Determining the risk of driver-at-fault events associated with common distraction types using naturalistic driving data.

INTRODUCTION

Studies thus far have focused on automobile accidents that involve driver distraction. However, it is hard to discern whether distraction played a role if fault designation is missing because an accident could be caused by an unexpected external event over which the driver has no control. This study seeks to determine the effect of distraction in driver-at-fault events.

METHOD

Two generalized linear mixed models, one with at-fault safety critical events (SCE) and the other with all-cause SCEs as the outcomes, were developed to compare the odds associated with common distraction types using data from the SHRP2 naturalistic driving study.

RESULTS

Adjusting for environment and driver variation, 6 of 10 common distraction types significantly increased the risk of at-fault SCEs by 20-1330%. The three most hazardous sources of distraction were handling in-cabin objects (OR = 14.3), mobile device use (OR = 2.4), and external distraction (OR = 1.8). Mobile device use and external distraction were also among the most commonly occurring distraction types (10.1% and 11.0%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Focusing on at-fault events improves our understanding of the role of distraction in potentially avoidable automobile accidents. The in-cabin distraction that requires eye-hand coordination presents the most danger to drivers' ability in maintaining fault-free, safe driving. Practical Applications: The high risk of at-fault SCEs associated with in-cabin distraction should motivate the smart design of the interior and in-vehicle information system that requires less visual attention and manual effort.