The effects of perception of risk and importance of answering and initiating a cellular phone call while driving.

Recent data suggest that laws banning cellular phone use while driving may not change use patterns, especially among young drivers with high rates of mobile phone adoption. We examined reasons younger drivers choose or do not choose to talk on a phone while driving among a sample of young drivers (n=276) with very high ownership of cellular phones (over 99%) and a very high use of cellular phones while driving (100% for those that were primary operators of an automobile). Respondents were surveyed for patterns of use, types of call, perceived risk, and motivations for use. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) to explore the relationships between perceived risk of the behavior, emotionality of the call, perceived importance of the call, and how often calls were initiated versus answered. The model suggests that even though people believe that talking on a cellular phone while driving is dangerous, they will tend to initiate a cellular conversation if they believe that the call is important.

[1]  P. Sheeran,et al.  Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. , 2006, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  S. Walsh,et al.  Me, my mobile, and I : the role of self- and prototypical identity influences in the prediction of mobile phone behavior , 2007 .

[3]  William J Horrey,et al.  Assessing the awareness of performance decrements in distracted drivers. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[4]  Mathew P White,et al.  Risk Perceptions of Mobile Phone Use While Driving , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[5]  T. Little,et al.  To Parcel or Not to Parcel: Exploring the Question, Weighing the Merits , 2002 .

[6]  Robert D. Foss,et al.  Short-term effects of a teenage driver cell phone restriction. , 2009, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[7]  Paul Atchley,et al.  Conversation Limits the Functional Field of View , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[8]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Association between cellular-telephone calls and motor vehicle collisions. , 1997, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  Darren Pennay.  Community attitudes to road safety: community attitudes survey wave 16, 2003 , 2004 .

[10]  T. Little,et al.  On selecting indicators for multivariate measurement and modeling with latent variables: When "good" indicators are bad and "bad" indicators are good. , 1999 .

[11]  Frank Drews,et al.  A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[12]  John D Lee,et al.  Technology and teen drivers. , 2007, Journal of safety research.

[13]  M. Woodward,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of strategies for the diagnosis of suspected pulmonary embolism , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  Katherine M White,et al.  Dialling and driving: factors influencing intentions to use a mobile phone while driving. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[15]  A J McKnight,et al.  The effect of cellular phone use upon driver attention. , 1993, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[16]  Paul Atchley,et al.  Cellular phone use while driving: A methodological checklist for investigating dual-task costs , 2008 .

[17]  Peter R. Harris,et al.  Who Reaps the Benefits, Who Bears the Risks? Comparative Optimism, Comparative Utility, and Regulatory Preferences for Mobile Phone Technology , 2007, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[18]  Christopher B. Mayhorn,et al.  Perceptions of Driver Distraction by Cellular Phone Users and Nonusers , 2005, Hum. Factors.

[19]  S. Walsh,et al.  Ring, Ring, Why Did I Make that Call? Mobile Phone Beliefs and Behaviour Among Australian University Students , 2006 .

[20]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Driven to Distraction: Dual-Task Studies of Simulated Driving and Conversing on a Cellular Telephone , 2001, Psychological science.

[21]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[22]  George Yannis,et al.  Perception of road accident causes. , 2006, Accident; analysis and prevention.