CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18Human-Automation Interaction and SafetyTraffic and Road SafetyIoT and GPS-based Vehicle Safety Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Distracting behaviors among teenagers and young, middle-aged, and older adult drivers when driving without and with warnings from an integrated vehicle safety system

Kidd, David G., Buonarosa, Mary Lynn·2017·Journal of Safety Research
DOI 10.1016/j.jsr.2017.02.017
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Introduction Negative reinforcement from crash warnings may reduce the likelihood that drivers engage in distracted driving. Alternatively, drivers may compensate for the perceived safety benefit of crash warnings by engaging in distractions more frequently, especially at higher speeds. The purpose of this study was to examine whether warning feedback from an integrated vehicle-based safety system affected the likelihood that various secondary behaviors were present among drivers ages 16-17, 20-30, 40-50, and 60-70.Method Participants drove an instrumented sedan with various collision warning systems for an extended period. Ten 5-second video clips were randomly sampled from driving periods at speeds above 25mph and below 5mph each week for each driver and coded for the presence of 11 secondary behaviors.Results At least one secondary behavior was present in 46% of video clips; conversing with a passenger (17%), personal grooming (9%), and cellphone conversation (6%) were the most common. The likelihood that at least one secondary behavior was present was not significantly different during periods when drivers received warnings relative to periods without warnings. At least one secondary behavior was 21% more likely to be present at speeds below 5mph relative to speeds above 25mph; however, the effect of vehicle speed was not significantly affected by warning presence. Separate models for each of the five most common secondary behaviors also indicated that warnings had no significant effect on the likelihood that each behavior was present.Conclusions Collision warnings were not associated with significant increases or decreases in the overall likelihood that teen and adult drivers engaged in secondary behaviors or the likelihood of the behaviors at speeds above 25mph or below 5mph.Practical applications There was no evidence that forward collision warning and other technologies like those in this study will increase or decrease distracted driving.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsr.2017.02.017

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kidd, D. G., & Buonarosa, M. L.
Affiliations
  • Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Kidd, David G.
ORCID
Kidd, David G.
Venue
Journal of Safety Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
61
Pages
177-185
ISSN
0022-4375 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jsr.2017.02.017
OpenAlex
W2593776997
Cited by
18
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4
FWCI
2.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Safety Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Traffic and Road Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › IoT and GPS-based Vehicle Safety Systems
Keywords
driver distraction, collision warning systems, forward collision warning, teen drivers, young adult drivers, middle-aged drivers, older drivers, negative reinforcement, vehicle speed, passenger conversation
MeSH terms
Accidents, Traffic, Distracted Driving, Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Protective Devices, Cell Phone, Young Adult

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