  When social norms, laws against texting were provided,  texting drivers were found more responsible than when the social norms were not provided;  the author believes that in order to reduce texting while driving our social norms about distracted driving must change, similar to what occurred with respect to drunk  driving

“National Phone Survey on Distracted Driving Attitudes and Behaviors”, NHTSA, 2011 (DOT HS 811 55) – Survey of 6,002 drivers 18 and older from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Most commonly performed potentially distracting behaviors while driving: talking to passengers in the vehicle (80%), adjusting the car radio (65%), eating/drinking (45%), making/accepting phone calls (40%), interacting with children in the back seat (27%), and using a portable music player (30%); men more likely than women to use navigation systems (55% of men, 46% of women), use smartphones for driving directions (30% men, 21% women), and use portable music players with headphones (4% men, 1% women); women more likely than men to interact with children in the back seat (23% men, 31% women) and do personal grooming (3% men, 8% women); men and women equally likely to make or accept phone calls (42% men, 39% women), read incoming e-mail or text messages (10% men, 9% women), and send messages (both 6%); drivers younger than 25 are 2 to 3  times more likely than older drivers to read or send text messages or e-mails

“The Choice to Text and Drive in Younger Drivers: Behavior May Shape Attitude”,  Atchley, P., et al., Transportation Research Board of the National Academies 2011. Study suggests that if we choose to engage in risky behaviors, i.e. texting while driving, we may change our attitudes, minimizing the risk because we engage in that behavior; attitudes may not shape behaviors but our behaviors may actually shape our attitudes

3) Teens,  Millennials & Young Drivers

In a USDOT study (August 2022), the EndDD.org teen distracted driving presentation was found to be effective in teaching students about distracted driving, increasing the likelihood that they would intervene when their drivers drove distracted, increased actual interventions and also reduced parent distracted driving behaviors.

Threat appeals reduce impulsive decision making associated with texting while driving: A behavioral economic approach (March 2019). In this study of college students the
threat appeals reduced the degree of impulsive decision making
associated with texting while driving, led to greater anticipated regret
from texting while driving, and decreased intentions to text while
driving. The results suggest that video-based threat appeals are
promising intervention strategies for the public health challenge of
texting while driving.

Teens and Speeding: Breaking the Deadly Cycle, GHSA, January, 2020. GHSA found that from 2015 to 2019, teen drivers and passengers (16-19 years of age) accounted for a greater proportion of speeding-related fatalities (43%) than all other age groups (30%). During this five-year period, 4,930 teen drivers and passengers died in speeding-related crashes. Other findings include that for speeding-related fatal crashes involving teens the driver is more likely to be male, have run off the road or rolled the vehicle and be unbuckled.

Attitudes on technological, social, and behavioral economic strategies to reduce cellphone use among teens while driving, Traffic Injury Prevention, 2018. Delgado, et al. This study asked teens a number of questions about cellphone use and the likelihood of giving up that use under a number of situations. Most teens were willing or somewhat willing to give up reading texts (90%), sending texts (95%), and social media (99%) while driving. However, they were not willing to give up navigation (59%) and music applications (43%).  Overall, the following strategies were rated as likely to be very effective for reducing texting while driving: gain-framed financial incentives (75%), loss-framed financial incentives (63%), group-based financial incentives (58%), insurance discounts (53%), automatic phone locking while driving (54%), e-mail notifications to parents (47%), automated responses to incoming texts (42%), peer concern (18%), and parental concern (15%).

Global driving study finds American millennials are worst offenders of phone use behind the wheel, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, August 13, 2019 –  53% of American millennials have sent emails or texts compared to 33% for Western European millennials. There were similar differences noted for using a phone, or glancing at incoming notifications or texts and emails.

“Attitudes on technological, social, and behavioral economic strategies to reduce cellphone use among teens while driving” M. Kit Delgado, et al., Traffic Injury Prevention March 2018 — Online survey of 153 teen drivers who own smartphones and admitted to texting while driving – Teens were more open to giving up reading (90%) and sending (95%) texts than they were for navigation (59%) and music applications (43%). Financial incentives appear to be the best strategy for encouraging teens to put away their phones while driving, as 75% of those surveyed were open to gain-framed incentives and 63% were open to loss-framed incentives. Insurance discounts, parental and peer involvement, and automated response systems also piqued the interest of teens. 60% of teens do not want their parents to be able to monitor their phone usage behind the wheel.

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety 2016 Traffic Safety Culture Index, February, 2017 – While texting while driving remained about the same for 16-18 year olds at 34%, it skyrocketed to 60 % for 19-24 year olds and remained at  50% for 25-39 year olds. 88% of young millennials engaged in at least one risky behavior behind the wheel in the past 30 days, earning the top spot of worst behaved U.S. drivers. These  behaviors included texting while driving, red-light running and speeding.

NTSB Safety Alert, “Drowsy Driving Among Young Drivers", Feb. 2017 – 1 in 5 fatal crashes involve a drowsy driver and drivers aged 16 to 24 are most at risk. The problem is outlined, a related crash analyzed and tips provided for teens and parents

Teenagers Fatality Facts 2016, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Highway Loss Data Institute – A total of 2,820 teenagers ages 13-19 died in motor vehicle crashes in 2016. This is 68% fewer than in 1975 and 3% more than in 2015. About 2 of every 3 teenagers killed in crashes in 2016 were males. Teenagers accounted for 8% of motor vehicle crash deaths, comprised 9% of passenger vehicle (cars, pickups, SUVs, and vans) occupant deaths among all ages, 5% of pedestrian deaths, 3% of motorcyclist deaths, 8% of bicyclist deaths and 15% of all-terrain vehicle rider death. (Data collected and comparisons made in easy to read charts back to 1975).

“Distraction and Teen Crashes: Even Worse Than We Thought,”   AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2015 –   University of Iowa researchers studied  the extent  to which teen driver distraction was involved in crashes by viewing videos from 1,691 in-vehicle cameras taken for the 6 seconds leading up to the crash . The results indicated that some form of distraction was involved in 58% of the crashes studied, with speaking to passengers and cell phone use as the two most frequent causes. The frequency  of distraction-involved crashes was found go be about 4 times that previously reported by NHTSA (14%). Some of the videos are available for viewing.

“Distracted &  Dangerous – Helping States Keep Teens Focused on the Road,”  GHSA, Aug. 2014 – Comprehensive summary of nationwide efforts to date to combat teen distracted driving; highlights teen distracted driving research and the extent of the teen distracted driving problem;  summarizes applicable legislative and enforcement efforts; describes innovative programs from across the country that are showing promise in reducing distracted driving crashes

“Is that Mom on the Phone? Teen Drivers and Distraction“, LaVoie, et al,  American Psychological Association, Aug. 2014 – Interview and survey of over 400 teen drivers from 31 states ages 15 to 18 –  more than 1/2 of teens talk on cell phone to mom or dad while driving with  teens reporting that  parents expect to be able to reach them;  teens more likely to send text messages to friends than parents

“Fatality Facts, Teeneagers",  IIHS 2014-  Fatal crash rate per mile driven for 16-19 year-olds nearly 3 times the rate for drivers ages 20 and over and nearly twice as high for 16-17 year-olds as for 18-19 year-olds

“Teens and Technology 2013", Pew Research Internet Project – Survey of  teens ages 12-17 and their parents – 78% of teens have a cell phone, 47% of those own smartphones – up 14% from 2011;  1 in 4 teens are “cell-mostly” internet users

“Special Considerations in Distracted Driving With Teens”, Durbin, D, et al, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) 2014  (Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine) –  Reviews a number of factors contributing to increased crash risk for teens, including use of mobile devices, inexperience, parental influences on attitudes and behaviors pertinent to distracted driving

“Are We Doing Enough to Prevent the Perfect Storm?: Novice Drivers, ADHD, and Distracted Driving”,  Winston, FK, McDonald,CC. Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) 2013 Journal of the American Medical Association -Pediatrics. Recognizing that motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for teens, but that the GDL laws have been the only really effective intervention to reduce deaths, the authors urge more effective interventions to reduce teen deaths

“Don’t Txt n Drive: Teens Not Getting Msg“, American Academy of Pediatrics, 2013 –  43% of youths admit to texting while driving; prevalence higher among males, older teens

“Bridgestone Young Driver  Survey Results 2014”, –  More than half of teens admit they will occasionally text and drive; 70% likely to do so at a red light; 60% said they have texted while driving alone compared to 37% with a friend; 70% have asked a friend or parent to stop texting while driving

“Bridgestone Young Driver Survey Results 2013”, –  Comprehensive survey of teen attitudes and behaviors, including participation in distracted driving behaviors,  broken down by daytime versus nighttime –  97% have texted while driving during daytime  and 47% at night; 92% when driving alone and 32% when driving with friends (suggesting perhaps social pressure may be reducing texting);   teens observed  parents’ driving distractions  including hand held cell phone use 60%, hands-free cell phone use 46%, using navigation 40%, reading texts 29%, sending texts 25%; nearly 2/3 of teens viewed texting as unacceptable but 45% admitted to reading and 37% to sending texts

“Distracted driving Among Newly Licensed Teens“, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2012 – Part of an in-depth naturalistic three-phase study of 50 families in NC with a novice teenage driver. Use of electronic devices was the most common distracted driving behavior and was found in 7% of the clips; nearly twice as many teens were observed or suspected of operating an electronic device (e.g., texting) than were seen talking on a hand-held phone; excluding electronic device use, teens were observed engaging in distracting behaviors in 15.1% of video clips: adjusting controls was the most common (6.2%), followed by personal grooming (3.8%), and eating or drinking (2.8%); females twice as likely as males to be using an electronic device; electronic device use was most common when drivers carried no passengers, and were least common when a parent or other adult was in the vehicle

“Young Drivers Report the Highest Level of Phone Involvement in Crash or Near-Crash Incidences”, NHTSA, 2012 – 68% of drivers 18 to 20 are willing to answer incoming phone calls on driving trips; drivers 18 to 20 have the highest incidence of self- reported crash or near-crash experiences and the highest incidence of phone involvement at the time of the crash or near-crash; most do not think that talking on a phone while driving affects their driving performance

“Prevalence of Teen Driver Errors Leading to Serious Motor Vehicle Crashes“, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) & State Farm Insurance Companies (Accident Analysis & Prevention) 2011 – Analysis from federal database of more than 800 crashes involving teen drivers – 75% of crashes due a critical teen driver error, with 3 common errors accounting for nearly 1/2 of all serious crashes: 21% ue to lack of scanning that is needed to detect and respond to hazards;  21% due to going too fast for road conditions and 21% due to being distracted by something inside or outside the vehicle

Teen Driver Distraction Study  –  University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute and Toyota, 2012 – Significant correlation between parent and teen distractions.  Teens whose parents drive distracted are 2 to 4 times likely to also drive distracted.

“U.S. High School Students Improve Motor Vehicle-related Health Behaviors", CDC 2012 – Students showed improvement in seat belt usage, alcohol usage and driving, and not being driven by an impaired driver; the challenge – 1 in 3 high school students had texted or e-mailed while driving during the past 30 days

“Cause for Concern for Summer Drivers: Speeding, Texting, and Distracted Driving Prevalent in a High Percentage of Teens’ “Near Misses” According to Liberty Mutual/SADD Study”, 2011 – National study of 2,294 high school students, 68% of teens admit to have narrowly avoided a crash –  more than half of those reporting multiple instances — more apt to blame external causes such as other drivers or the weather; yet, as to what they were doing at the time of the incident, speeding: 30%, texting while driving: 21%, talking to passengers: 20%, changing songs on MP3 player: 17%

“The Choice to Text and Drive in Younger Drivers: Behavior May Shape Attitude”,  Atchley, P., et al., Transportation Research Board of the National Academies 2011. Study suggests that if we choose to engage in risky behaviors, i.e. texting while driving, we may change our attitudes, minimizing the risk because we engage in that behavior; attitudes may not shape behaviors but our behaviors may actually shape our attitudes

A) GDL – Graduated Driver Licensing

“Long-Term Changes in Crash Rates After Introduction of a Graduated Driver Licensing Decal Provision“, Curry, Elliot, et al., (American Journal of Preventive Medicine) 2014 – NJ’s Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL) decal provision is associated with a sustained two-year decline in crash rates among intermediate (i.e., probationary) teen drivers. Crash rates decreased 1.8% per year before the provision and 7.9% per year in the post-decal period. For several crash types, effects appeared to be particularly strong for 18- and 19-year-olds. Crash involvement of an estimated 3,197 intermediate drivers was prevented in the first two years after the decal’s implementation.

“Graduated Driver Licensing Programs and Fatal Crashes of 16-year-old Drivers: A National Evaluation”, Baker, et al., (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)  2006 – Analysis of data collected from 1994 to 2004; as much as a 21% reduction in fatal crash rates attributed to GDL laws; “The most comprehensive graduated driver licensing programs result in the best reduction of fatal crashes of 16-year-old drivers.”

4) Parents & Adults

“Patterns of Texting and Driving in a US National Survey of Millennial Parents vs Older Parents”, Jennifer Glicklich, et al., JAMA Pediatrics,  May 2019 –  National survey of 435 parents – mllennial parents read text messages while driving more frequently than did older parents, 42.2% vs 26.7% ; no difference was seen for writing texts;  The DDS (Distracted Driving Survey) score for older parents was 2 points less than that of millennial parents, meaning younger parents are still generally more likely to participate in inappropriate driving habits. Only 24.6% of millennials and 17.3% of older parents used an app or cell phone feature aimed at reducing texting and driving, a difference that was not statistically significant

Parents’ Distracted Driving Behaviors, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Research Institute, July 2018 —  Online survey of 760 parents and caregivers of children ages 4-10 years. from 47 US states, indicated they engaged in the following behaviors while driving, and the car was moving, with their child in the vehicle: 52.2% admitted to talking on a hands-free phone; 47% admitted to talking on a hand-held phone; 33.7% have read and 26.7% have sent a text message; 13.7 percent have used social media. A correlation was also found between parents engaging in other risky driving behaviors whether or not children were present in the car, such as not wearing a seat belt and driving under the influence of alcohol.

Travelers Insurance Company poll, Sept. 2017 – Of those who drive to or for work, 43% will answer or make work-related communications while driving, including texting, emailing and calling. The reasons those drivers gave for doing so were 38% felt they needed to always be  available, 37% feared missing out on something important at work and 17% did not want to upset the boss. By age groups, 18-34 and 35-44 year olds were tied at 54% for the largest percentage of drivers engaged in work-related communications while driving.

“Many parents multi-task while driving kids", University of Michigan, 2014 published in American Journal of Pediatrics – Almost 90 percent of drivers reported engaging in at least one technology-based distraction while driving their child in the prior month, and most drivers reported engaging in 4 of the 10 distractions asked about in the study.

“Exclusive Survey from American Baby and Safe Kids Worldwide: Moms Make the Same Risky Driving Choices as Teens“, 2013 –  78% admit to talking on the phone while driving with their baby; 64% of moms have turned around to tend to their child’s needs while driving; 26% text or check email

“Nearly Half of Commuters  Admit to Texting While Driving", AT&T survey, 2013 – 49% of adults admitted to texting while driving (43% for teens) – 40% call it a habit; 6 in 10 did not do it 3 years prior

Parent/Teen Correlation in Distracted Driving  –  University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute and Toyota, 2012 -Parents who talk on cell phones, send texts or eat and drink while driving have teenagers who are 2 to 4 times more likely to do the same.

“Adults and Cell Phone Distractions," Pew Research Center, 2010 – Adults are just as likely as teens to have texted while driving and are substantially more likely to have talked on the phone while driving.

5) Cognitive Distractions: Hands Free vs. Hand Held & Voice to Text

In-Vehicle Infotainment Systems Especially Distracting to Older Drivers, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, July 2019 — In-vehicle infotainment systems are intended to simplify tasks such as navigation and communication while driving, but are they actually causing an even bigger issue? Research suggests that this technology is adding to the risk of distraction behind the wheel, specifically for older drivers. Complicated menus and finicky voice command features can take attention away from the road for up to 40 seconds, depending on the task. Older drivers (55-75 yrs) in particular take anywhere from 4.7-8.6 seconds longer to perform these operations in comparison to younger drivers (21-36 yrs). Professionals claim that the issue is not in the age of the drivers, but rather the poor design of the technologies. Either way, it is important to use in-vehicle infotainment systems with caution.

Car Safety Features Lead to Riskier Driving Habits, State Farm Insurance, July 2019 — New advanced driver assist technologies such as Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and Lane Keeping Assist (LKA) are leading drivers to take more risks behind the wheel, specifically when it comes to smartphone usage. Drivers are misplacing their trust in these new systems; they are meant to assist drivers perform the functions necessary to navigate the road, not do it for them, as many expect. A trend was identified in this study as drivers with ACC and/or LKA consistently admit to participating in distracted driving behaviors more often than those without ACC and/or LKA. The lack of education on autonomous vehicles and technologies has led to an increase in comfort with distracted driving, which is very dangerous to those on the road. While the new systems are helpful, cars will not be driving themselves anytime soon, so it is important to eliminate any distractions while operating a motor vehicle.

Researchers Find Visual Distractions More of an Issue Than Cognitive Distractions, Ars Technica, July 2019 — Many believe that cognitive distractions are the biggest issue when it comes to concentrating on the road. However, new studies by MIT suggest that keeping your eyes focused while driving is more important. In a series of tests, researchers evaluated two variables when driving: cognitive distractions and visual attention. The study concluded that where the driver was looking had more of an impact on his/her ability to detect road activity than what the driver was thinking. This conclusion has added emphasis to the idea of “keep your eyes on the road” and will potentially influence future technologies such as vehicular infotainment to reevaluate their strategies and the risks that they contribute to drivers.

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, “Visual and Cognitive Demands of Using In-Vehicle Infotainment Systems”, Sept 2017 – Thirty 2017 vehicles tested  with not a single vehicle infotainment system  resulting  in a low user demand, only 7 a moderate demand and 23 high demand or very high demand. Visual and cognitive demand were tested, as well as the time it took drivers to complete a task .Study participants were required to use voice command, touch screen and other interactive technologies to make a call, send a text message, tune the radio or program navigation, all while driving down the road. Programming navigation was the most distracting task, taking an average of 40 seconds for drivers to complete.

University of Iowa, Why talking on cell phones adversely affects driving performance, June 2017 – Researchers  used computerized experiments that tracked eye movements while asking subjects to answer true or false questions to mimic having a cell phone conversation or even a conversation with a passenger. Doing so caused participants to take about twice as long to direct their eyes to a new object than those who were not asked to respond. This phenomenon is referred to as “attentional disengagement.”  And, the more the brain was distracted the worse participants performance became, a “snowball effect.”

SPIDER: A Framework for Understanding Driver Distraction, Strayer, et al, University of Utah, 2016 describes how  cognitive distraction adversely affects our ability to scan, predict, identify, decide whether action is necessary and execute appropriate driving responses. Understanding these concepts puts defensive driving in a  new light.

The Smartphone and the Driver’s Cognitive Workload: A Comparison of Apple, Google, and Microsoft’s Intelligent Personal Assistants,  Strayer, et al /AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, Oct. 2015  – 3 studies;  drivers who used voice-activated features on their phones had significantly increased reaction times for detecting potential hazards for up to 18 seconds after stopping the smart phone use; use of hands-free voice commands on smart phones found to be highly distracting to drivers;  voice-dialing, voice-contact calling and music selection using in-vehicle “infotainment” systems were examined  in 10 model-year 2015 vehicles –  3 were rated as moderately distracting, 6 as highly distracting and the system in the 2015 Mazda 6 as very highly distracting

“Mental Workload of Common Voice-Based Vehicle Interactions across Six Different Vehicle Systems“, Strayer, et al/ AAAFoundation for Traffic Safety, 2014 – Evaluation of the two most common voice-based interactions in which drivers engage – changing radio stations and voice dialing – with the actual voice-activated systems found in six different automakers’ vehicles. The accuracy of voice recognition software significantly influences the rate of distraction. Systems with low accuracy and reliability generated a high level (category 3) of distraction. Composing text messages and emails using in-vehicle technologies (category 3) was more distracting than using these systems to listen to messages (category 2). Toyota’s Entune® system – lowest cognitive distraction ranking (at 1.7), which is similar to listening to an audio book. The Chevrolet MyLink® resulted in the highest level of cognitive distraction (rating of 3.7) Separate assessment of Apple’s Siri (version iOS 7). Hands- and eyes-free use of Apple’s Siri generated a relatively high category 4 level of mental distraction.

“Understanding the distracted brain – Why driving while using hands-free cell phones is risky behavior", NSC  2012 – Hands-free devices offer no safety  benefit when driving; multitasking is a myth; cell phone use while driving  impairs driving performance and also weakens the brain’s ability to capture driving cues;  drivers who use cell phones experience inattention blindness ( “look at” but not “see” up to 50 percent of the info in their driving environment) – references to more than 30 scientific studies and reports

“Voice-To-Text Apps Offer No Driving Safety Benefit; As With Manual Texting, Reaction Times Double”, Texas A & M Transportation Institute, 2013 –  Voice-to-text technologies found no safer than manual texting; all texting, manual or voice to text, took drivers eyes away from the road and resulted in doubling reaction times; even voice-to- text features resulted in drivers looking away from the road; voice to text took longer than manual texting

“Measuring Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile”, Strayer, et al/ AAAFoundation for Traffic Safety, 2013 – created a scientifically-based 5 point rating scale to determine relative levels of cognitive distractions for specific tasks – listening to the radio was a category “1”, or minimal risk distraction, talking on a cell phone, hands free or handheld a category “2”, or moderate risk and listening to and responding to in-vehicle, voice activated e-mail features a category “3”, or extensive risk

“A decrease in brain activation associated with driving when listening to someone speak”, Just, et al., Carnegie Mellon, Brain Research, 2008 – Functional MRI used to investigate the impact of  language comprehension (spoken sentences requiring a true/ false answer) on the brain activity associated with a simulated driving task –  significant deterioration in driving accuracy;  brain activity previously devoted to the task of driving was reduced by 37% ; “Language comprehension performed concurrently with driving draws mental resources away from the driving and produces deterioration in driving performance, even when it does not require holding a phone."

“Conversation limits the functional field of view”, Atchley, P, Dressel, J. (Human Factors) 2004 –  Subjects performed a task designed to measure the functional field of view in isolation and while performing a hands-free conversational task –  In both experiments, the addition of the conversational task led to large reductions in the functional field of view; because similar reductions have been shown to increase crash risk, reductions in the functional field of view by conversation may be an important mechanism involved in increased risk for crashes with in-car phone use

6) Cell Phone Conversation vs. Talking With Passenger

“Passenger and Cell-Phone Conversations in Simulated Driving", Strayer, et al, (Human Factors and Ergonomics Society)  2004 – passenger conversations differ from cell phone conversations because the surrounding traffic becomes a topic of the conversation, helping driver and passenger to share situation awareness, and mitigating the potential effects of conversation on driving

“Driving while conversing: Cell phones that distract and passengers who react“, Charlton (Accident Analysis and Prevention) 2008 –  research compared the driving performance and conversational patterns of drivers speaking with in-car passengers, hands-free cell phones, and remote passengers who could see the driver’s current driving situation (via a window into a driving simulator). Driving performance suffered during cell phone and remote passenger conversations as compared with in-car passenger conversations

7) Cell Phone Driver vs. Drunk Driver

“A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver",  Strayer, D., et al, 2006  (Human Factors)  2006  –  When drivers were conversing on either a handheld or hands-free cell phone,  braking reactions were delayed and they were involved in more traffic accidents than when they were not conversing on a cell phone; by contrast, when drivers were intoxicated from ethanol 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 conditions and time on task, cell-phone drivers exhibited greater impairment than intoxicated drivers

8) Text Messaging

“The effects of texting on driving performance in a driving simulator: The influence of driver age", Rumschlag and Palumbo, et al, Wayne State University, (Accident Analysis and Prevention) Dec. 2014 – older drivers are more adversely affected by texting while driving than younger drivers while using a driving simulator to measure lane excursions

“Driver Electronic Use in 2012“, NHTSA, 2014 (DOT HS 811 884) – The percentage of drivers text-messaging or visibly manipulating hand-held devices increased from 1.3 percent in 2011 to 1.5 percent in 2012; hand held cell phone use continued to be higher among females, highest among 16 to 24 year-olds and lowest among drivers 70 and older

“Distraction Effects of In-Vehicle Tasks Requiring Number and Text Entry Using Auto Alliance’s Principle 2.1B Verification Procedure“, NTHSA, 2012 (DOT HS 811 571) – Text messaging associated with the highest levels of driving performance degradation and more distracting than all other tasks due to its higher level of task demand, followed by destination entry; radio tuning  – lowest levels of driving performance degradation; the two phone dialing tasks (contact selection and 10 digit number dialing) equivalent in their effects on driving performance and were intermediate relative to the two extremes

“Distraction Effects of Manual and Text Entry While Driving“, NHTSA, 2011 (DOT HS 811 510) –  text messaging associated with the highest level of distraction potential, ten-digit dialing was the second most distracting task; radio tuning had the lowest level

Americans and Text Messaging," Pew Research Center 2011 , Cell owners between the ages of 18 and 24 exchange an average of 109.5 messages on a normal day;  text messaging and phone calling on cell phones have leveled off for the adult population as a whole

“Driver Distraction in Commercial Motor Vehicle Operations”, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 2009 – Text messaging creates a crash risk 23 times greater than driving without distraction (See Table 3 and page xx)

“Text Messaging During Simulated Driving”, Drews and Strayer, et al., (Human Factors) 2009 –  Sixfold increase in crashes by drivers texting while driving

9) Effectiveness of Bans on Texting and Hand-held Use of Cell Phones

Review of recent literature on the effectiveness of distracted driving laws. Ian J. Reagan, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), April 2021, A review of 16 studies examining the relationship between laws banning cellphone use and crash outcomes found an encouraging reduction in crashes. On average, bans of texting or cellphone use were associated with an approximate 6% reduction
in fatal crash metrics, and those laws with a primary enforcement component were associated with a 12% reduction. The results do not represent strong evidence of a causal relationship, however, due to methodological limitations.

“Impact of Texting Laws on Motor Vehicular Fatalities in the United States“, Ferdinand, et al, (American Journal of Public Health), August  2014 – Analysis of data from 48 states,  2000-2010 to determine within-state changes in fatalities from crashes after enactment of texting bans using data from Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and controlling for a number of variables, including economic and legal (seat belt laws, speed limits, BAC and GDL laws) –   concluded that primarily enforced laws banning all drivers (teens and adults) from texting associated with reduction in traffic fatalities in all age groups (19 people per state per yr); laws that are only secondarily enforced were not effective in reducing traffic fatalities;  states banning only young drivers from texting with primary enforcement had the greatest impact on reducing deaths among those aged 15 to 21 years;  handheld bans appeared to be most effective for adults.

“Did California’s hand-held cell phone ban reduce accidents?” Burger, et al., Transportation Research Part A 66, 162-172, June  2014 – Study examined the number of CA accidents for 2008, the 6 month period before enactment of a cell phone ban on July 1st and the 6 month period after enactment of the ban – No evidence that the ban had reduced traffic accidents. Authors suggested possible explanations for the “unexpected result”, including that substitution of hands-free use for hand-held use would not reduce crashes if, hands-free use was equally dangerous; that some drivers may be naturally more prone to taking risks and that those drivers could include those who would likely use cell phones while driving; that drivers are not complying with the law and that the law is not being enforced.

“Driver cell phone and texting bans in the United States: Evidence of Effectiveness” McCartt, et al., Engaged Driving Symposium, (Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine), March 31, 2014. The authors analyzed a number of peer reviewed papers and technical reports and concluded that all-driver (adults and teens) bans on hand-held cell phone use reduced hand-held cell phone use, increased hands-free cell phone use and reduced the overall use of phones while driving compared to states that did not have bans. Bans on all phone use by teens were not shown to reduce their phone use. As to the effect of bans on crashes, the studies varied widely and produced mixed results. Lack of controls and other variables were cited.

“Texting Bans and Fatal Accidents on Roadways: Do They Work? Or Do Drivers Just React to Announcements of Bans?" Abouk and Adams, University of Wisconsin – Madison, (American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(2): 179-99), 2013 – Studied all states in which texting bans were applicable to all drivers, adults and teens, and in which enforcement was primary. Authors studied fatalities and restricted their study to only crashes involving single-occupants, theorizing that drivers are less likely to text with passengers in the car.  Results indicated that texting bans with primary enforcement reduced traffic fatalities in one-occupant crashes, but that the decreases were short-lived, only up to four months.

10) Seat Belts

“Seat Belts Fact Sheet“, CDC 2010 – Seat belts reduce serious crash-related injuries and deaths by about 50%; adults age 18-34 are less likely to wear seat belts than adults 35 or older; states with primary enforcement of seat belt laws have 87% seat belt use as compared to states with secondary enforcement or no seat belt laws – 79%

11) Pedestrians & Bicyclists

2019 Pedestrian Fatalities Highest Since 1988. GHSA, February, 2020.  In recent years, the number of pedestrian fatalities in the United States has grown sharply. During the 10-year period from 2009 to 2018, the number of pedestrian fatalities increased by 53% (from 4,109 deaths in 2009 to 6,283 deaths in 2018); by comparison, the combined number of all other traffic deaths increased by 2%. Along with the increase in the number of pedestrian fatalities, pedestrian deaths as a percentage of total motor vehicle crash deaths increased from 12% in 2009 to 17% in 2018. The last time pedestrians accounted for 17% of total U.S. traffic deaths was over 35 years ago, in 1982.

2018 Fatal Motor Vehicle Crashes: Overview, DOT HS 812 826, NHTSA, October, 2019 –  While distracted driving deaths fell in 2018 by the largest percentage in 10 years, pedestrian and bicyclist deaths increased to a combined total of about 7,000 for the highest annual totals since 2009. Pedestrian and bicyclist deaths now account for about 20% of all highway fatalities.

“Distraction Shouldn’t Be Deadly”, August 30th, 2019, New York City Department of Transportation – Review of NYC pedestrian fatality reports from 2014-2017 and NHSTA fatality data nationwide from 2010 – 2015 reflect “little concrete evidence that device-induced distracted walking contributes significantly to pedestrian fatalities and injuries.” Nationally, fatalities involving the use of portable electronic devices by pedestrians ranged from one to twelve per year, representing 0% to 0.2% of pedestrian traffic fatalities. NYC records show two cases (0.2%) in which there was electronic device involvement, of 856 with available narratives. The most significant gains in reducing pedestrian fatalities and severe injuries can be made by continuing to target the most dangerous behaviors — such as driver speeding and failure-to-yield — and by implementing street improvement projects that reduce the severity of crashes.

Spotlight on Highway Safety  – Pedestrian Fatalities by State, 2018 Preliminary Data , GHSA , 2019— For the first time since 1990, pedestrian fatalities are expected to be at an all time high for 2018. Pedestrian related deaths are projected to be up by 3% for January-June in comparison to those same months in 2017. With 2,876 pedestrian traffic fatalities in the first 6 months of 2018, this is an increase of 86 lives lost in contrast to the previous year’s first half. Although pedestrian death rates vary from state to state, GHSA suspects that these numbers are on the rise due to factors like speed, roadway designs, and distracted/impaired driving.

Spotlight on Highway Safety – Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2017 Preliminary Data (Feb. 2018) – nearly 6,000 pedestrians were killed in motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. in 2017, marking the second year in a row at numbers not seen in 25 years. Pedestrians now account for approximately 16% of all motor vehicle deaths, compared with 11% just a few years ago. Pedestrian fatalities have increased 27% from 2007. Report suggests the correlation between growth in smartphone use nationally and the legalization of recreational marijuana in several states.

NHTSA 2016 Fatal Traffic Crash Data (Oct. 2017)  – In 2016 pedestrian deaths increased 9% to 5,987 (the highest number since 1990) and bicyclist deaths increased by 1.3% to 840  (the highest number since 1991).

Spotlight on Highway Safety – Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2016 Preliminary Data, March 2017, GHSA – Based on preliminary data provided by all 50 states, The Governors Highway Safety Association projects an 11% increase in the number of pedestrians killed on U.S. roadways in 2016, compared to 2015 and a 25% increase since 2010.  This would represent the steepest year-to-year increase since record-keeping began, both in terms of number of deaths and percent increase. Pedestrians now account for the largest proportion of traffic fatalities recorded in the past 25 years.

Spotlight on Highway Safety – Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2014 Preliminary Data, Feb. 2015, GHSA –  estimate that 2,125 pedestrians were killed in the first half of 2014, essentially unchanged when compared with the 2,141 pedestrian fatalities during the same period in  2013; pedestrian fatalities were up in 21 states, down in 24 states and D.C and remained the same in 5 states;  4 states, California, Florida, Texas, and New York – accounted for 43% of all pedestrians deaths in 2013; in 36% of the fatalities, the pedestrians aged 16 & older had a BAC of .08 or higher;  28% surge in deaths involving pedestrians ages 20 to 69 over this same period

Spotlight on Highway Safety – Bicyclists Safety, Oct. 2014, GHSA – yearly bicyclist deaths increased 16% between 2010 and 2012, while overall motor vehicle fatalities increased just 1% during the same time period; adults 20 and older represented 84% of bicyclist fatalities in 2012, compared to only 21% in 1975;  adult males comprised 74%  of bicyclists killed in 2012; urban areas accounted for 69% percent of  bicycle fatalities in 2012, compared with 50% in 1975; bicyclists killed in motor vehicle crashes increased in 22 states between 2010 and 2012 with 6 states comprising 54% of  all fatalities

NJ State Police Year to Date Statewide Fatal Crash Statistics for December 31, 2014 – 3.9%  increase in highway fatalities in 2013 by 21 victims, bringing the total to 563 up from 542 in 2013;  driver, passenger and pedacyclists fatalities all decreased from 2013;  pedestrians killed spiked by 28%; in 2013, 132 pedestrians were killed and in 2014, a total of 170

“Technology-related distracted walking behaviors in Manhattan’s most dangerous intersections", Basch, et al., Department of Public Health, William Paterson University, (Injury Prevention), 2014 – Data was gathered by direct observations at 10 intersections in Manhattan with the highest frequency of pedestrian–motor vehicle collisions. More than 1 in 4 of the >3500 pedestrians observed were distracted by mobile electronic devices while crossing during the ‘walk’ (28.8%) and ‘don’t walk’ (26.3%) signals

“Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State, 2013 Preliminary Data“, GHTSA – Pedestrian fatalities in the U.S. decreased in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009, but increased in 2010, 2011 and 2012; 15% increase in pedestrian deaths from 2009 to 2012 compares with a 3% decrease in all other motor vehicle deaths during the same time period;  overall decrease in first 1/2 of 2013 –  decreased in 25 states, increased in 20 states and D.C., stayed the same in 5;  uneven distribution of pedestrian deaths among states, with CA, TX & FL accounting for 1/3 of the 4,743 deaths in 2012

Traffic Safety Facts 2011 Data, “Pedestrians",  DOT HS 811 748,  Aug 2013 – In 2011, 4,432 pedestrians were killed and 69,000 injured in traffic crashes in the U.S.; a pedestrian was killed every 2 hrs. and injured every 8 minutes;  increase of 3% from 2010, but a decrease of 7% from 2002; in 2011, pedestrian deaths accounted for 14% of all traffic fatalities, and 3% of injuries (pedestrian defined as a person on foot, not bicycling, skateboarding, etc.)

“TEENS AND DISTRACTION: An In-Depth Look at Teens’ Walking Behaviors”, Safe Kids Worldwide, 2013 – pedestrian injuries among teenagers in particular on the rise, up 25% in the last five years in the 16-19 year-old age group; 49% use a cell phone while walking to school and 40% admitted to listening to music while walking; 20% of high school students and 12% of middle school students cross the street while using a digital device

“Fatalities of Pedestrians, Bicycle Riders, and Motorists Due to Distracted Driving Motor Vehicle Crashes in the U.S., 2005–2010”,  University of Nebraska Med. Ctr, Dept. of Health Services Research and Admin.,  2013 – Distracted drivers are the cause of an increasing share of fatalities  found among pedestrians and bicycle riders.

“Pedestrian Injuries Due to Mobile Phone Use in Public Places”, Ohio State University and DOT, 2013 –  Study of emergency room injuries, 2004-2010, nationwide – Injuries to pedestrians using mobile phones increased in numbers and as a percentage of total pedestrian injuries from 2004 to 2010; for cell-phone related injuries, the increase for pedestrians parallels that for drivers

“New Study Shows Three out of Five Pedestrians Prioritize Smartphones over Safety When Crossing Streets”, Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 2013 – 60% of pedestrians walk while texting, emailing, talking on the phone, or listening to music; yet, 70% percent consider those behaviors to be dangerous

12) Evaluating the Effectiveness of Distracted Driving Initiatives

In a USDOT study (August 2022),
the EndDD.org teen distracted driving presentation was found to be
effective in teaching students about distracted driving, increasing the
likelihood that they would intervene when their drivers drove
distracted, increased actual interventions and also reduced parent
distracted driving behaviors.

“TeenDrivingPlan Effectiveness: The Effect of Quantity and Diversity of Supervised Practice on Teens’ Driving Performance“, Mirman, et al., Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) 2014 –  Evaluation of a web-based intervention, the TeenDrivingPlan (TDP), on teens’ driving performance – Exposure to TDP increased teen-perceived social support, parent engagement, and practice diversity. Both greater practice quantity and diversity were associated with better driving performance

“Evaluation of EndDD.org’s Student Awareness Initiative: Effectiveness of a Program to Prevent Teen Distracted Driving”, Jacobsohn and Winston, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) Research Institute 2014 – in some areas the EndDD program was being effective- teen to parent conversations, reduced frequency of parents observed to text following presentation, and in other areas changes were necessary to increase effectiveness, teen to teen conversation and teen driving behaviors