Driver hand-held cellular phone use: a four-year analysis

INTRODUCTION: The use of hand-held cellular (mobile) phones while driving has stirred more debate, passion, and research than perhaps any other traffic safety issue in the past several years. There is ample research showing that the use of either hand-held or hands-free cellular phones can lead to unsafe driving patterns. Whether or not these performance deficits increase the risk of crash is difficult to establish, but recent studies are beginning to suggest that cellular phone use elevates crash risk. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to assess changes in the rate of hand-held cellular phone use by motor-vehicle drivers on a statewide level in Michigan. This study presents the results of 13 statewide surveys of cellular phone use over a 4-year period. Hand-held cellular phone use data were collected through direct observation while vehicles were stopped at intersections and freeway exit ramps. Data were weighted to be representative of all drivers traveling during daylight hours in Michigan. RESULTS: The study found that driver hand-held cellular phone use has more than doubled between 2001 and 2005, from 2.7% to 5.8%. This change represents an average increase of 0.78 percentage points per year. The 5.8% use rate observed in 2005 means that at any given daylight hour, around 36,550 drivers were conversing on cellular phones while driving on Michigan roadways. The trend line fitted to these data predicts that by the year 2010, driver hand-held cellular phone use will be around 8.6%, or 55,000 drivers at any given daylight hour. CONCLUSIONS: These results make it clear that cellular phone use while driving will continue to be an important traffic safety issue, and highlight the importance of continued attempts to generate new ways of alleviating this potential hazard.     

Longer-term effects of Washington, DC, law on drivers' hand-held cell phone use

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the substantial short-term declines in drivers' use of hand-held phones achieved in the District of Columbia (DC) were sustained 1 year after a ban. METHODS: Drivers' daytime hand-held cell phone use was observed in DC and nearby areas of Virginia and Maryland, states without bans. Observations were conducted several months before the ban, shortly after, and 1 year later. The number of vehicles observed in all three surveys combined was 51,945 in DC, 36,796 in Maryland, and 43,033 in Virginia. RESULTS: The rate of talking on hand-held phones declined significantly from 6.1 percent before the law to 3.5 percent shortly after; when measured 1 year later, use was 4.0 percent, still significantly lower than baseline. Based on increases in rates of talking on hand-held phones in Maryland and Virginia, longer-term phone use in DC was estimated to be 53 percent lower than would have been expected without the ban. Declines in DC were identified for drivers of vehicles registered in all three jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: In DC, there was an initial decline of about 50 percent in drivers talking on hand-held cell phones following a ban, and this decline was sustained about 1 year later. After a similar ban in New York, there was an initial decline in phone use comparable with the initial decline in DC, but the decline a year after the New York ban took full effect was only about 21 percent and not statistically significant. The potential difference in sustained effectiveness for the DC ban may reflect tougher enforcement in DC. Even if full compliance with hand-held phone bans can be achieved, the risks from drivers' use of hands-free phones will remain.     

Effects of Washington, D.C. law on drivers' hand-held cell phone use

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of Washington, D.C. law prohibiting drivers' use of hand-held cell phones on such use. METHODS: Daytime observations of drivers were conducted at signalized intersections in D.C. in March 2004, several months before the law took effect on July 1, 2004, and again in October 2004. As a comparison, observations also were conducted in areas of Virginia and Maryland located close to the D.C. border. Maryland and Virginia placed no limitations on drivers' phone use. Use was observed for 36,091 vehicles in D.C., 25,151 vehicles in Maryland, and 28,483 vehicles in Virginia. RESULTS: The rate of talking on hand-held cell phones among drivers in D.C. declined significantly from 6.1% before the law to 3.5% after. Phone use declined slightly in Maryland and increased significantly in Virginia so that, relative to the patterns of hand-held phone use in the two states, phone use in D.C. declined 50%. Hand-held phone use in D.C. declined comparably among drivers of vehicles registered in all three jurisdictions. D.C. police issued 2,556 citations and 1,232 warnings for cell phone violations during July-November 2004. There were spates of media coverage when the law was passed and when it took effect. CONCLUSIONS: D.C.'s law prohibiting drivers' hand-held phone use had a strong effect on such use among drivers in D.C. Without ongoing publicized enforcement of the law, long-term compliance may be difficult to achieve.     

Driving and telephoning: Relative accident risk when using hand-held and hands-free mobile phones

Experimental research shows that using mobile phones while driving leads to impaired driving, and it has been suggested that this driving impairment to a large extent is a result of cognitive, rather than physical, distractions. This notion is partly supported by empirical data showing that use of hands-free phones is associated with impaired driving in much the same way as use of hand-held phones. In the present study, accident risk when using hand-held and hands-free phones was investigated in a sample of 4307 drivers who were involved in accidents in 2007. In addition, data from a similar survey from 1997 (N = 5007) were used in order to get more observations. Relative risk was estimated using “quasi-induced exposure” in multiple-vehicle accidents. Results from the two surveys combined showed a significant increase in accident risk for hand-held mobiles and for hand-held and hands-free phones together. A non-significant tendency towards increased risk for hands-free mobiles was also detected. However, analyses of data from 2007 separately did not result in statistically significant relative risk estimates for any of the mobile types. Hand-held users were more inclined to attribute the accident to mobile phone use than were hands-free users.     

Drivers' visual behavior when using handheld and hands-free cell phones

ObjectiveThis study investigated driver distraction and how the use of handheld (HH), portable hands-free (PHF), and integrated hands-free (IHF) cell phones affected the visual behavior of motor vehicle drivers.MethodA naturalistic driving study recorded 204 participating drivers using video cameras and vehicle sensors for an average of 31 days. A total of 1564 cell phone calls made and 844 text messages sent while driving were sampled and underwent a video review. Baselines were established by recording epochs prior to the cell phone interactions. Total eyes-off-road time (TEORT) was examined to assess the visual demands of cell phone subtasks while driving. Percent TEORT was reported and compared against the baseline.ResultsVisual-manual subtasks performed on HH, PHF, and IHF cell phones were found to significantly increase drivers' mean percent TEORT. In contrast, conversing on an HH cell phone was found to significantly decrease drivers' mean percent TEORT, indicating that drivers looked at the forward roadway more often. No significant differences in percent TEORT were found for drivers conversing using PHF or IHF cell phones. The mean TEORT durations for visual-manual subtasks performed on an HH cell phone were significantly longer than the mean TEORT durations on either IHF or PHF cell phones.Practical applicationsThis research helps to further reinforce the distinction made between handheld and hands-free cell phone use in transportation distraction policy.     

Driving performance while using cell phones: an observational study

INTRODUCTION: Through spontaneous driving observations, this study sought to examine the impact of using a hands-free cell phone while driving on speed and safe gap keeping behaviors. The study also examined the association between the measure of disturbance created by using a cell phone and the driver's awareness of the disturbance. METHOD: Twenty-three male adults were observed while driving for an hour and a half each; drivers were unaware of being observed. During the session, each of the participants received a phone call, initiated by an associate of the observer. The experiment was divided into two periods during which the experimental parameters were monitored: 10 minutes during conversation on a cell phone and 10 minutes of non-conversation on a hands-free cell phone. After the experiment, the driver was questioned concerning the extent to which his/her driving was disturbed by the cell phone conversation. RESULTS: T-test for matched samples revealed that the gaps between the drivers' cars and those in front of them diminished when drivers were engaged in the cell phone conversations. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed that drivers that had short conversations did not change their speed, while drivers who were engaged in long (over 16 minutes) conversations drove faster. No effect of drivers' awareness toward cell phone-related disturbance on actual driving behavior monitored in the present study was found.     

Cell phone users, reported crash risk, unsafe driving behaviors and dispositions: a survey of motorists in Maryland

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this investigation was to identify risky driving behaviors and dispositions that distinguish drivers who use a cell phone while operating a motor vehicle from non-cell phone using drivers. METHOD: Annual telephone surveys were used to identify drivers who reported using a cell phone while driving in the last month (n=1803) and were compared to those who said they did not use cell phones while driving (n=1578). RESULTS: Cell phone using drivers were more likely to report driving while drowsy, going 20 mph over the speed limit, driving aggressively, running a stop sign or red light, and driving after having had several drinks. They were also more likely to have had a prior history of citation and crash involvement than non-cell phone using drivers. Cell phone using drivers also reported they were less careful and more in a hurry when they drive than non-cell phone using drivers. CONCLUSION: Cell phone using drivers report engaging in many behaviors that place them at risk for a traffic crash, independent of the specific driving impairments that cell phone usage may produce. Strategies that combine coordinated and sustained enforcement activities along with widespread public awareness campaigns hold promise as effective countermeasures for these drivers, who resemble aggressive drivers in many respects.     

In-car cell phone use and hazards following hands free legislation

OBJECTIVE: A new law took effect in Finland at the beginning of 2003 which prohibits the handheld use of mobile phones while driving a motor vehicle. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the law on phone usage and self-reported safety during the first few months and 16 months later to determine whether the initial level of compliance with the law had been sustained. METHODS: Data were collected by Gallup home poll before (spring 2002) and after legislation took effect (spring 2003 and 2004). A representative sample of drivers who owned a cell phone (n = 836 to 966) was interviewed each time. On-road observations were also collected in four cities for 2003 and 2004. RESULTS: Just after the law, 97% of drivers were aware of the new hands free legislation. In sharp contrast to the pre-law rate of 16%, 43% reported not using the phone while driving immediately after the law and 41% one year later. The occasional users especially reduced their use of phones while driving. The law was correlated to reductions in self-reported handheld use of cell phones while driving, from 55.6% pre-law to 15.2% immediately after passage. In spite of this change, however, the hands free legislation did not reduce self-reported involvement of Finnish drivers in phone-related hazards. Handheld usage was still lower in 2004 than pre-law (20.0%), but the 32% increase from 2003 was significant. Observational data collected in Finland in 2003 and 2004 showed an even higher upward trend in handheld use (87% increase, from 3.1% to 5.8%; pre-law data were not available), and matched a similar increase reported by McCartt and Geary (2004) in their observational evaluation of New York's handheld mobile phone law. CONCLUSION: The self-reports indicate that the hands-free law reduced handheld phone use, among occasional users especially, but did not reduce phone-related hazards. The effect of the law on phone use substantially declined within one year.     

Collision and violation involvement of drivers who use cellular telephones

The study sample consisted of 3,869 drivers, split approximately 50/50 between observed cell phone users and those observed not using cell phones (labeled "nonusers"). Cell phone use was determined by a snapshot observation made on city streets. The sample represented 54% of those originally observed, for whom a match was obtained for both vehicle license plate and for gender and estimated age group of the observed driver and that of the driver named in the vehicle policy. Data were obtained from records of insurance claims, police-reported collisions and violations, following a strict protocol to protect individual privacy. The dependent measures were at-fault crash claims and "inattention" violations. A logistic regression model controlled for age, gender, exposure (represented by not-at-fault crash claims), alcohol-related offenses, and aggressive driving offenses. The study also involved a comparison of the contributing factors and collision configurations of police-reported collisions involving the users and "nonusers" in the sample. Drivers observed using cell phones had a higher risk of an at-fault crash than did the "nonusers," although the difference was not significant for males. There was no apparent effect on "inattention" violations. The cell phone users also had a higher proportion of rear-end collisions. The violation pattern of cell phone users suggests that they are, in general, riskier drivers. These differences likely reflect lifestyle, attitude and personality factors. It is essential to control for these factors in assessing the direct risk attributable to cellular telephone use.     

Views of US drivers about driving safety

Problem: To assess how drivers view dangers on the highway, what motivates them to drive safely, how they say they reduce their crash and injury risk, and how they rate their own driving skills. Results: Most drivers rated their skills as better than average. The biggest motivating factor for safe driving was concern for safety of others in their vehicle, followed by negative outcomes such as being in a crash, increased insurance costs, and fines. The greatest threats to their safety were thought to be other drivers' actions that increase crash risk such as alcohol impairment or running red lights. In terms of reducing crashes and injuries, drivers tended to focus on actions they could take such as driving defensively or using seat belts. There was less recognition of the role of vehicles and vehicle features in crash or injury prevention. Impact on research, practice, and policy: Knowing how drivers view themselves and others, their concerns, and their motivations and techniques for staying out of trouble on the roads provides insight into the difficulty of changing driving practices.     

Distractions and the risk of car crash injury: the effect of drivers' age

PROBLEM: Motor-vehicle accidents are one of the major causes of injury in most motorized countries. Driver distractions have been suggested as a contributor to traffic accidents. Moreover, age of the driver seems to have a role in the relationship between distractions and car crashes. But very few studies have investigated the effect of driver's age on this relationship. This exploratory study investigated the association between distractions, both inside and outside the vehicle, and the increased risk of car crash injury among drivers across different ages. METHOD: This study used a case series design to analyze data routinely collected by the NSW police in Australia. A special focus of this study was on how drivers' age affects the risk of car crash injury, which was determined by using a well-documented risk estimation methodology. RESULTS: The results obtained indicated that drivers of all ages, on the whole, are more susceptible to distractions inside the vehicle than distractions coming from outside. Age was shown to affect the relationship between in-vehicle distraction and the risk of car crash injury. A separate analysis was also conducted on hand-held phone usage while driving with results supplementing previous findings reported in the literature. IMPACT TO INDUSTRY: Safety strategies to countermeasure in-vehicle distractions have been suggested and discussed.     

Is a hands-free phone safer than a handheld phone?

Introduction

Although it is becoming more and more accepted that driving while talking on a cell phone can be hazardous, most jurisdictions are making handheld phone use illegal while allowing hands-free phone use.

Methods

The scientific literature exploring the effects of these two types of cell phone use on driving and driving-related performance is reviewed here.

Results

Our review shows that talking on the phone, regardless of phone type, has negative impacts on performance especially in detecting and identifying events. Performance while using a hands-free phone was rarely found to be better than when using a handheld phone. Some studies found that drivers compensate for the deleterious effects of cell phone use when using a handheld phone but neglect to do so when using a hands-free phone.

Impact on Industry

Current research does not support the decision to allow hands-free phone use while driving.     

Self-regulation of driving speed among distracted drivers: An application of driver behavioral adaptation theory

Objective: The adaptive behavior of mobile phone–distracted drivers has been a topic of much discussion in the recent literature. Both simulator and naturalistic studies suggest that distracted drivers generally select lower driving speeds; however, speed adaptation is not observed among all drivers, and the mechanisms of speed selection are not well understood. The aim of this research was to apply a driver behavioral adaptation model to investigate the speed adaptation of mobile phone–distracted drivers.

Methods: The speed selection behavior of drivers was observed in 3 phone conditions including baseline (no conversation) and hands-free and handheld phone conversations in a high-fidelity driving simulator. Speed adaptation in each phone condition was modeled as a function of secondary task demand and self-reported personal/psychological characteristics with a system of seemingly unrelated equations (SURE) accounting for potential correlations due to repeated measures experiment design.

Results: Speed adaptation is similar between hands-free and handheld phone conditions, but the predictors of speed adaptation vary across the phone conditions. Though perceived workload of secondary task demand, self-efficacy, attitude toward safety, and driver demographics were significant predictors of speed adaptation in the handheld condition, drivers' familiarity with the hands-free interface, attitude toward safety, and sensation seeking were significant predictors in the hands-free condition. Drivers who reported more positive safety attitudes selected lower driving speeds while using phones.

Conclusion: This research confirmed that behavioral adaptation models are suitable for explaining speed adaptation of mobile phone distracted drivers, and future research could be focused on further theoretical refinement.     

Mobile phone use while driving: Predicting drivers’ answering intentions and compensatory decisions

The current study considered, for the first time, compensatory decisions within the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to explain why people use mobile phones while driving. The effects of age, gender, and mobile phone mode on respondents’ answering intentions and compensatory decisions were mainly examined. A series of questions were administered to 333 drivers (ages 25-59), which included (1) demographic measures, (2) scales that measured prior mobile use activities in both driving and ordinary contexts, (3) a question to measure drivers’ perceptions of the safety of hands-free phones, and (4) TPB measures, which measured answer intention and two compensatory behavioural decisions (i.e., reminding the caller that he/she is driving, limiting the length of a conversations (including perceived its limits)), along with predictive variables. Drivers reported a moderate likelihood of answering intention and a strong tendency to engage in the two compensatory behaviours. Answering intention and compensatory decisions, perceived behavioural control, perceived risk, and usage frequency were more dependent on mobile phone mode and age group than gender. The regression models explained 64% and 67% of the variance in answering intention in the handheld and hands-free scenario separately. Attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural risk and control (PBRC), and prior answering behaviour emerged as common predictors. The predictive models explained 31% and 37% of the variance for perceived limits of a conversation length in handheld and hands-free scenarios, respectively. Answering intention and PBRC consistently predicted most of the variance (handheld: 28%; hands-free: 32%) for this compensatory perception limits. The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.     

Driving context influences drivers' decision to engage in visual–manual phone tasks: Evidence from a naturalistic driving study

IntroductionVisual–manual (VM) phone tasks (i.e., texting, dialing, reading) are associated with an increased crash/near-crash risk. This study investigated how the driving context influences drivers' decisions to engage in VM phone tasks in naturalistic driving.MethodVideo-recordings of 1,432 car trips were viewed to identify VM phone tasks and passenger presence. Video, vehicle signals, and map data were used to classify driving context (i.e., curvature, other vehicles) before and during the VM phone tasks (N = 374). Vehicle signals (i.e., speed, yaw rate, forward radar) were available for all driving.ResultsVM phone tasks were more likely to be initiated while standing still, and less likely while driving at high speeds, or when a passenger was present. Lead vehicle presence did not influence how likely it was that a VM phone task was initiated, but the drivers adjusted their task timing to situations when the lead vehicle was increasing speed, resulting in increasing time headway. The drivers adjusted task timing until after making sharp turns and lane change maneuvers. In contrast to previous driving simulator studies, there was no evidence of drivers reducing speed as a consequence of VM phone task engagement.ConclusionsThe results show that experienced drivers use information about current and upcoming driving context to decide when to engage in VM phone tasks. However, drivers may fail to sufficiently increase safety margins to allow time to respond to possible unpredictable events (e.g., lead vehicle braking).Practical applicationsAdvanced driver assistance systems should facilitate and possibly boost drivers' self-regulating behavior. For instance, they might recognize when appropriate adaptive behavior is missing and advise or alert accordingly. The results from this study could also inspire training programs for novice drivers, or locally classify roads in terms of the risk associated with secondary task engagement while driving.     

Living dangerously: driver distraction at high speed

Recent research indicates that cell phone use can distract drivers from safe vehicle operation. However, estimates of the prevalence of cell phone use while driving have been limited to daytime hours and low-speed roadways. This paper describes the results of a study to estimate rates of cell phone use and other distractions by examining approximately 40,000 high-quality digital photographs of vehicles and drivers on the New Jersey Turnpike. The photographs, which originally were collected as part of a separate study, were taken both during the day and during the night and at different locations across the span of the Turnpike. A radar gun linked to the camera recorded the speeds of vehicles as they passed. This provided us with the speeds of every vehicle photographed, and allowed us to determine population counts of vehicles. A panel of three trained coders examined each photograph and recorded the presence of cell phone use by the drivers or any other distracting behavior. Demographic information on the driver was obtained during previous examinations of the photographs for an unrelated study. A rating was considered reliable when two out of the three coders agreed. Population estimates (and confidence intervals) of cell phone use and other distractions were estimated by weighting the cases by the inverse probability of vehicle selection. Logistic regression was used to predict cell phone use from demographic and situational factors. The results indicated that the most frequent distraction was cell phone use: 1.5% of the drivers on the Turnpike were using cell phones compared to the 3 to 4% use rates reported in the National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS) surveys conducted during the daytime on lower speed roadways. The Turnpike survey indicated that cell phones were used less on weekends and at night, and when the driver was exceeding the speed limit or had a passenger in the car.     

Driver personality characteristics related to self-reported accident involvement and mobile phone use while driving

A causal model was developed in this study to clarify the effect of mobile phone use on driving safety. Based on the model, a series of questionnaires were developed, and 194 car drivers were interviewed based on these questionnaires. Results showed that perceived risk and mobile phone usage habits varied with different individual traits. Drivers who were prone to accidents revealed a lower perception of safety risks and a higher self-reported accident rate resulting from mobile phone use than those who were not accident-prone. Aggressive drivers were found to use mobile phones more frequently while driving but had a similar accident rate to non-aggressive drivers. Frequency in mobile phone use while driving significantly increased among aggressive male drivers regardless of accident proneness. Findings from this study imply that the perceived risk of drivers might be an ignored but important factor in the relationship between mobile phone use and driving safety. Because of the difficulty in practically identifying who is accident-prone or not, this study suggests that overall prohibition in mobile phone use while driving is needed to reduce the corresponding number of traffic accidents.     

Quantifying driver cell phone use at signalized intersections using software-defined radio

Objective: This article outlines a data collection process that quantifies driver cell phone use using a software-defined radio (SDR) at a signalized intersection. Cell phone use while driving has been shown to be factor that increases the risk of a crash incident. Both operational and enforcement strategies can be applied at locations where high driver cell phone use is identified.

Methods: A baseline driver cell phone use observation was made at the intersection, where 9,699 vehicles were observed at the intersection of Carlton Road and State Route 31 (Pennington Road) in Ewing, New Jersey. An SDR cell phone detection device created as part of this study was then deployed at the same intersection to determine whether the SDR device could detect an active cell phone signal. The identification of vehicle cell phone activity using the SDR was conducted a sample of 4,000 vehicles. A visual observation, along with a motion detection camera, was made alongside the SDR to visually confirm cell phones use.

Results: Of the 4,000 vehicles sampled using the SDR cell phone detection device, 6.1% of the a.m. peak travel time and 7.6% of the p.m. peak travel time had an active cellular device. A concurrent visual field verification of driver cell phone use showed that approximately 57% (a.m. peak) and 67% (p.m. peak) of the SDR-detected cell phones were visually confirmed to be associated with distracted cell phone use.

Conclusions: Once characterized, the frequency of driver cell phone use can be used to justify changes to signal timing protocols. These adjustments could include extending the signal’s “all-red time” or holding “yellow time” longer in order to properly clear the intersection. These data can also be used to identify locations that may require more enforcement measures to dissuade driver cell phone use. Furthermore, the impact of anti–cell phone campaigns or new laws can be quantified by measuring before and after cell phone use in the near term rather than waiting for crash studies at intersections to be completed and analyzed.     

Effects of naturalistic cell phone conversations on driving performance

PROBLEM: The prevalence of automobile drivers talking on cell phones is growing, but the effect of that behavior on driving performance is unclear. Also unclear is the relationship between the difficulty level of a phone conversation and the resulting distraction. METHOD: This study used a driving simulator to determine the effect that easy and difficult cell phone conversations have on driving performance. RESULTS: Cell phone use caused participants to have higher variation in accelerator pedal position, drive more slowly with more variation in speed, and report a higher level of workload regardless of conversation difficulty level. CONCLUSIONS: Drivers may cope with the additional stress of phone conversations by enduring higher workloads or setting reduced performance goals. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: Because an increasing number of people talk on the phone while driving, crashes caused by distracted drivers using cell phones will cause disruptions in business, as well as injury, disability, and permanent loss of personnel.     

Sleepiness among night-time drivers: relationship to blood alcohol concentration and other factors

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to explore the distribution and correlates of subjective sleepiness among the general night-time driving population. METHODS: The survey took place in three British Columbia communities in June 2003 between 21:00 hours to 03:00 hours. Sites and vehicles were selected randomly. Surveyors obtained information on several demographic and situational variables including self-assessed degree of sleepiness and self-reported hours asleep and awake, as well as an objective measure of blood alcohol concentration obtained from a hand-held breath-testing device. RESULTS: The total compliance rate among intercepted drivers was 85%. Among the 2335 drivers responding to the questionnaire, 68.4% indicated that they were wide awake, 27.6% were somewhat sleepy, and 4.1% were very sleepy. Logistic regression quantified the independent contributions of the various factors to subjective sleepiness. Male drivers with positive blood alcohol concentrations under 50 mg% were more likely to report feeling sleepy than those with either higher or with zero blood alcohol concentration. Greater relative risk of sleepiness was also associated with being female, being under age 55, and advanced hour of night. Driving with passengers of the same gender was associated with lower reported sleepiness. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of night-time drivers are driving while sleepy, especially at late night and early morning hours. The combination of alcohol and sleepiness compounds impairment in experimental studies and deserves greater attention in crash risk studies and as a topic for public education and awareness.