PLAN TERRITORIAL DE SALUD DEL DISTRITO CAPITAL POR ALCIRA HERNANDEZ

The workshop participants were broken into five groups of about ten people each for purposes of focused discussion and the development of recommendations. Each group included a group leader who led the discussion and a recorder who took notes about the discussion. The instructions emphasized that it was most important to hear a range of opinions from various perspectives, rather than attempting to find some consensus. A two-hour period was provided for the breakout group discussions, followed by a re-convening of the full workshop group to hear and discuss the individual group outcomes. As a means of structuring the problem and giving each group a manageable theme, the breakout groups were structured around different driver monitoring strategies. A definition, with several examples, was provided for each strategy. The three examples provided for each category were selected to illustrate a range of possibilities. There was no implication that these were necessarily good, or bad, concepts and they were not intended to be the focus of discussion; they were simply a variety of possibilities meant to stimulate thinking. The five general categories of monitoring strategies were:

Driver feedback: Teen drivers could receive real-time feedback about errors or risks. Feedback might also be delayed somewhat, so that it is presented at a safe time. The key point is that the driver is made aware of errors or poor driving judgment at about the time the behavior occurs. The specific purpose of driver feedback is to make an error explicit and provide an opportunity to correct it. For example, a signal might sound when the vehicle exceeds the posted speed by a criterion amount. A voice display might inform the driver if an eyes-off-road time exceeds some duration (e.g., 2 seconds). A visual message might be presented if the vehicle enters a prohibited (“geofenced”) location.

Vehicle adaptation: Based on what the driver is doing or the situation the driver is in, some aspect of vehicle functioning can be altered. The specific purpose of vehicle adaptation is to prevent, terminate, or discourage certain behavior. For example, if the vehicle is speeding, the infotainment system could be locked out. If the system senses that the driver is distracted, the criteria for issuing warnings could be modified (e.g., longer time-to-collision criterion). If some potentially hazardous condition is sensed (e.g., the driver is not wearing a seat belt, road is wet, excessive driver-passenger interaction), the maximum vehicle speed may be limited.

Reporting: Reporting refers to recording, and perhaps summarizing, behaviors for review at a later time. The report might be intended for the teen, parents, or other parties such as insurers, driver educators, or licensing authorities. The specific purpose of reporting is to characterize past performance in order to inform and to provide deterrence for negative behaviors or promote

positive behaviors. Various technologies might be used to download and transmit the

information. The report could include summary statistics, listings of events, details of incidents, evaluative ratings, or other information. For example, a report might provide a detailed log of speeding events, showing dates, times, locations, speed limits, and travel speeds. A report might compile a weekly index of driver performance and show the driver’s score relative to a

comparison group. A report might include video clips of the scene immediately before and after hard braking events.

Coaching: An intermediary might process and interpret the monitored information and provide the teen driver with explanations of errors and advice for improved performance. The key aspect of coaching is that events are interpreted by someone with the relevant skills, so that the

feedback to the driver is guidance and not just descriptive. The specific purpose of coaching is to provide the teen driver with critical feedback that makes errors explicit and more appropriate actions evident. For example, video recordings triggered by hard braking events could be

transmitted to a service that interprets the scenes and determines what the driver could have done differently. Event data or video might be directly provided to a teen’s driving instructor, who in turn uses the information to coach their students during training sessions. Teen peer groups might share event reports and discuss their suggestions of how to handle the situation better. External motivation: This category highlights how formal positive or negative incentives could be incorporated into a monitoring program. Generally teen monitoring systems have provided information for the teen driver or parent. The use of that information is a family matter. However, there may be incentives, such as lowered insurance premiums, simply for using a monitoring system. Benefits or disincentives might further be made contingent on performance as well. The specific purpose of external motivation is to motivate improved behavior. For example, pay-as-you-go insurance programs might adjust teen drivers’ insurance costs based on the amount of high-risk driving they are involved in. Schools might reward students with privileged parking spaces based on safe performance scores from summary reports. A GDL system might extend a provisional period if there is a high incidence of aggressive or risky events.

It was acknowledged that this taxonomy of general strategies was somewhat arbitrary and that the strategies are not mutually exclusive. An effective program might draw on a combination of multiple strategies. However, each of these general categories provided a substantial range of possibilities, issues, and research needs and could serve as the basis for productive discussion without being so broad that the discussion might be unfocused.

The breakout groups covered the following topics in their discussions:

• Successes of current applications of this strategy

o What has been successful

o Why did it work?

• Limitations of current practice with this strategy

o Limited successes

o Limited range of concepts

• Promising new ideas, expansions, refinements

o Additional behaviors, situations, measurement refinement

o New designs, concepts, implementations

• Barriers to new approaches

o Acceptance: public, consumer, political

o Technology

o Institutional

o Practicality and cost

• Needed research

o Short term research

o Long term research

Following the discussion, the breakout group leader and recorder summarized the major points of discussion, for presentation to the full workshop group.