Prevalence and trends of distracted driving in Canada

Introduction: This study evaluates prevalence and trends in distracted driving in Canada based on multiple indicators collected from the Road Safety Monitor (RSM) and Canada’s National Fatality Database maintained by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF). Method: Data from the RSM on self-reported distracted driving behaviors were analyzed using multivariate techniques including logistic regression analysis in various years spanning from 2004 to 2019. Data from TIRF’s National Fatality Database from 2000 to 2016 were also analyzed using piecewise regression analysis to evaluate trends and prevalence of driver distraction. Results: Significantly more Canadians reported talking on their phone hands-free or handheld phone while driving in 2019 compared to 2010. There was a 102% increase in the percentage that reported texting while driving in 2019 (9.7%) compared to 2010 (4.8%). For every 10-year increase in age, drivers were 44% less likely to text, 38% less likely to use a handheld phone, and 28% less likely to use a hands-free phone. Males were 62% more likely to use a handheld phone and 50% more likely to use a hands-free phone than females. Findings related to drivers’ perceived danger of distracted driving and attitudes are also presented. Although the number of distraction-related fatalities has not increased substantially from 2000 to 2016, the percentage of all fatalities where distraction was a contributing factor has increased. Unlike drinking drivers, distracted drivers more often kill other road users in crashes than kill themselves. Conclusions: In conclusion, while most Canadians appear to understand that one of the high-risk forms of distracted driving (i.e., texting while driving) is indeed dangerous, there is a minority who are unaware of, or resistant to, this fact. Practical Applications: Enforcement activities and education initiatives to combat distracted driving ought to be tailored to the target audience based on the patterns uncovered.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Cell phones and driving: review of research

OBJECTIVE: The research literature on drivers' use of cell phones was reviewed to identify trends in drivers' phone use and to determine the state of knowledge about the safety consequences of such use. METHODS: Approximately 125 studies were reviewed with regard to the research questions, type and rigor of the methods, and findings. Reviewed studies included surveys of drivers, experiments, naturalistic studies (continuous recording of everyday driving by drivers in instrumented vehicles), studies of crash risk, and evaluations of laws limiting drivers' phone use. RESULTS: Observational surveys indicate drivers commonly use cell phones and that such use is increasing. Drivers report they usually use hand-held phones. Experimental studies have found that simulated or instrumented driving tasks, or driving while being observed, are compromised by tasks intended to replicate phone conversations, whether using hand-held or hands-free phones, and may be further compromised by the physical distraction of handling phones. Effects of phone use on driving performance when drivers are in their own vehicles are unknown. With representative samples of adequate size, naturalistic studies in the future may provide the means to document the patterns and circumstances of drivers' phone use and their effects on real-world driving. Currently, the best studies of crash risk used cell phone company billing records to verify phone use by crash-involved drivers. Two such studies found a fourfold increase in the risk of a property-damage-only crash and the risk of an injury crash associated with phone use; increased risk was similar for males and females, younger and older drivers, and hands-free and hand-held phones. A number of jurisdictions in the United States and around the world have made it illegal for drivers to use hand-held phones. Studies of these laws show only limited compliance and unclear effects on safety.CONCLUSIONS: Even if total compliance with bans on drivers' hand-held cell phone use can be achieved, crash risk will remain to the extent that drivers continue to use or switch to hands-free phones. Although the enactment of laws limiting drivers' use of all phones is consistent with research findings, it is unclear how such laws could be enforced. At least in the short term, it appears that drivers' phone use will continue to increase, despite the growing evidence of the risk it creates. More effective countermeasures are needed but are not known at this time.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Are cellular phone blocking applications effective for novice teen drivers?

ProblemDistracted driving is a significant concern for novice teen drivers. Although cellular phone bans are applied in many jurisdictions to restrict cellular phone use, teen drivers often report making calls and texts while driving.MethodThe Minnesota Teen Driver Study incorporated cellular phone blocking functions via a software application for 182 novice teen drivers in two treatment conditions. The first condition included 92 teens who ran a driver support application on a smartphone that also blocked phone usage. The second condition included 90 teens who ran the same application with phone blocking but which also reported back to parents about monitored risky behaviors (e.g., speeding). A third control group consisting of 92 novice teen drivers had the application and phone-based software installed on the phones to record cellular phone (but not block it) use while driving.ResultsThe two treatment groups made significantly fewer calls and texts per mile driven compared to the control group. The control group data also demonstrated a higher propensity to text while driving rather than making calls.DiscussionSoftware that blocks cellular phone use (except 911) while driving can be effective at mitigating calling and texting for novice teen drivers. However, subjective data indicates that some teens were motivated to find ways around the software, as well as to use another teen's phone while driving when they were unable to use theirs.Practical applicationsCellular phone bans for calling and texting are the first step to changing behaviors associated with texting and driving, particularly among novice teen drivers. Blocking software has the additional potential to reduce impulsive calling and texting while driving among novice teen drivers who might logically know the risks, but for whom it is difficult to ignore calling or texting while driving.     

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.     

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.     

Real-world effects of using a phone while driving on lateral and longitudinal control of vehicles

IntroductionTechnologies able to augment human communication, such as smartphones, are increasingly present during all daily activities. Their use while driving, in particular, is of great potential concern, because of the high risk that distraction poses during this activity. Current countermeasures to distraction from phone use are considerably different across countries and not always widely accepted/adopted by the drivers.MethodsThis study utilized naturalistic driving data collected from 108 drivers in the Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety Systems (IVBSS) program in 2009 and 2010 to assess the extent to which using a phone changes lateral or longitudinal control of a vehicle. The IVBSS study included drivers from three age groups: 20–30 (younger), 40–50 (middle-aged), and 60–70 (older).ResultsResults from this study show that younger drivers are more likely to use a phone while driving than older and middle-aged drivers. Furthermore, younger drivers exhibited smaller safety margins while using a phone. Nevertheless, younger drivers did not experience more severe lateral/longitudinal threats than older and middle-aged drivers, probably because of faster reaction times. While manipulating the phone (i.e., dialing, texting), drivers exhibited larger lateral safety margins and experienced less severe lateral threats than while conversing on the phone. Finally, longitudinal threats were more critical soon after phone interaction, suggesting that drivers terminate phone interactions when driving becomes more demanding.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that drivers are aware of the potential negative effect of phone use on their safety. This awareness guides their decision to engage/disengage in phone use and to increase safety margins (self-regulation). This compensatory behavior may be a natural countermeasure to distraction that is hard to measure in controlled studies.Practical ApplicationsIntelligent systems able to amplify this natural compensatory behavior may become a widely accepted/adopted countermeasure to the potential distraction from phone operation while driving.     

Adolescents' perspectives on distracted driving legislation

Purpose: Distracted driving is a growing global epidemic, with adolescent drivers reporting frequent engagement in distracted driving behaviors. Public health initiatives and legislative efforts designed to decrease the prevalence of these unwanted driving behaviors have demonstrated small, but significant reductions in crash risk. Non-compliance is a known problem among drivers of all ages, but may be especially problematic for novice, adolescent drivers. Using a construct from the Health Belief Model, the relations between demographic factors, perceived threat to safety, and peer influences were investigated with adolescents' support for three types of distracted driving legislation regarding: (a) reading or sending text messages/emails while driving; (b) hand-held cell phone use while driving; and (c) using non-driving-related-in-vehicle (NDIV) technology while driving. Investigating adolescents' perceptions provides an opportunity to understand distracted driving enforcement and legislation. Methods: Three hundred and seventy-nine adolescents aged 15–19 (M = 16.12, SD = 0.56) were recruited from public high schools. Demographics, perceptions, and support regarding distracted driving were assessed using self-report surveys. Statistical analyses included bivariate correlations and adjusted odds ratios to investigate influences of adolescent support for distracted driving legislation. Results:Female adolescents were at 2 times greater odds of supporting a law against texting/emailing while driving compared to male adolescents. Greater perceived threat to safety was associated with all three types of distracted driving legislation (aOR = 1.10, 1.33). Minimal association was found with peer influences. Conclusions: Perceived threat to safety and gender were associated with legislative support in adolescents. Practical application: Interventions and public health campaigns that incorporate elements related to perceived threat may be more successful with female adolescent drivers than male adolescents. Future experimental research will help to determine what factors affect adolescents' perspectives on distracted driving to promote compliance with related legislation.     

Self-reported wrist and finger symptoms associated with other physical/mental symptoms and use of computers/mobile phones

Recently, computer, mobile phone and Internet use has increased. This study aimed to determine the possible relation between self-reported wrist and finger symptoms (aches, pain or numbness) and using computers/mobile phones, and to analyze how the symptoms are specifically associated with utilizing desktop computers, portable computers or mini-computers and mobile phones. A questionnaire was sent to 15,000 working-age Finns (age 18–65). Via a questionnaire, 723 persons reported wrist and finger symptoms often or more with use. Over 80% use mobile phones daily and less than 30% use desktop computers or the Internet daily at leisure, e.g., over 89.8% quite often or often experienced pain, numbness or aches in the neck, and 61.3% had aches in the hips and the lower back. Only 33.7% connected their symptoms to computer use. In the future, the development of new devices and Internet services should incorporate the ergonomics of the hands and wrists.     

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.     

The prevalence of seatbelt and mobile phone use among drivers in Riyadh,Saudi Arabia: An observational study

IntroductionRoad traffic injuries (RTIs) are the third leading cause of death in Saudi Arabia. Numerous factors may increase the likelihood of RTIs. The prevalence of risk factors associated with RTIs may vary due to several reasons. Because little is known about these risk factors locally, we examined the prevalence of mobile phone and seatbelt use and their association with spatial locations.MethodsThis is an observational study conducted at major highways and inner intersections throughout Riyadh, the country's capital. Two observers captured seatbelt and mobile phone use among drivers. Logistic regression models were constructed to examine the association between real estate prices and mobile phone or seatbelt use. Observations were categorized as taken place in an affluent neighborhood if the average price per square meter was above 2500 Saudi Riyal.ResultsA total of 1700 drivers were observed in 13 sites citywide. 13.8% of drivers were seen using mobile while driving and only a third of drivers (34%) were wearing seatbelts. Being at an affluent neighborhood was associated with close to three times higher odds of wearing seatbelts (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.9–3.7) and also associated with 42% lower odds of mobile phone use among drivers (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.36–0.92).DiscussionThis study found a high prevalence of traffic violations among drivers in Riyadh. Based on our estimate, 660,000 drivers are roaming the street during daytime while using their phones and they are less likely to wear seatbelts. Unfortunately, this estimate might contribute to increasing RTIs. Despite existing regulations, seatbelt use among drivers is significantly lower than in developed countries (i.e. USA 94%).ConclusionOur study found a high prevalence of traffic violations represented by lack of compliance with seatbelt and mobile phone use laws. These findings provide a basis for their underlying prevalence in SA. Practical applications: Public health prevention programs may use these findings to facilitate support to increasing investment in awareness campaigns and further enforcement by the traffic police to reduce RITs and improve population health.