Search

Mobile phone use while driving remains a significant traffic safety concern. Although numerous interventions have been developed to address it, there is a gap in the synthesis of relevant information through a comprehensive behaviour change lens. This scoping review uses the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to examine the literature to (a) identify behavioural constructs targeted in interventions for mobile phone use while driving, (b) determine if the intervention success varied by sociodemographic group (e.g., age, gender, driving experience), and (c) map interventions to TDF domains to highlight areas for future research. Following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews, we searched seven databases and identified 5,202 articles. After screening, 50 articles detailing 56 studies met the following inclusion criteria: (a) intervention studies, (b) providing details on methods and results, (c) written in English, and (d) targeting any driver behaviour related to mobile phone use while driving with a bottom-up approach, using not regulation or law enforcement, but individuals' psychological processes, such as cognitive, behavioural, and emotional. Findings show that most interventions targeted young drivers and were typically effective. Except for a few studies, the effectiveness of interventions targeting different sociodemographic groups either remained untested or revealed nonsignificant differences. This finding points to a gap in the literature, indicating a need for further investigation into the efficacy of interventions for different groups, and for tailoring and testing them accordingly. The interventions also often targeted multiple TDF domains, complicating the interpretation of the relative efficacy of specific domains. Most frequently targeted domains included beliefs and consequences, emotions, knowledge, social influence, social/professional role and identity, and behavioural regulation. Physical skills and optimism domains were not targeted in any intervention. Further, almost all interventions addressed deliberate engagement in mobile phone distractions, while the automatic and fast processes involved in such behaviours were often overlooked. Mobile phone distractions are in part habitual behaviours, yet the existing mitigation efforts mostly assumed intentional engagement. More focus on the habitual nature of mobile phone distractions is needed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study sought to evaluate the relationship between young drivers' intention to engage in cellphone distractions while driving and their emotions towards the associated risks. First, we assessed whether the emotions of guilt, shame, and fear are associated with young drivers' intention to engage in cellphone distractions, through an extended Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) model. Second, we evaluated whether road signs that may evoke these negative emotions reduce cellphone use intentions among young drivers., Methods: An online survey was conducted with young drivers (18 to 25 years old) from Ontario, Canada. 403 responses were collected, of which, 99 responses were used to evaluate the first objective and all 403 responses were used to evaluate the second objective., Results: Anticipating feelings of guilt, shame, and fear negatively predicted the intention to engage in cellphone distractions, above and beyond the standard TPB constructs (i.e., attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control). When prompted with potentially emotion-evoking road signs (children crossing, my mom/dad works here), an increase in anticipated feelings of these emotions corresponded with lower intention to engage in cellphone distractions., Conclusion: Countermeasures that target young driver emotions toward distracted driving risks may be effective in reducing their distraction engagement. Future studies in more controlled environments can investigate causal relationships between emotions and distracted driving among young drivers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Habits have often been overlooked in studies investigating cell phone-related driver distractions. This paper examines the association between habits and cell phone-related driver distractions within a mediation model based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). Additionally, it explores potential differences in behaviors across urban and rural driving environments and between males and females., Method: We conducted an online survey in China with 1,016 respondents, measuring attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, self-reported behavior, and habits associated with cell phone use while driving., Results: Data was analyzed using a two-stage structural equation modeling approach. Results indicate that the measurement model provided a good fit to the data and was invariant across urban and rural driving environments, as well as across genders. The latent path model investigating mediation also demonstrated a good fit and revealed that TPB variables (attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control) partially mediated the relationship between cell phone-related habits and cell phone use while driving. The structural model was invariant across driving environments but not across genders, for which the extent of the differences were limited. Moreover, habits were strongly associated with subjective norms and perceived behavioral control, emerging as the strongest predictor of cell phone-related distractions., Conclusions: The findings suggest that habits should be considered in research on phone-related distracted driving behaviors and in the development of intervention designs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of in-vehicle feedback based on peer social norms in mitigating teen driver distraction., Background: Distraction is a significant problem among teen drivers. Research into the use of in-vehicle technologies to mitigate this issue has been limited. In particular, there is a need to study whether social norms interventions provided through in-vehicle feedback can be effective. Peers are important social referents for teens; thus, normative intervention based on this group is promising. Socially proximal referents have a greater influence on behavior; thus, tailoring peer norm feedback based on gender may provide additional benefits., Method: In this study, 57 teens completed a driving simulator experiment while performing a secondary task in three between-subject conditions: (a) postdrive feedback incorporating same-gender peer norms, (b) postdrive feedback incorporating opposite-gender peer norms, and (c) no feedback. Feedback involved information based on descriptive norms (what others do)., Results: Teens' self-reported frequency of distraction engagement was positively correlated with their perceptions of their peers' engagement in and approval of distractions. Feedback based on peer norms was effective in reducing distraction engagement and improving driving performance, with no difference between same- and opposite-gender feedback., Conclusion/application: Feedback based on peer norms can help mitigate driver distraction among teens. Tailoring social norms feedback to teen gender appears to not provide any additional benefits. Longer-term effectiveness in real-world settings should be investigated.

Objective: A driving simulator study was conducted to investigate the effect of cognitive distraction on different stages of perception-response time (saccade latency, processing time, and movement time) to unexpected roadway hazards, both when the hazard onset is abrupt and when it is gradual., Background: Prior studies, which typically focus on overall response times, have demonstrated that distraction, including cognitive distraction, leads to an increase in response times. Studies have also shown that response times differ depending on the type and location of the hazard. However, there is limited research into the effect of cognitive distraction for gradually developing hazards (e.g., a left-turn across path vehicle), as existing research primarily focuses on abrupt hazard onsets (e.g., lead vehicle braking)., Method: Twenty-four participants were presented with three different emergency roadway hazards, including one abrupt onset hazard (a pedestrian stepping onto the roadway from in front of a parked vehicle) and two gradually developing hazards (an oncoming vehicle turning left across the driver's path and a vehicle accelerating perpendicularly into the driver's path from the right). Half of the participants completed a delayed digit recall task (cognitive distraction condition), the other half did not (control condition)., Results: The left-turn across path hazard was particularly characterized by the long processing period (initiation of the saccade towards the hazard to initial motor response), whereas the pedestrian hazard was more notable for the shortest saccadic latency (hazard onset to the start of the saccade towards the hazard). Cognitive distraction led to a significant increase in brake reaction time for the right-incursion vehicle hazard, in processing time for the left-turn across path hazard, and a marginally significant increase in saccadic latency for the pedestrian and right-incursion vehicle hazards., Conclusion: Hazard ambiguity due to gradual onset, such as with the left-turn across path hazard, appears to increase the processing duration before a response is executed, especially when distracted. Abrupt hazard onset appears to induce shorter saccadic latencies than gradual onsets likely due to a stronger attentional capture property. However, cognitive distraction may increase saccadic latencies for these types of hazards., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective The aim of this study was to explore individual differences in voluntary and involuntary driver-distraction engagement. Background Distractions may stem from intentional engagement in secondary tasks (voluntary) or failing to suppress non-driving-related stimuli or information (involuntary). A wealth of literature has examined voluntary distraction; involuntary distraction is not particularly well understood. Individual factors, such as age, are known to play a role in how drivers engage in distractions. However, it is unclear which individual factors are associated with voluntary- versus involuntary-distraction engagement and whether there is a relation between how drivers engage in these two distraction types. Method Thirty-six participants, ages 25 to 39, drove in a simulator under three conditions: voluntary distraction with a self-paced visual-manual task on a secondary display, involuntary distraction with abrupt onset of irrelevant visual-audio stimuli on the secondary display, and no distraction. Results The number of glances toward the secondary display under voluntary distraction was not correlated to that under involuntary distraction. The former was associated with gender, age, annual mileage, and self-reported distraction engagement; such associations were not observed for the latter. Accelerator release time in response to lead-vehicle braking was delayed similarly under both conditions. Conclusion Propensity to engage in voluntary distractions appears to be not related to the inability of suppressing involuntary distractions. Further, voluntary and involuntary distraction both affect braking response. These findings have implications for design of in-vehicle technologies, which may be sources of both distraction types.

Objective: The purpose of this research is to investigate teens' perceived social norms and whether providing normative information can reduce distracted driving behaviors among them., Background: Parents are among the most important social referents for teens; they have significant influences on teens' driving behaviors, including distracted driving which significantly contributes to teens' crash risks. Social norms interventions have been successfully applied in various domains including driving; however, this approach is yet to be explored for mitigating driver distraction among teens., Method: Forty teens completed a driving simulator experiment while performing a self-paced visual-manual secondary task in four between-subject conditions: a) social norms feedback that provided a report at the end of each drive on teens' distracted driving behavior, comparing their distraction engagement to their parent's, b) post-drive feedback that provided just the report on teens' distracted driving behavior without information on their parents, c) real-time feedback in the form of auditory warnings based on eyes of road-time, and d) no feedback as control. Questionnaires were administered to collect data on these teens' and their parents' self-reported engagement in driver distractions and the associated social norms., Results: Social norms and real-time feedback conditions resulted in significantly smaller average off-road glance duration, rate of long (>2s) off-road glances, and standard deviation of lane position compared to no feedback. Further, social norms feedback decreased brake response time and percentage of time not looking at the road compared to no feedback. No major effect was observed for post-drive feedback. Questionnaire results suggest that teens appeared to overestimate parental norms, but no effect of feedback was found on their perceptions., Conclusion: Feedback systems that leverage social norms can help mitigate driver distraction among teens. Overall, both social norms and real-time feedback induced positive driving behaviors, with social norms feedback outperforming real-time feedback., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: With the proliferation of new mobile and in-vehicle technologies, understanding the motivations behind a driver's voluntary engagement with such technologies is crucial from a safety perspective, yet is complex. Previous literature either surveyed a large number of distractions that may be diverse, or too focuses on one particular activity, such as cell phone use. Further, earlier studies about social-psychological factors underlying driver distraction tend to focus on one or two factors in-depth, and those that examine a more comprehensive set of factors are often limited in their analyses methods., Objective: The present work considers a wide array of social-psychological factors within a structural equation model to predict their influence on a focused set of technology-based distractions. A better understanding of these facilitators can enhance the design of distraction mitigation strategies., Method: We analysed survey responses about three technology-based driver distractions: holding phone conversations, manually interacting with cell phones, and adjusting the settings of in-vehicle technology, as well as responses on five social-psychological factors: attitude, descriptive norm, injunctive norm, technology inclination, and a risk/sensation seeking personality. Using data collected from 525 drivers (ages: 18-80), a structural equation model was built to analyse these social-psychological factors as latent variables influencing self-reported engagement in these three technology-based distractions., Results: Self-reported engagement in technology-based distractions was found to be largely influenced by attitudes about the distractions. Personality and social norms also played a significant role, but technology inclination did not. A closer look at two age groups (18-30 and 30+) showed that the effect of social norms, especially of injunctive norm (i.e., perceived approvals), was less prominent in the 30+ age group, while personality remained a significant predictor for the 30+ age group but marginally significant for the younger group., Conclusion: Findings from this work provide insights into the social-psychological factors behind intentional engagement in technology-based distractions and in particular suggesting that these factors may be sensitive to demographic differences., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)