Embed
Email

An Evidence-Based Assessment of Crash Risk and the Use of Cell ...

Document Sample

Shared by: cuiliqing
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
11/10/2011
language:
English
pages:
14
An Evidence-Based Assessment

of Crash Risk and the Use of Cell

Phones while Driving



Jim Sayer

Carol Flannagan

Distracted Driving



 National Safety Council

 NSC estimated that 25% of crashes are caused

by cell phones alone, a model-based estimate

• Assumes that drivers do not self-limit cell-phone use

in any way

• Assumes a simple causal link between cell-phone use

and crashes

 Comparisons with drunk driving

Source: National Safety Council (2010). Attributable Risk

Estimate Model. National Safety Council, Itasca, IL.

Evidence-Based Assessments



 U.S. DOT’s analysis of several crash

databases shows:

 45,230 drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2009†

 5,084 (11%) drivers in fatal crashes, are coded

for all forms of distraction combined †

 1008 (2.2%) are associated with cell phones in

use or present (GES analysis)

 This does not account for contributory factors

† Sources: NHTSA (2009). Distracted Driving 2009. Report

No. DOT HS-811-379

Evidence-Based Assessments



 NMVCCS internal sources of distraction:

 The most frequently coded factor was

conversing with a passenger (16%)

• “As a word of caution, conversing with a passenger as

an associated factor in a large number of crashes

should not be taken to understand that this factor

actually caused distraction so frequently. NMVCCS

data merely indicates the presence of this factor in

many crashes…..”

Source: NHTSA (2010). Distracted Driving and Driver,

Roadway, and Environmental Factors, DOT HS 811 380

Evidence-Based Assessments



 NMVCCS Internal sources of distraction:

 Phone use was an associated factor in 3.4

percent of the crashes (conversing on phone,

dialing or hanging up phone, and text

messaging)



Source: NHTSA (2010). Distracted Driving and Driver,

Roadway, and Environmental Factors, DOT HS 811 380

Evidence-Based Assessments



 NOPUS data shows cell phone use held

constant, at about 7%, from 2005 – 2008 †

 Total crashes involving all distractions held

constant, at about 17%, from 2006 – 2009‡

† Source: NHTSA (2010). Distracted Driving and Driver,

Roadway, and Environmental Factors, DOT HS 811 380

‡ Source: NHTSA (2009). Distracted Driving 2009. Report No.

DOT HS-811-379

The Paradox of Cell Phone Use

and Crashes Rates

 Cell phone use rates while driving are

holding steady

 Distraction related crashes are holding

steady

 Overall, not just when driving, cell phone

use is increasing

 Does this suggest a form of self-regulation

by drivers?

The Paradox of Cell Phone Bans

and Crash/Use Rates

 Cell-phone bans, without immense

enforcement, have not been very effective

in changing crash rates

 IIHS recently reported no change in

insurance claims for crashes in

jurisdictions that instituted hand-held cell

phone bans, nor any change in

comparison jurisdictions

Source: Status Report, Special issue: phoning while driving

(February, 2010). Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

The Elephants in the Room



 In 2008: 37,261 fatalities

 11,773 people (32% of all fatalities) were killed in

alcohol-impaired-driving crashes

 11,674 lives (31% of all fatalities) were lost in

speeding-related crashes

 8,500 lives (23% of all fatalities) were 16 – 24 yrs



 5,290 lives (14% of all fatalities) were

motorcyclists – 37 times more likely to die

Source: NHTSA (2009). Traffic Safety Facts 2008 Data. Report

No. DOT HS-811-162

What Does it All Mean?



 Is distracted driving an issue?

 YES, it is 11% of fatal crashes



 Is the root of all distracted driving cell

phones?

 NO, cell phones are a small percentage

 Are cell phones any worse than many

other forms of distraction?

 This is still the subject of MUCH debate

What Does it All Mean?



 Is driving while using a cell phone like

driving drunk?

 ABSOLUTELY NOT, a damaging comparison

 Potential to trivialize drunk driving

Still Lots of Work to be Done

 Still several issues related to distraction,

in general, that are not understood:

 What role does self-regulation play?

 Is cell phone distraction unique?

 What are the actual risks associated with all

forms of distraction?

 What technological solutions are there?

 What are the long term effects of legislation?

 What are use rates?

• NOPUS is may be over estimating cell phone use

Thank You









jimsayer@umich.edu

Distracted Driving



 Secretary LaHood:

 “Last year, 5,500 people were killed as a result

of distracted driving”

 “Look, the epidemic in America is caused by

the fact that everybody has a cell phone or a

BlackBerry and people think they can use

them anytime, anyplace.”



Source: NPR Talk of the Nation, October 26, 2010



Related docs
Other docs by cuiliqing
11.1 Exploring Area and Perimeter
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Volusia County
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
choosing_topics_and_y10
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
CLE Credit - rscrpubs.com
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Meeting Minutes September 8 Final
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
nov2411
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
EKG Spreadsheet - Geocities.ws
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Gift from Christ to the Church
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!