Cited by 65Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsTraffic and Road SafetyHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Texting while driving as impulsive choice: A behavioral economic analysis

Open access
Hayashi, Yusuke, Russo, Christopher T., Wirth, Oliver·2015·Accident Analysis & Prevention

Abstract

The goal of the present study was to examine the utility of a behavioral economic analysis to investigate the role of delay discounting in texting while driving. A sample of 147 college students completed a survey to assess how frequently they send and read text messages while driving. Based on this information, students were assigned to one of two groups: 19 students who frequently text while driving and 19 matched-control students who infrequently text while driving but were similar in gender, age, years of education, and years driving. The groups were compared on the extent to which they discounted, or devalued, delayed hypothetical monetary rewards using a delay-discounting task. In this task, students made repeated choices between $1000 available after a delay (ranging from 1 week to 10 years) and an equal or lesser amount of money available immediately. The results show that the students who frequently text while driving discounted delayed rewards at a greater rate than the matched control students. The study supports the conclusions that texting while driving is fundamentally an impulsive choice made by drivers, and that a behavioral economic approach may be a useful research tool for investigating the decision-making processes underlying risky behaviors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aap.2015.07.025

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals highly sensitive to rewards or impulsive tend to engage in risky behaviors such as texting on cell phones while driving.

    “Evidence indicates that individuals, who are highly sensitive to rewards or impulsive, have a tendency to engage in risky behaviors such as texting on their cell phones while driving (Hayashi et al., 2015; Pearson et al., 2013).”

    From Is it harmful or helpful? Examining the causes and consequences of generative AI usage among university students (2024) · cites this paper as Hayashi et al., 2015

    The Discussion (page not provided) reports that college students who frequently text while driving were more impulsive as measured by delay discounting. The paper does not establish that people highly sensitive to rewards are more likely to text while driving, and its student sample does not support extending the finding to individuals generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Higgins ST Silverman K Heil SH 2008 Contingency Management in Substance Abuse Treatment Guilford Press New York, NY

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hayashi, Y., Russo, C. T., & Wirth, O.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (US)
Corresponding author
Hayashi, Yusuke
Venue
Accident Analysis & Prevention
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-10
Volume
83
Pages
182-189
ISSN
0001-4575 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1924077383
Cited by
64
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1
FWCI
5.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Accident Analysis & Prevention (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Pennsylvania State University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Traffic and Road Safety
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
texting while driving, delay discounting, impulsive choice, behavioral economics, risky driving behavior, delayed rewards, decision-making, university students
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Automobile Driving, Female, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reward, Students, Young Adult, Text Messaging, Economics, Behavioral, Delay Discounting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review