4.5 Article

A diary study of distracted driving behaviours

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2020.08.003

Keywords

Diary study; Road safety; Qualitative; In-vehicle technology; Driver distraction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The introduction and uptake of technology within road vehicles has readily advanced the capabilities and the functions that the driver of a road vehicle has available to them. While this has benefited the drivers' productivity and entertainment behind the wheel, it has also heightened the possibility for distraction. Research into driver distraction to date has identified how technologies inside the vehicle may be used ineffectively and can compromise the safety of the road transport system. Yet, the factors that drivers state impact on their decision to engage with distracting technologies are less well known. This paper presents the first diary study into driver distraction. The study asked drivers to record all technological distractions that they engaged with across a 4-week period, as well as interactions that they ignored or choose not to engage with. The diary entries include the technologies drivers interacted with and the conditions surrounding this, as well as external factors that drivers cited to influence their decision to interact. Primarily, factors relating to the task itself were found to be of most importance to the drivers' decision to engage. Differences were also found in how drivers stated they compensated for any engagement with distracting tasks. This has important consequences for the design and integration of technological devices into the vehicle. The novel application of the method offers insights into the naturalistic conditions surrounding drivers' involvement with distracting technologies. The method is also reviewed on its applicability to the study of driver distraction. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available