The contribution of passengers versus mobile phone use to motor vehicle crashes resulting in hospital attendance by the driver
Introduction
There is evidence to suggest that mobile phone use contributes to driver distraction and can increase the likelihood of having a serious motor vehicle crash (McEvoy et al., 2005). However, there is controversy about the extent to which mobile phone use while driving differs from passenger carriage (Rapid responses to McEvoy et al., 2005). Mobile phone use while driving has a number of potentially distracting effects: cognitive (arising from the conversation), visual (from looking for the phone or at the display or keypad), auditory (through listening to the conversation) and manual (from holding the phone or dialling a number). Passengers can cause similar distractions namely, cognitive (from conversing), visual (if the driver turns to look at a passenger), auditory (from listening to a conversation) and even manual (for example, a driver passing a drink to a child). Moreover, passenger carriage may have additional effects on the driver, including peer influence. Under certain circumstances, any of these could lead to an adverse event.
To date, only a few studies have compared driving impairment resulting from remote mobile phone conversations versus conversations with passengers; most of which have been laboratory-based driver simulator studies (Hunton and Rose, 2005, Gugerty et al., 2004, Consiglio et al., 2003). Generally, these studies have indicated that driving impairment occurs for both situations. However, the findings are inconsistent on whether the extent of the driving impairment differs significantly between the two conditions. Hunton and Rose (2005) found that hands-free mobile phone use interfered more with driving than passenger conversations. By contrast, Consiglio et al. (2003) found that conversation significantly lengthened mean reaction time in each of the following three situations: conversing with a passenger, conversing with a hand-held mobile phone and conversing with a hands-free mobile phone. The mean reaction times between these situations were not significantly different.
In order to provide epidemiological evidence of the effects of passenger carriage and mobile phone use on road safety, we conducted two studies to contrast the risk associated with each factor. Using drivers involved in motor vehicle crashes requiring presentation to hospital, a case-control study and a case-crossover study were undertaken. The former (henceforth named the ‘passenger study’) examined the role of passenger carriage, and number and age group of passengers on motor vehicle crashes. The findings were compared with risk estimates of the effect of mobile phone use on motor vehicle crashes derived from the case-crossover study (McEvoy et al., 2005), henceforth named the ‘mobile phone study’.
Section snippets
Setting
Both studies were conducted in metropolitan Perth, the capital city of the state of Western Australia. The population of Perth is 1.3 million, with close to 1.1 million aged ≥15 years (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2002). Based on driver's licence statistics, it is estimated that 75% of people aged ≥17 years in Perth hold a driver's licence. There were no passenger or hands-free mobile phone restrictions in place in Western Australia at the time of the studies. Hand-held mobile phone use while
Passenger study
Of the 347 drivers approached following a crash, 39 declined participation and 34 met an exclusion criterion. The remaining 274 drivers were interviewed. The case response rate was 88% (274/313). Among the 2267 drivers approached at service stations, 1145 declined participation and 26 were ineligible. The remaining 1096 drivers were interviewed. The control response rate was 49% (1096/2241). Accordingly, there were 1370 participants in the case-control study, 274 cases and 1096 controls (1:4
Discussion
Drivers with passengers were almost 60% more likely to have a motor vehicle crash resulting in their hospital attendance, irrespective of their age group. The likelihood of a crash was more than doubled in the presence of two or more passengers. Nonetheless, the risk is considerably lower than that conferred by mobile phone use while driving. In contrast to mobile phone use, passengers, with some exceptions, are generally aware of the road conditions and can moderate their conversation as
Acknowledgements
The contribution of Ms. Claire Haworth, Ms. Margaret Hocking, Mr. John Anderson and Mr. Frank West at The University of Western Australia is acknowledged. The studies relied upon the support of the participating hospitals, St. John Ambulance Service, and telecommunication companies (mobile phone study) and participating service stations (passenger study). The research was funded by the Motor Accidents Authority of New South Wales (Australia) and Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (United
References (22)
- et al.
The effects of a mobile telephone task on driver behaviour in a car following situation
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(1995) - et al.
Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a braking response
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(2003) - et al.
Regulating conversation during driving: a problem for mobile phones
Transport Res. F
(2005) - et al.
Driver hand-held mobile phone use and safety belt use
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(2003) - et al.
Effects of remote and in-person verbal interactions on verbalization rates and attention to dynamic spatial scenes
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(2004) - et al.
Evaluating the impact of passengers on the safety of older drivers
J. Safety Res.
(2003) - et al.
The influence of alcohol, age and number of passengers on the night-time risk of driver fatal injury in New Zealand
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(2004) - et al.
Passenger carriage and car crash injury: a comparison between younger and older drivers
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(2003) - et al.
The observed effects of teenage passengers on the risky driving behavior of teenage drivers
Accid. Anal. Prev.
(2005) - Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2005. 1301.0 Year Book Australia, 2005. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Available...
Cited by (69)
Personality, perceptions and behavior: A study of speeding amongst drivers in Victoria, Australia
2023, Journal of Safety ResearchKey factors associated with parents’ illegal engagement with their smartphones while driving their children
2023, Accident Analysis and PreventionMobile phone penalties and road crashes: Are changes in sanctions effective?
2023, Journal of Safety ResearchCitation Excerpt :Experiments have shown that talking on a mobile phone reduces reaction time for drivers (Farmer, Braitman, & Lund, 2010).1 Distractions take multiple forms, such as cognitive (conversation to task related), visual (looking at the phone), auditory (listening to the phone), and manual (holding the phone or dialing/texting; McEvoy, Stevenson, & Woodward, 2007). Being distracted by a mobile phone while driving can have serious consequences for health, increasing the risk of a crash by three to four times (Elvik, 2011; McEvoy et al., 2007; World Health Organization, 2018), although most of the effect seems to work through use of hand-held mobile phones (Backer-Grøndahl & Sagberg, 2011).
How do the type and duration of distraction affect speed selection and crash risk? An evaluation using naturalistic driving data
2022, Accident Analysis and PreventionEvaluating the causal effects of cellphone distraction on crash risk using propensity score methods
2020, Accident Analysis and PreventionCitation Excerpt :Crash databases, such as hospital records, the General Estimation System (GES), and the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), are major sources for crash risk evaluation. Using a case-crossover approach based on cellphone and hospital records, studies in Cantata and Australia show that cellphone use was associated with a fourfold increased crash risk (McEvoy et al., 2007; Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997). Study using GES database showed that cellphone distraction resulted in significant higher risk (OR = 11.56) of rear-end collision for teenage drivers (Neyens and Boyle, 2007).
Unsafe motorization: A clog in the wheels of sustainable transportation
2020, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives