1. Putting the Brakes on Distracted Driving
Philip S. Renaud, Executive Director, The Risk Institute

2. Distraction is Deadly
9% of all fatal crashes in 2016 in U.S. were due to distracted driving
It’s even worse in Ohio, there’s been a 35% increase in distracted driving fatalities over the last 5 years
Distracted driving crashes account for 18% of Ohio’s crash fatalities and 16% of Ohio’s serious crash injuries
The risk of a DD crash in Columbus is 20% higher than any other type of crash
Enough is enough

3. Hands Eyes Mind Distracted Driving is anything that takes your
off of driving

4. The Risk Institute Approach
The solution to end distracted driving won’t happen in courtrooms or laboratories. 
That’s why the Risk Institute takes a four-tiered, cross-disciplinary approach. 
Research. Urban Planning. Legislation. Technology.

5. Our most recent research examines driver behaviors and motivations as well as the impact of built environments on distracted driving.

6. How people are distracted

7. The ultimate reason people drive distracted is due to overconfidence in their own abilities

8. Why do people drive distracted?
Most people won’t admit to driving distracted, however…
People that drive distracted:
Think many other people drive distracted
Are overconfident in their DD ability
Think distracted driving is NOT risky
See more benefits to using phone and driving
Are attached to their phones
Are high in reactance to attempts to change them (only measured in Survey 2—predicts DD more than risk or gender)
Are male (Survey 1 only) or younger (Survey 2 only)
Have higher verbal intelligence
Survey 2
Effect b se p
How would you rate your ability to drive a car while using your cellphone for something important?
DD-prevalence other
BP-phone
attachment to cell
reactance (ave of 6)
SMap Mean distance from correct *-1 so higher value means better (closer to 0 is better more neagtive is worse)
Scored spatial questions
Scored vocab questions
What is your age?
Survey 1
Effect B Sig test
Think others drive distracted more = more DD 0.38 t=11.42, p<.001
Higher risk perceptions (Weller scale) = less DD −4.06 t=−5.24, p<.001
Perceived benefits of using phone while driving = more DD 3.47 t=6.50, p<.001
More think better than others at DD = more DD 0.06 t=2.54, p=.011
More attachment to cell phone = more DD 2 t=3.88, p<.001
Men more likely to DD than women 3.57 t=3.17, p=.002
Higher verbal intelligence = less DD −.47 t=−4.81, p<.001
Starting model included (and removed): perceived risk in specific situations, risk inconsistencies (subset and time), perceived risks of using phone while driving, general driving ability overconfidence, accident overconfidence, attitudes towards driving, attitudes towards cell phone, rating of DD study, race (white vs. non), age, weekly hours driving, ONS, SNS, SMAP, spatial reasoning

9. Why do people drive distracted?
Underestimation of distracted driving: people just don’t see it as risky
Overconfidence in driving ability: people think risks apply to others, not them
Affective reactions: see phones as beneficial; downplay risk
Motivated denial: people don’t want to see risk; rationalize behavior
Perceived norms: think others do it and/or it’s not a big deal
Underestimation of distracted driving: people just don’t see it as risky (e.g., Weller et al., 2013)
Overconfidence in driving ability: people think risks apply to others, not them (e.g., Tison, Chaudhary, & Cosgrove, 2011, our pilot study)
Affective reactions: see phones as beneficial; downplay risk (e.g., Weller et al., 2013)
Motivated denial: people don’t want to see risk (e.g., Nelson et al., 2009)
Perceived norms: think others do it and/or it’s not a big deal (e.g., Chen, Donmez, et al., 2016)

10. The Impact of Built Environments
A lot time, energy and money have been spent on tech advancement, legislation and research, but we’re also examining urban planning and the impact of built environments.

11. The Impact of Built Environments
Our study revealed that built environments such as
length of roadway,
number of lanes, and
urban roadways
have a positive association of distracted driving crash frequency
Meaning that distracted driving crashes are most likely on an eight-lane, interstate highway in an urban area.

12. The Impact of Built Environments
DD crashes tend to be more severe than non-DD crashes — up to 49.4% more severe on an Interstate Highway
A DD crash is 2.12x more likely to be fatal if it occurs in a work zone
A DD crash is x more likely to be fatal rather than a severe injury if it’s a rear-to-end or angle (lane change, head-on collision)

13. Changes to Built Environments
Roundabouts were found to be the single most effective road design in reducing the rate of crashes and crash severity.
Over the time studied ( ), no severe injury crashes or fatal crashes occurred at a roundabout

14. Changes to Built Environments
Other effective changes are
Medians
Asphalt shoulders
Better signage at and near workzones
Roundabout first policy
New Albany has a roundabout first policy – for any new intersection or changes to an intersection, a roundabout must first be considered before any other type of intersection can be introduced

15. So what do we do?

16. Take Action Reduce message resistance
People see DD as a low-risk, with numerous benefits.
They’re also most likely to be young males who don’t care much for reducing distraction and are most likely to resist changes.
Develop and test more effective messaging
Less is more; keep it simple
Evoke emotion
Present numeric risk information and visual aids
Improve our built environments
Roundabouts
Medians
Survey 2
Effect b se p
How would you rate your ability to drive a car while using your cellphone for something important?
DD-prevalence other
BP-phone
attachment to cell
reactance (ave of 6)
SMap Mean distance from correct *-1 so higher value means better (closer to 0 is better more neagtive is worse)
Scored spatial questions
Scored vocab questions
What is your age?
Survey 1
Effect B Sig test
Think others drive distracted more = more DD 0.38 t=11.42, p<.001
Higher risk perceptions (Weller scale) = less DD −4.06 t=−5.24, p<.001
Perceived benefits of using phone while driving = more DD 3.47 t=6.50, p<.001
More think better than others at DD = more DD 0.06 t=2.54, p=.011
More attachment to cell phone = more DD 2 t=3.88, p<.001
Men more likely to DD than women 3.57 t=3.17, p=.002
Higher verbal intelligence = less DD −.47 t=−4.81, p<.001
Starting model included (and removed): perceived risk in specific situations, risk inconsistencies (subset and time), perceived risks of using phone while driving, general driving ability overconfidence, accident overconfidence, attitudes towards driving, attitudes towards cell phone, rating of DD study, race (white vs. non), age, weekly hours driving, ONS, SNS, SMAP, spatial reasoning

17. Putting the Brakes on Distracted Driving
Philip S. Renaud, Executive Director, The Risk Institute
250 W. Woodruff Ave. Columbus, OH fisher.osu.edu/risk