Delgado M Kit, McDonald Catherine C, Winston Flaura K, Halpern Scott D, Buttenheim Alison M, Setubal Claudia, Huang Yanlan, Saulsgiver Kathryn A, Lee Yi-Ching
a Behavioral Science and Analytics for Injury Reduction (BeSAFIR) Lab, Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine , University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania.
b Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine , University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia , Pennsylvania.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2018;19(6):569-576. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2018.1458100. Epub 2018 May 24.
The majority of U.S. teens admit to handheld cellphone use while driving, an increasingly common cause of crashes. Attitudes toward novel cellphone applications and settings that block use while driving are poorly understood, potentially limiting uptake. We examined teens' willingness to reduce cellphone use while driving and perceptions of potential strategies to limit this behavior.
Teen drivers (n = 153) aged 16-17 who owned smartphones and admitted to texting while driving completed an online survey. Survey instruments measured willingness to give up cellphone use and perceptions of technological and behavioral economic strategies to reduce cellphone use while driving. We used chi-square tests to test the hypothesis that willingness to give up certain types of cellphone use while driving and the perceptions of strategies to reduce cellphone use while driving would differ by self-reported frequency of texting while driving in the past 30 days (low [1-5 days] vs. high [6 or more days]).
Most teens were willing or somewhat willing to give up reading texts (90%), sending texts (95%), and social media (99%) while driving. However, they were not willing to give up navigation (59%) and music applications (43%). Those who engaged in high-frequency texting while driving were more likely to say that they were not willing to give up navigation applications (73 vs. 44%, P <.001), music applications (54 vs. 32%, P <.001), and reading texts (15 vs. 4%, P =.029). Overall, the following strategies where rated as likely to be very effective for reducing texting while driving: gain-framed financial incentives (75%), loss-framed financial incentives (63%), group-based financial incentives (58%), insurance discounts (53%), automatic phone locking while driving (54%), e-mail notifications to parents (47%), automated responses to incoming texts (42%), peer concern (18%), and parental concern (15%). Those who engaged in high-frequency texting while driving were less likely to say that following strategies would be very effective: automated responses to incoming texts (33 vs. 53%, P =.016), peer concern (9 vs. 29%, P =.002), and parental concern (9 vs. 22%, P =.025). The strongest perceived benefit of cellphone blocking apps was decreasing distraction (86%). The predominant reason for not wanting to use this technology was not wanting parents to monitor their behavior (60%).
Promising strategies for increasing acceptance of cellphone blocking technology among teen drivers include automated screen locking and permitting hands-free navigation and music combined with behavioral economic incentives to sustain engagement.
大多数美国青少年承认开车时会使用手持手机,这已日益成为撞车事故的常见原因。人们对新型手机应用程序以及能在开车时阻止使用手机的设置的态度了解不足,这可能会限制其应用。我们研究了青少年在开车时减少手机使用的意愿以及对限制这种行为的潜在策略的看法。
16至17岁拥有智能手机且承认开车时会发短信的青少年司机(n = 153)完成了一项在线调查。调查工具测量了他们放弃手机使用的意愿以及对减少开车时手机使用的技术和行为经济学策略的看法。我们使用卡方检验来检验以下假设:在过去30天内自我报告的开车时发短信频率不同(低[1 - 5天]与高[6天或更多天])的青少年,其在开车时放弃某些类型手机使用的意愿以及对减少开车时手机使用策略的看法会有所不同。
大多数青少年愿意或有点愿意在开车时放弃阅读短信(90%)、发送短信(95%)和使用社交媒体(99%)。然而,他们不愿意放弃导航应用(59%)和音乐应用(43%)。在开车时频繁发短信的青少年更有可能表示不愿意放弃导航应用(73%对44%,P <.001)、音乐应用(54%对32%,P <.001)和阅读短信(15%对4%,P =.029)。总体而言,以下策略被认为对减少开车时发短信很可能非常有效:收益框架的经济激励(75%)、损失框架的经济激励(63%)、基于群体的经济激励(58%)、保险折扣(53%)、开车时自动锁定手机(54%)、给家长发送电子邮件通知(47%)、对来电短信自动回复(42%)、同伴关注(18%)和家长关注(15%)。在开车时频繁发短信的青少年不太可能认为以下策略会非常有效:对来电短信自动回复(33%对53%,P =.016)、同伴关注(9%对29%,P =.002)和家长关注(9%对22%,P =.025)。手机屏蔽应用最明显的好处是减少分心(86%)。不想使用这项技术的主要原因是不想让家长监控他们的行为(60%)。
在青少年司机中提高对手机屏蔽技术接受度的有前景的策略包括自动屏幕锁定、允许免提导航和音乐,并结合行为经济学激励措施以维持参与度。