Teen Driving &Distracted Driving

Strategies To Save Lives

NCSLDecember 9, 2010

National Safety Council

18,000 Organizational Members at 54,000 locations

38 state and local chapters

20,000 training agencies

Mission: Save lives by preventing injuries and deaths at work, in homes and communities, and on the roads through leadership, research, education and advocacy.

Teen Driving

NSC and Teen Driving

• NSC sponsored International Symposia on Graduated Driver Licensing in 2002 and 2007.

• NSC and its chapters have been engaged in legislative activity in several states.

• NSC member companies are educating their employees/parents of teen drivers about GDL.

• NSC currently building state coalitions in 14 states.

Teen Driving-Related DeathsIncludes teen drivers, their passengers and third parties

Annual teen driving-related deaths declined 36% from 2003-2009.

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Graduated Driver Licensing:Maximizes experience and minimizes risks

1st Stage – Learners Permit (12 months)Minimum hours of supervised practice driving.

2nd Stage – Intermediate (6 months)Night driving and passenger restrictions.Belt use, zero tolerance for alcohol use, total ban on all cell phone use

3rd Stage – Full License through age 18Belt use, zero tolerance for alcohol use, total ban on all cell phone use

7 Elements of Comprehensive GDL

• Learners permit period of at least nine months.

• Minimum of required practice driving hours.

• Restriction on night driving after 10 pm during first year of licensure.

• Restriction on passengers for first year of licensure.

• Prohibition on all cell phone use while driving.

• Primary enforcement of seat belt laws.

• Zero tolerance for alcohol use.

GDL: A Proven “Vaccine”Impact of GDL Laws on Teen Crashes

Moving from 0 to 1 GDL element: 4% crash reduction

1 to 2: 6.25% reduction

2 to 3: 0% reduction

3 to 4 GDL: 12% reduction

4 to 5 or more: 21% crash reduction

Net Effect:

States with Comprehensive GDL have up to 43% fewer teen crashes than states with no GDL.

What Parents Think About GDLNorth Carolina Survey

• 96% overall opinion of GDL is “approve” or “highly approve”

• 87% agree with 9 pm night time restriction.

• 86% agree with 12 month learners’ permit period.

What Parents Think About GDLIowa Survey of 1,065 parents of 16 & 17-year old drivers

• 97% support bans on texting while driving.

• 90% support bans on all cell phone use while driving.

• 82% support moving the night time restriction from 12 am to 10 pm.

• 79% support restricting teen drivers to no more than 1 passenger (with exceptions for relatives).

• 57% support extending the supervised practice period from 6 to 12 months.

Urban vs. RuralNorth Carolina, Iowa, Kansas

• No significant difference in parental support for GDL between urban and rural parents.

• Majority of rural parents and urban parents in every state support every element of GDL in their states.

Teens Also Support GDLNorth Carolina teen survey

• 81% agree or strongly agree with 9 pm. night driving restriction.

• 59% have overall positive opinion of GDL.

States’ Adoption ofComprehensive GDL

• 8 states have 5 or more elements. These states have generally seen reductions in teen crashes of 20-45%.

• 34 states have 3 or fewer elements.

National Safety CouncilTaking Action

• Active in 12+ states to educate and engage parents, teens and advocates, earn media interest, build support for GDL.

• Allstate-funded coalitions: California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas.

• CDC-funded coalitions in Florida and Ohio, plus support other CDC coalitions in Iowa, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota.

• NSC legislative advocacy in Iowa, Florida, Pennsylvania, +1.

National Safety CouncilTaking Action

• Advocating for Federal GDL bill to provide incentives to states.

• Raising $10 million for teen driving strategies to include national parent education initiative to reach far more parents than are currently being reached.

Distracted Driving

NSC and Distracted Driving

• Beginning in 2001, NSC members and volunteers became concerned with research showing risks of cell phone use while driving.

• Consistency of research from multiple research methods and convergence of data led NSC members in the transportation industry to propose an official policy. Representatives of all industry groups involved.

• In January 2009, NSC became first national organization to call for total bans on all cell phone use while driving.

• Today, 500+ NSC members have their own total bans covering nearly 2 million employees.

Types of Driver Distractions

Visual – Eyes off roadMost are for short durations of 1-2 seconds (billboards, dashboard glances, GPS maps, scenery). Generally low crash risk of 0-1.5x.

Mechanical – Hand off wheelMost do not significantly affect driving (eating, drinking, tuning radio). Low crash risk of 0-1.6x.

Combinations of Visual & MechanicalModerately increased risk (handling or retrieving object, such as CD, mobile device, personal grooming). Crash risk of up to 3.8x.

Types of Driver Distractions

Cognitive Distraction – Mind off driving

• Higher risk than hands off wheel or eyes off road due to brain overload and selective attention.

• Principal deficiencies in driving are slower response times, following distance, and missed traffic signals.

• Higher crash risk: Cell phone use while driving -- 4x crash risk.

Combinations of Visual, Mechanical & Cognitive

• Generally highest crash risks of 8x up to 23x, associated with activities like reading and texting.

Measuring Cognitive Distraction

• Simulator studies have identified specific impairment related to inattention blindness and tunnel vision.

• A study in a community-like driving range showed drivers on cell phones had higher rates of missed traffic signals and poor recognition of their behavior.

• A naturalistic study of 56,000 drivers at intersections showed that drivers on cell phones (hand-held and hands-free) missed 2x more traffic signals than people not on phones.

Translating Risk Into Crashes

• While some activities are higher risk than others, they do not necessarily cause more crashes, injuries or deaths.

• How many crashes occur due to a specific behavior is a function of the level of risk and the prevalence of the activity.

Risk: How risky is it?

Prevalence: How many people are doing it for what period of time?

Texting:Risk + Prevalence

• Risk: Increased risk of injury from texting while driving: 8x up to 23x.

• Prevalence: 0.6% of drivers at any one time are manipulating hand-held devices. The number texting is lower than that.

• Result: Minimum of 100,000 crashes, or 2% of all crashes, involve texting.

Cell Phone Use:Risk + Prevalence

• Risk: Increased risk of injury from using a cell phone while driving: 4x

• Prevalence: 10% of drivers at any one time, or more than 700,000 drivers, observed using hand-held devices. The number engaged in conversations is likely higher as hands-free is not measured in observation surveys.

• Result: 1.2 million crashes/year or 21% of all crashes, involve cell phone use.

63% of Voters Support LawsBanning All Cell Phone Use

While Driving

National Safety CouncilTaking Action

• Advocating for state laws.

• Advocating for inclusion of distracted driving research and incentives to states in Transportation Reauthorization.

• Working with employers to enact policies and measure their impact.

• Evaluating technology solutions that manage all incoming/outgoing calls and messages without driver involvement.

Conclusions

1. Strong laws, vigorously enforced, are essential to reduce crashes, prevent injuries and save lives on our roads. For a majority of Americans –

Education, by itself, does not change behavior.

2. A significant majority of American voters support most traffic safety laws (drunk driving, primary seat belt laws, motorcycle helmets). A majority also supports GDL and total cell phone bans.

3. Despite public support, 42 states do not have comprehensive GDL and no state has a total ban on cell phone use while driving.

How Can We Be Helpful?

• How can advocacy groups help legislators enact necessary safety legislation that saves lives?

• How can state coalitions of businesses, health and safety groups, victims’ advocates and others be helpful?