Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Distracted Driving Newport
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Distracted Driving Newport

179
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
179
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Things tha distract us from driving can be pretty much anything. Some appear t be fairly benign like talking to a passenger. We know texting canbe quite distracting, but its funny that a behavior we are pushing people towards is likely distracting also---hands free is distracting. And of course there is hand held cell use and things related to GPS devices.And certainly there are different degrees of distraction. This is a hypothetical heirarchy based on common sense and theory…not research.
  • Nhtsa has suggested that here are different types of distraction based on what part of the driving task is interfered with. A distracting task can interfere with vision---tkes your eyes off the road, manual operation of the vehicle—takes your hands off the wheel, or the cognitive or mental aspects of driving…takes you mind off the task.Each of these can operate by itself, and in tandem, and each at different strengths to interfere with driving
  • Talking to a passenger for instance uses a bit of metal engery—and maybe a tad of visual if you are one of those people who insist on looking at your passenger while talking. But for those who talk wile straight ahead…it m bit of cognitive
  • Checking gps uses a bit more cognition as you need to proccess the information to see where the turn is etc…and it takes your eyes off the road briefly (hopefullY
  • Talking on a hands free device (with voice commands spo no dialing) probably uses a good bit of cognition
  • Hand held has the same cognitiom but completey removes one hand from the steering wheel
  • The number of Americans with cell phones has grown at an extremely fast rate.and texting requires a lot of all three---type find keys look at the device.
  • And this relationship between the type of distraction and degree of distraction led to that degree of distraction heirarchy.
  • Of course if folks weren’t distracted while driving we could care less about it…but it appears that with the technological advances…and more people using thiese advances….more people are likely o be driving distracted. The number of americans owning cell phone has increased by 250X in the past 20 years. This is just cell phones…similar increases are lkikely to be seen with gps and ipods etc. You may have heard that ford was planning to put the capability to update your twitter account in the car.
  • Observation of people driving also inicates a growing problem. The number of people drivinag at any given time with a hand held cell has doubled in the past 8 years. .
  • The number of Americans with cell phones has grown at an extremely fast rate.
  • When looking at trend over time, some of the people are going to have these items on, GPS, phone on the floor etc, had the opportunity to be distracted, will have more distracted drivers over time…in general when this expands into the fleet-opportunity of distraction is there.
  • We know who these people are.
  • Sample based survey, not in every county, not in every city, this is not representative of state use. Made to be representative of the nation.
  • Hard to say who’s doing it, everyone is doing it!
  • Day of week time of day doesn’t matter
  • An Examination of Driver Distraction as Recorded in NHTSA Databases, September 2009Driver Distraction: A Review of the Current State-of-Knowledge, April 2008 this is where state data would have been if state data would have been available-so many differences from state to state
  • The number of Americans with cell phones has grown at an extremely fast rate.
  • Will try to do crash data but don’t know how it works in, don’t have a pre/post, will know how many crashes we have due to distraction for this demonstration. Don’t know how it will fit in
  • Odd significant increase in self reported talking despite observation in Hartford
  • Significant increase in Hartford
  • Significant increase in Hartford and Bridgeport
  • Significant in all (but obviously huge in Hartford). PIOH,TITO  Just Drive  DTF, TTCW  No Phone Zone  I Promise NTDD all sig also---same in bport except I promise.
  • Sig increase in hartford and bport
  • Sig increase in bport and hartford.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Distracted Driving Demonstration Project 2010
      Tara Casanova, MS
      Preusser Research Group
      Edmund Hedge
      Connecticut Department of Transportation
    • 2. Less Distracting
      Talking to a passenger
      Glancing at gps
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Texting
      More Distracting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 3. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Manual
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 4. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Manual
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 5. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Manual
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 6. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Manual
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 7. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Manual
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 8. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Manual
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 9. Types of Distraction
      Talking to a passenger
      visual
      Glancing at gps
      Manual
      Talking on Hands Free Cell
      Talking on Hand-held Cell
      Cognitive
      Texting
      Distracted Driving: What is it?
    • 10. In 2007 about 250 Million had cell phones
      or about 82% of all Americans
      About 50 Million had cell phone in 1997
      About 1 Million had cell phone in 1987
      Distracted Driving: A Growing Problem
    • 11. Source: NOPUS
      Distracted Driving: A Growing Problem
    • 12. Increasing Fatal Crashes
      20%
      19%
      17%
      Source: NCSA/FARS
      (excluding extrapolation)
    • 13. Social Acceptability
      Until this year, cell phone use and texting while driving were likely acceptable practices.
    • 14. Distracted Driving: What’s being done?
      Laws
      • 7 States ban Hand Held phones for All Drivers
      • 15. NY (2001)
      • 16. DC (2004)
      • 17. CT (2005)
      • 18. UT (2007)
      • 19. CA (2008)
      • 20. WA (2008)
      • 21. OR (2010)
      • 22. 21 States Ban Hand Held Phones for Novice Drivers
      • 23. 19 States ban texting while drivinG
    • Social Norming
      • Local movements: e.g. Stay alive, just drive (sajd.org)
      • 24. Government programs: distraction.GOV, white House guidelines for federal employees
      • 25. OPRAH: NO PHONE ZONE; DON’T TEMPT F8, THAT TXT CAN W8
      Distracted Driving: What’s Being Done?
    • 26. Definition of Distraction in FARS
    • 27. Distraction: Who’s doing it?
    • 34. Nopus
      Who’s Doing It? Observation Data
    • 46. Who’s Doing It? (FARS)
    • 47. When? FARS 2004-2008
    • 48. Data Concerns
      • Difficult to accurately determine driver distraction as a contributing factor in a crash.
      • 49. Investigating officers typically do not report the occurrence of a distracting activity unless there is direct evidence.
      • 50. Drivers don’t admit it…
      • 51. The incidence of distraction among crash-involved drivers is underestimated in crash studies.
      • 52. Differences in methodology and definitions of distraction.
      • 53. Different results and conclusions.
    • Connecticut Answers the Call…
      An RFP was announced through GHSA for the NHTSA Distracted Driving Enforcement Pilot Project.
      CT DOT Application Process.
      CT and NY were selected-WHY?
      Timeline.
    • 54. Enforcement: City Selection:
      • Regional collaboration
      • 55. data driven
      • 56. performance based
      • 57. Diverse demographics
      • 58. Manpower issues
    • Enforcement Concerns
      No historical data.
      Crash reports.
      Ability to track reports.
    • 59. 25
      Crash Reporting
      Amend the PR-1 crash reports to include the Traffic Unit and the distracted driving attribute that applies.
      1.Not Distracted
      2.Electronic communication device
      3.Other electronic device (GPS,DVD)
      4.Outside the vehicle
      5.Inside the vehicle
      6. Unknown
    • 60. Enforcement Daily Reporting Sheets
    • 61. 27
      Law Enforcement Training
      Roll Call (Video)
      Pamphlets
      Peer Pressure
      Media training
    • 62. Key Talking Points
      What Is Distracted Driving?
       How Serious Is the Distracted Driving Problem?
      What Is NHTSA Doing To Combat This Problem?Why  Were Connecticut and New York Selected?
      What will the Campaign Look Like?
      How Will The Campaign Be Evaluated?
      What Will Law Enforcement Agencies Be Doing To Promote Officer Compliance with the Cell Phone Law?
      How Will the Campaign Be Paid For?
      How Much Revenue Do You Estimate This Campaign Will Generate For The Cities Involved?
      What Can the Public Do To Reduce Distracted Driving and Support This Campaign?
      What Can Parents Do to Keep Their Teens Safe From The Risks of Driving Distracted?
    • 63. Press Conference
    • 64.
    • 65.
    • 66. Media
      Target Areas
      Media market
      Slogans
      Federal slogan
      Earned media
    • 67. Media
    • 68. 34
      Media: Earned and Paid
      Paid Media
      Advertising Campaign
      Digital Billboards
      Earned Media
    • 69.
    • 70. Enforcement Activity
    • 71. Wave 1 All Agency Enforcement Citations
    • 72. Demo Evaluation
      • 4 hve waves in each state in just about 1 year
      • 73. April 2010, July 2010, October 2010, march/April 2011
      • 74. Earned and paid Media generally start about 1 week before and run into the enforcement
      • 75. Pre data collection (OBSERVATIONS AND Media awareness surveys) starts about 1 week prior to the start of any media
      • 76. Post data collection (OBSERVATIONS AND Media awareness surveys) starts during the last few days of enforcement
    • Demo Evaluation
      Data elements
      • Enforcement data:
      • 77. citations
      • 78. type of enforcement (sa patrol, spotters etc)
      • 79. Media data:
      • 80. strength and penetration of media buy
      • 81. (how many people heard it)
      • 82. earned media: number of news articles
      • 83. Crash data: yes
      • 84. Change in PR1 to include distraction categories:
      1=not distracted
      2=electronic communication device
      3=other electronic device
      4=other inside the vehicle
      5=external distraction
      6=unknown
    • 85. Design: Observations
      Locations around Hartford (Hartford, East Hartford, West Hartford) and Fairfield County (Stamford, Bridgeport—comparison).
      15 observation sites per location. Sites selected based on:
      High traffic volume
      Geographic dispersity
      1 hour at traffic lighted intersections of the green light traffic
      Observed hand held use, blue tooth use, and manipulating devices.
    • 86. Design: Awareness Surveys
      New Britain, Wethersfield (Hartford Area) Norwalk, Bridgeport (comparison)
      Pre n ≈ 1,000; post 2 n ≈500*
      1 page survey
      * 1st and last (Post wave 4) waves will be n = 1,000
    • 87. Results: Hand-held Observations
    • 88. Results: Public Awareness
    • 89. Results: Awareness
    • 90. Results: Awareness
    • 91. Results: Awareness
    • 92. Results: Awareness
    • 93. Results: Awareness
    • 94. Conclusions
      • Cell phone ticketing was great.
      • 95. Observation data show a decrease in use.
      • 96. Awareness data show people got the message.
      • 97. There was an increase in: message recognition, perceived strictness of enforcement, those who got a ticket, and those who heard of enforcement.
    • Questions?