State all-driver distracted driving laws and high school students' texting while driving behavior

Objective: Texting while driving is highly prevalent among adolescents and young adults in the United States. Texting while driving can significantly increase the risk of road crashes and is associated with other risky driving behaviors. Most states have enacted distracted driving laws to prohibit texting while driving. This study examines effects of different all-driver distracted driving laws on texting while driving among high school students.

Methods: High school student data were extracted from the 2013 National Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Distracted driving law information was collected from the National Conference of State Legislatures. The final sample included 6,168 high school students above the restricted driving age in their states and with access to a vehicle. Logistic regression was applied to estimate odds ratios of laws on texting while driving.

Results: All-driver text messaging bans with primary enforcement were associated with a significant reduction in odds of texting while driving among high school students (odds ratio = 0.703; 95% confidence interval, 0.513–0.964), whereas all-driver phone use bans with primary enforcement did not have a significant association with texting while driving (odds ratio = 0.846; 95% confidence interval, 0.501–1.429).

Conclusions: The findings indicate that all-driver distracted driving laws that specifically target texting while driving as opposed to all types of phone use are effective in reducing the behavior among high school students.     

Teens' distracted driving behavior: Prevalence and predictors

IntroductionTeen drivers' over-involvement in crashes has been attributed to a variety of factors, including distracted driving. With the rapid development of in-vehicle systems and portable electronic devices, the burden associated with distracted driving is expected to increase. The current study identifies predictors of secondary task engagement among teenage drivers and provides basis for interventions to reduce distracted driving behavior. We described the prevalence of secondary tasks by type and driving conditions and evaluated the associations between the prevalence of secondary task engagement, driving conditions, and selected psychosocial factors.MethodsThe private vehicles of 83 newly-licensed teenage drivers were equipped with Data Acquisition Systems (DAS), which documented driving performance measures, including secondary task engagement and driving environment characteristics. Surveys administered at licensure provided psychosocial measures.ResultsOverall, teens engaged in a potentially distracting secondary task in 58% of sampled road clips. The most prevalent types of secondary tasks were interaction with a passenger, talking/singing (no passenger), external distraction, and texting/dialing the cell phone. Secondary task engagement was more prevalent among those with primary vehicle access and when driving alone. Social norms, friends' risky driving behaviors, and parental limitations were significantly associated with secondary task prevalence. In contrast, environmental attributes, including lighting and road surface conditions, were not associated with teens' engagement in secondary tasks.ConclusionsOur findings indicated that teens engaged in secondary tasks frequently and poorly regulate their driving behavior relative to environmental conditions. Practical applications: Peer and parent influences on secondary task engagement provide valuable objectives for countermeasures to reduce distracted driving among teenage drivers.     

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.     

Naturalistic teenage driving study: Findings and lessons learned

IntroductionThis paper summarizes the findings on novice teenage driving outcomes (e.g., crashes and risky driving behaviors) from the Naturalistic Teenage Driving Study.MethodSurvey and driving data from a data acquisition system (global positioning system, accelerometers, cameras) were collected from 42 newly licensed teenage drivers and their parents during the first 18 months of teenage licensure; stress responsivity was also measured in teenagers.ResultOverall teenage crash and near-crash (CNC) rates declined over time, but were > 4 times higher among teenagers than adults. Contributing factors to teenage CNC rates included secondary task engagement (e.g., distraction), kinematic risky driving, low stress responsivity, and risky social norms.ConclusionsThe data support the contention that the high novice teenage CNC risk is due both to inexperience and risky driving behavior, particularly kinematic risky driving and secondary task engagement.Practical ApplicationsGraduated driver licensing policy and other prevention efforts should focus on kinematic risky driving, secondary task engagement, and risky social norms.     

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.     

Injury prevention programs against distracted driving: Are they effective?

Introduction: Distracted driving (talking and/or texting) is a growing public safety problem, with increasing incidence among adult drivers. The aim of this study was to identify the incidence of distracted driving (DD) among health care providers and to create awareness against DD. We hypothesized that distracted driving is prevalent among health care providers and a preventive campaign against distracted driving would effectively decrease distracted driving among health care providers.

Methods: We performed a 4-phase prospective interventional study of all health care providers at our level 1 trauma center. Phase 1: one week of pre-intervention observation; phase 2: one week of intervention; phase 3: one week of postintervention observation; and phase 4: one week of 6 months of postintervention observation. Observations were performed outside employee parking garage at the following time intervals: 6:30–8:30 a.m., 4:40–5:30 p.m., and 6:30–7:30 p.m. Intervention included an e-mail survey, pamphlets and banners in the hospital cafeteria, and a postintervention survey. Hospital employees were identified with badges and scrubs, employees exiting through employee gate, and parking pass on the car. Outcome measure was incidence of DD pre, post, and 6 months postintervention.

Results: A total of 15,416 observations (pre: 6,639, post: 4,220, 6 months post: 4,557) and 520 survey responses were collected. The incident of DD was 11.8% among health care providers. There was a significant reduction in DD in each time interval of observation between pre- and postintervention. On subanalysis, there was a significant decrease in talking (P = .0001) and texting (P = .01) while driving postintervention compared to pre-intervention. In the survey, 35.5% of respondents admitted to DD and 4.5% respondents were involved in an accident due to DD. We found that 77% respondents felt more informed after the survey and 91% respondents supported a state legislation against DD. The reduction in the incidence of DD postintervention was sustained even at 6-month follow-up.

Conclusion: There was a 32% reduction in the incidence of distracted driving postintervention, which remained low even at 6-month follow-up. Implementation of an effective injury prevention campaign could reduce the incidence of distracted driving nationally.     

Actual and perceived social norms of children’s road crossing behavior

This study compared the actual and perceived social norms regarding road crossing behaviors, and aimed at uncovering a misperception of group norms. The basic notion underlying the study was that if children perceived the behaviors and attitudes of their friends regarding road crossing as more negative than they actually are, this might lead the children to adopt riskier behavior when crossing the road. The participants were comprised of 123 elementary school children (ages from 6 to 13; 78 boys - 65% and 42 girls - 35%) from Beitar-Ilit, a religious city in Israel. A questionnaire especially constructed for the study was administered to the participants. A t-test yielded a significant difference between the child’s own attitudes score and the perceived peers’ attitudes score. On average, children perceive their friends’ attitudes with regard to road crossing behaviors as being more negative compared to their own attitudes. A second t-test yielded a significant difference between the child’s own behavior score and the perceived peers’ behavior score. Children perceived the road crossing behavior of their friends as riskier relative to their own crossing behavior. A regression test revealed that the variables, perceived peers’ attitudes and perceived peers’ behaviors, contributed significantly to the explained variance: the more risky the perceived peers’ attitudes and behaviors with regard to road crossing, the more risky the child’s own behavior when crossing the road. It is hoped that an interventional educational program based on positive norms in the social group will encourage children to exhibit safe behavior in the roads.     

Crash risk perception of sleepy driving and its comparisons with drink driving and speeding: Which behavior is perceived as the riskiest?

Objective: Driver sleepiness is a major crash risk factor but may be underrecognized as a risky driving behavior. Sleepy driving is usually rated as less of a road safety issue than more well-known risky driving behaviors, such as drink driving and speeding. The objective of this study was to compare perception of crash risk of sleepy driving, drink driving, and speeding.

Methods: Three hundred Australian drivers completed a questionnaire that assessed crash risk perceptions for sleepy driving, drink driving, and speeding. Additionally, the participants' perceptions of crash risk were assessed for 5 different contextual scenarios that included different levels of sleepiness (low, high), driving duration (short, long), and time of day/circadian influences (afternoon, nighttime) of driving.

Results: The analysis confirmed that sleepy driving was considered a risky driving behavior but not as risky as high levels of speeding (P < .05). Yet, the risk of crashing at 4 a.m. was considered as equally risky as low levels of speeding (10 km over the limit). The comparisons of the contextual scenarios revealed driving scenarios that would arguably be perceived as quite risky because time of day/circadian influences were not reported as high risk.

Conclusions: The results suggest a lack of awareness or appreciation of circadian rhythm functioning, particularly the descending phase of circadian rhythm that promotes increased sleepiness in the afternoon and during the early hours of the morning. Yet, the results suggested an appreciation of the danger associated with long-distance driving and driver sleepiness. Further efforts are required to improve the community's awareness of the impairing effects from sleepiness and, in particular, knowledge regarding the human circadian rhythm and the increased sleep propensity during the circadian nadir.     

Examining motor vehicle crash involvement and readiness to change on drinking and driving behaviors among injured emergency department patients

Objective: To measure the effect of motor vehicle crash (MVC) involvement and readiness to change drinking and driving behaviors on subsequent driving and drinking behaviors among injured emergency department (ED) patients who use alcohol at harmful levels.

Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of injured ED patients who screened positive for harmful alcohol use, who at recruitment reported driving in the past 12 months and received at least one of the intended intervention sessions (brief behavioral intervention versus attention placebo control; N = 407). Outcome variables were as follows: (1) change in 6 impaired driving behaviors and (2) report of MVCs and traffic violations in the 12 months following recruitment; predictor variables were as follows: (1) treatment assignment, (2) MVC involvement at recruitment, and (3) baseline readiness to change alcohol use and drinking and driving.

Results: Modeling of change in the 6 impaired driving variables indicated that neither the recruitment visits being MVC related nor baseline readiness to change alcohol use and drinking and driving behaviors predicted greater changes in impaired driving over time. Baseline reports of past moving traffic violations and the ED visit being MVC related predicted a greater likelihood of each behavior at 12 months following study recruitment.

Conclusions: This study and others have demonstrated that ED patients with harmful alcohol use are willing to engage in behavioral interventions directed at changing risky behaviors. However, this study did not demonstrate that patients considered having the potential to be more engaged with the intervention because their ED visit was MVC related and/or they had expressed intent to change their risky alcohol use and drinking and driving behaviors were more likely to change these risky behaviors.     

Drink driving and risky behavior among university students in southwestern Nigeria—Implications for policy development

Background: Drink driving contributes significantly to road traffic injuries. Little is known about the relationship between drink driving and other high-risk behaviors in non-Western countries. The study aimed to assess the relationship between drink driving and other risky behaviors including making phone calls, sending text messages, nonuse of protective gear, and driving against traffic.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey of risky behavior among undergraduates was conducted. A stratified random sampling method was used to identify young undergraduates who had driven a motorized vehicle in the past year. The Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) and other tools developed by researchers were used to identify the risky behaviors.

Results: Of 431 respondents, 10.7% had engaged in drink driving in the past 12 months. The most common risky behavior was making phone calls (63.7%), followed by nonuse of helmets (54.7%), driving against traffic (49.2%), nonuse of seat belts (46.8%), and sending text messages (26.1%). Alcohol use was significantly associated with making phone calls (U = 1.148; P < .0001), sending text messages (U = 1.598; P = .021), nonuse of helmets (U = 1.147; P < .0001), driving against traffic (U = 1.234; P < .0001), and nonuse of seat belts (U = 3.233; P = .001). Drink driving was associated with all risky behaviors except nonuse of seat belts (U = 1.842; P = .065).

Conclusion: Alcohol use and drink driving were associated with multiple risky driving behaviors. This provides useful insight for policy development and presents additional challenges for traffic injury prevention.     

How do significant others influence our driving? A descriptive study of ego–alter dyads in a college population

Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to describe the mutual influences between drivers and their significant others in a sample of college students, using a social network perspective.

Methods: A web-based survey was made of 65 dyads of drivers and their significant others, in order to examine areas of mutual influence concerning driving. Measures were taken of their frequency of risky driving, including how often they drive, talk on the cell phone, or text with each other while driving. They were also asked whether they have influenced or been influenced by each other to drive safer or in a more risky manner.

Results: The dyads were very similar in how frequently they drive as well as talk to each other on the phone while driving. However, they were unlikely to feel that their driving was influenced by each other, with only 17% of the drivers and 19% of the significant others saying that they have been overtly influenced by (or have influenced) each other's driving behavior often or most of the time. Yet, most (67.7% and 72.1%) said they have ever encouraged or been encouraged by each other to drive more safely, mainly by being told to reduce their speed. In both sets of drivers in these dyads, talking to and texting their significant other while driving was related to risky driving.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that a similarity exits in the driving patterns of young drivers and their significant others, especially concerning talking to each other on the phone while driving. The largest degree of overt social influence appears to center around avoidance of behaviors perceived to be associated with getting a traffic citation. Implications for safety campaign development and future research are presented.     

Social environment versus cycling competency predicting risk-taking in 11- to 13-year-old cyclists in The Netherlands

Abstract

Objectives: From age 12 onwards, cycling injuries begin rising in The Netherlands. A known contributing factor is younger children’s underdeveloped competency to deal with complex and hazardous traffic situations, and their exposure to such situations strongly increases after transitioning to secondary school. Little is known about intentional risk-taking as a contributing factor. In this developmental stage, children become increasingly vulnerable because of intentional risk-taking, affecting their safety and health. The incidence, predictors in the child’s social environment, and trends of such risks are systematically monitored; for instance, for alcohol use, smoking, and cyber bullying. Such monitors do not include risky road behavior. This exploratory field study examined the frequency of intentional risky cycling, its relationship with the perceived social environment, and relative to cycling competency measured as the ability to detect emerging hazards quickly.

Methods: Three hundred thirty-five students between 11 and 13 years of age (51% male) completed computerized tests of hazard perception skill and surveys on crashes, risk-taking, peer pressure, perceived risk-taking by parents or friends, and exposure to risky driving as passenger.

Results: Frequent risk-taking was associated with higher crash frequency. Stepwise regression confirmed that children who more often took risks on the road were also more sensitive to peer pressure, had more often been passengers of risky drivers, had parents and friends who exhibited risky behaviors in traffic more often, and perceived hazards as less dangerous but, in contrast to expectations, did not do worse on the detection of hazards. The predictors explained 28% of the variance in total risk-taking but varied from 6 to 20% depending on the specific risk-taking behavior concerned.

Conclusions: At least 20% of children sometimes or more often take risks in traffic. Children who feel peer pressure to behave in a risky manner, observe parents and friends behaving in a risky manner in traffic, and have been exposed as passengers to risky driving more often take risks in traffic themselves. These results provide support for including items on risky road behavior in health monitors and to design interventions that address the risk factors in the child’s perceived social environment.     

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.     

Driving concerns among older adults: Associations with driving skill,behaviors, and experiences

Objectives: The purpose of this investigation was to determine what older adults find most concerning about driving as they age and how these concerns are related to driving skill, behaviors, and experiences.

Methods: In partnership with the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration, a sample of 751 older adults ages 65 and older completed an online survey between October 2017 and May 2018. A content analysis was used to code open-ended responses about driver concerns, and multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyze the associations between driving concerns and driving skill, behavior, and experiences.

Results: Eighty-four percent of participants reported at least one driving concern, with 44% concerned about others’ driving, 34% concerned about their own driving, and 24% concerned about driving conditions. The most frequently mentioned driving concerns were other drivers in general, driving at night, visual ability and awareness, and other drivers being aggressive or reckless. Being concerned with their own driving was significantly associated with decreased perceived driving skill and increased odds of experiencing negative driving experiences in the past year. Being concerned about others’ driving was associated with increased odds of wearing a seat belt (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]?=?2.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02, 7.00), having high perceived driving skills in emergency situations (AOR = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.14, 2.12), and getting in a near crash or collision in the past year (AOR = 1.50; 95% CI, 1.04, 2.18).

Conclusions: Older adult drivers are frequently concerned about their own driving as well as the driving of others. Implications for future research and health practice are discussed.     

“Like it’s wrong,but it’s not that wrong:” Exploring the normalization of risk-compensatory strategies among young drivers engaging in illegal smartphone use

Introduction: Young drivers are the most vulnerable road users and most likely to use a smartphone illegally while driving. Although when compared with drink-driving, attitudes to illegal smartphone risk are nearly identical, smartphone use among young drivers continues to increase. Method: Four in-depth focus groups were conducted with 13 young (18–25 years) drivers to gain insight into their perceptions of the risks associated with the behavior. Our aim was to determine how drivers navigate that risk and if their behavior shapes and informs perceptions of norms. Results: Three key themes emerged: (a) participants perceived illegal smartphone use as commonplace, easy, and benign; (b) self-regulatory behaviors that compensate for risk are pervasive among illegal smartphone users; and (c) risk-compensation strategies rationalize risks and perceived norms, reducing the seriousness of transgression when compared with drink-driving. Young drivers rationalized their own use by comparing their selfregulatory smartphone and driving skills with those of “bad drivers,” not law abiders. Practical Applications: These findings suggest that smartphone behaviors shape attitudes to risk, highlighting the importance for any countermeasure aimed at reducing illegal use to acknowledge how a young person’s continued engagement in illegal smartphone use is justified by the dynamic composition of use, risk assessment and the perceived norms.     

Both texting and eating are associated with impaired simulated driving performance

Objective: Distracted driving is a known contributor to traffic accidents, and many states have banned texting while driving. However, little is known about the potential accident risk of other common activities while driving, such as eating. The objective of the current study was to examine the adverse impact of eating/drinking behavior relative to texting and nondistracted behaviors on a simulated driving task. Methods: A total of 186 participants were recruited from undergraduate psychology courses over 2 semesters at Kent State University. We utilized the Kent Multidimensional Assessment Driving Simulation (K-MADS) to compare simulated driving performance among participants randomly assigned to texting (N = 45), eating (N = 45), and control (N = 96) conditions. Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) were conducted to examine between-group differences on simulated driving indices. Results: MANOVA analyses indicated that groups differed in simulated driving performance, F(14, 366) = 7.70, P < .001. Both texting and eating produced impaired driving performance relative to controls, though these behaviors had approximately equal effect. Specifically, both texting and eating groups had more collisions, pedestrian strikes, and center line crossings than controls. In addition, the texting group had more road edge excursions than either eating or control participants and the eating group missed more stop signs than controls. Conclusions: These findings suggest that both texting and eating are associated with poorer simulated driving performance. Future work is needed to determine whether these findings generalize to real-world driving and the development of strategies to reduce distracted driving.     

Exploring simulated driving performance among varsity male soccer players

Background: It is documented that male athletes display riskier behaviors while driving (as well as in life in general) than female athletes and nonathletes. However, the literature has reported that athletes show better driving ability than nonathletes. This paradox between behaviors and abilities motivated the present study to further understand the collision risk of varsity athletes.

Objective: The current study estimates the performance differences between varsity male soccer players and male undergraduate nonathletes on (1) a driving task and (2) three perceptual–cognitive tasks (associated with collision risk prediction; i.e., Useful Field of View [UFOV] test).

Methods: Thirty-five male undergraduate students (15 varsity soccer players, 20 undergraduate nonathletes) took part in this study. Driving performance was assessed during 14?min of urban commuting using a driving simulator. While completing the simulated driving task and UFOV test, the physiological responses were monitored using an electrocardiograph (ECG) to document heart rate variability (HRV).

Results: Varsity soccer players showed more risky behaviors at the wheel compared to their nonathlete student peers. Varsity soccer players spent more time over the speed limit, committed more driving errors, and adopted fewer safe and legal behaviors. However, no difference was observed between both groups on driving skill variables (i.e., vehicle control, vehicle mobility, ecodriving). For subtests 1 and 2 of the UFOV (i.e., processing speed, divided attention), both groups performed identically (i.e., 17?ms). The nonathlete group tended to perform better on the selective attention task (i.e., subtest 3 of UFOV test; 63.2?±?6.2?ms vs. 87.2?±?10.7?ms, respectively; this difference was not significant, P = .76).

Conclusion: Preventive driving measures should be enforced in this high-risk population to develop strategies for risk reduction in male team athletes.     

A spectral power analysis of driving behavior changes during the transition from nondistraction to distraction

Objective: This article investigated and compared frequency domain and time domain characteristics of drivers' behaviors before and after the start of distracted driving.

Method: Data from an existing naturalistic driving study were used. Fast Fourier transform (FFT) was applied for the frequency domain analysis to explore drivers' behavior pattern changes between nondistracted (prestarting of visual–manual task) and distracted (poststarting of visual–manual task) driving periods. Average relative spectral power in a low frequency range (0–0.5 Hz) and the standard deviation in a 10-s time window of vehicle control variables (i.e., lane offset, yaw rate, and acceleration) were calculated and further compared. Sensitivity analyses were also applied to examine the reliability of the time and frequency domain analyses.

Results: Results of the mixed model analyses from the time and frequency domain analyses all showed significant degradation in lateral control performance after engaging in visual–manual tasks while driving. Results of the sensitivity analyses suggested that the frequency domain analysis was less sensitive to the frequency bandwidth, whereas the time domain analysis was more sensitive to the time intervals selected for variation calculations. Different time interval selections can result in significantly different standard deviation values, whereas average spectral power analysis on yaw rate in both low and high frequency bandwidths showed consistent results, that higher variation values were observed during distracted driving when compared to nondistracted driving.

Conclusions: This study suggests that driver state detection needs to consider the behavior changes during the prestarting periods, instead of only focusing on periods with physical presence of distraction, such as cell phone use. Lateral control measures can be a better indicator of distraction detection than longitudinal controls. In addition, frequency domain analyses proved to be a more robust and consistent method in assessing driving performance compared to time domain analyses.