Texting while driving, and other cell-phone Readings and writing activities are high-risk motor vehicle crashes and death. The paper illustrates the advancement and initial assessment of the Distracted Driving Survey (DDS).
Practices: Survey questions were developed by a research team Employing semi-structured interviews, pilot-tested, and assessed in young drivers for validity and reliability. Questions centered on texting while driving and using email, social networking, and maps on mobile phones with specific questions regarding the driving rates at which these actions are performed.
Outcomes: In 228 drivers 18-24 years old, the DDS revealed Excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.93) and correlations with documented 12-month crash prices. The score is registered on a 0-44 scale, with 44 being the highest risk behaviors. For each 1 unit increase of the DDS score, the likelihood of reporting a vehicle crash increases 7 percent. The survey can be completed in just two minutes or less than five minutes if demographic and background information is included. Text messaging was standard; 59.2 and 71.5 percent of respondents stated they composed and read text messages, correspondingly, while driving in the past 30 days.
The DDS is an 11-item measure that processes cell Phone-related distracted driving threat and contains reading/viewing and composing subscores. The scale demonstrated strong validity and reliability in motorists age 24 and younger. The DDS may help measure levels of cell-phone-related distracted driving and evaluate public health interventions focused on reducing these behaviors.
The Distracted Driving Survey is a short, reliable, and Valid measure to estimate cell-phone-related distraction when driving, focusing on texting and other viewing and composing activities. This survey is intended to provide additional information on the frequency of shared viewing and reading activities like texting, email usage, maps usage, and social networking viewing. The data are educational because different anti-distraction interventions target various facets of mobile phone utilization. By way of example, some anti-texting mobile phone applications wouldn’t impact map screening, email viewing or writing, or social networking use and for that reason wouldn’t influence those behaviors. Further research must determine if these trends also hold for elderly drivers. More outstanding DDS scores, indicating more diversion when driving, were correlated with increased reported crashes in the previous 12 months in a dose-response relationship. Although this finding doesn’t prove causality, the association is about and corroborates other research demonstrating the dangers of texting crash rates on classes and simulators.
This study confirmed prior reports of high rates of texting And driving in a young population, with more detailed descriptions of behavior on reading and writing text messages, the rates at which these actions are performed, and respondents’ perception of risk.
This measure may be used for more extensive studies to evaluate distracted driving behavior and evaluate interventions to reduce mobile phone usage, including texting while driving. A better understanding of the standard Mobile Phone functions used by Young drivers should alert the interventions aimed at reducing mobile Phone usage while driving.