As of July 1, 2008, California drivers must use hands-free technology when using a mobile phone while driving, and drivers under 18 may not use a mobile phone at all while driving. This study finds that California’s new hands-free law should save several hundred lives a year, based on the experience of the three states (and Washington, D.C.) where similar laws are already in effect. The results show that mobile phone ownership is associated with higher traffic fatality rates in bad weather and on wet roads and that hands-free laws reduce traffic fatalities during bad weather, on wet roads, and in rush-hour traffic. It is challenging to measure the effect of mobile phones and of hands-free laws on traffic collisions. Collisions can have many causes: If a tired driver rear-ends another car at night in the rain while talking on a mobile phone, who is to say whether the mobile phone, the darkness, the wet road, or the driver’s fatigue contributed most – or even at all – to the collision? To overcome the challenges of linking specific collisions to mobile phone usage, other studies have used various approaches, relying on administrative records, surveys, driving-simulation laboratories, and specially-outfitted vehicles. These studies found that hands-free devices offer no reduction in driver inattention or crash risk relative to hand-held mobile devices when drivers are using a phone. In this study, a different approach is used. The study looks at traffic fatalities, mobile phone ownership, and hands-free laws across states to estimate how fatalities changed in states after a hands-free law went into effect, compared to states without hands-free laws. The analysis cannot determine why, exactly, hands-free laws reduce fatalities in adverse conditions. Hands-free use might be less distracting than hand-held use, contrary to other studies, or hands-free laws might discourage overall phone use while driving, even if hands-free use is no safer. But even without understanding why hands-free laws seem to work, the findings suggest that California should expect a reduction of 300 fatalities annually during adverse driving conditions. These findings suggest that California should concentrate its enforcement efforts during adverse driving conditions. However, enforcement is more difficult during such conditions, due to both competing demands on traffic officers and to the increased risks involved in pulling drivers over. Thus, education and public awareness about mobile phone use and hands-free technology should supplement enforcement of the law. Furthermore, with relatively modest penalties for using hand-held phones and no prohibition against dialing and texting, even strict enforcement of the law might not discourage drivers from using their mobile phones in distracting ways. Thus, public education about the law – and about the distraction and danger of using a mobile phone in the first place – should be an important component in implementing the hands-free law and could help achieve changes in behavior that enforcement alone might not bring about. (Author/publisher)
Samenvatting