Proporción de factor trabajo y factor capital que explica la

Effectiveness:  Cost: $ Use: Medium Time: Short

Cell phones have become an essential feature of modern life. In December 2011, Americans owned more than 331 million cell phones, an increase of about 100 million phones in 5 years (CTIA, 2010). In a NHTSA survey of 6,000 U.S. residents, two out of three drivers (67%) admitted to making or accepting phone calls while driving, with 25% reporting they do so on some trips, and 15% saying they do so on most or all trips (Tison, Chaudhary, & Cosgrove, 2011). NHTSA’s 2010 national observation survey found 5% of drivers on the road at any given moment were using hand-held cell phones, unchanged from 2009 (NHTSA, 2011b). The percent of drivers who were manipulating a hand-held device (e.g., texting or dialing) increased from 0.6% in 2009 to 0.9% in 2010. NHTSA currently estimates that 9% of drivers are using some type of phone (hand-held or hands-free) in a typical daylight moment (NHTSA, 2011b). Many studies have investigated the effects of cell phone use on driving (See Caird, Willness, Steel, & Scialfa, 2008, and McCartt, Hellinga, & Braitman, 2006, for reviews). Experiments on simulators or test tracks document that talking on a cell phone use has some effect on driving performance, most commonly slowed reaction times, but these experiments cannot measure the impact on crash risk. For reasons outlined in the overview, it can be difficult to determine whether cell phones contribute to individual crashes. Two studies examining cell phone billing records concluded drivers are four times more likely to be involved in a serious crash when talking on a cell phone (McEvoy et al., 2005; Redelmeier & Tibshirani, 1997). In addition, these two studies and others have found that hands-free phones offer little or no safety advantage over hand-held phones (Caird et al., 2008; Ishigami & Klein, 2009). However, recent studies have questioned the estimates of crash risk and argued the real risk may be much smaller (Farmer, Braitman, & Lund, 2010; Young, 2012). For example, the 100-car study found a 29% increased risk from talking on a phone while driving (Klauer et al., 2006), much lower than the 400% increase found in earlier studies.

There is less disagreement about the dangers posed by texting while driving. In a study using highly instrumented commercial motor vehicles, texting drivers were 23 times more likely to be involved in a crash, near-crash, or other safety-critical event compared to uneventful baseline driving (Olson et al., 2009). This is supported by experimental studies using driving simulations, which suggest that texting drivers spend up to 400% more time looking away from the road and are more likely to leave their lane than when not text messaging (Drews, Yazdani, Godfrey, Cooper, & Strayer, 2009; Hosking, Young, & Regan, 2009). In the NHTSA survey, 21% of drivers admitted to reading text messages or emails while driving, and 16% reported sending text messages/emails (Tison, Chaudhary, & Cosgrove, 2011).

States have been very active in using legislation to address this issue. Since 2000, every State has considered legislation to curtail distracted driving or driver cell phone use. In 2011,

approximately 160 distracted driver bills were considered in 37 States (NCSL, 2012). Although distracted driving legislation generally falls under the jurisdiction of individual States, the Federal Government has recently directed its attention to this issue. In September 2009, and again in September 2010, the U.S. Department of Transportation convened a Distracted Driving Summit. At the 2009 meeting, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced that President

Obama had issued an executive order prohibiting Federal employees from texting while driving on official government business. In addition, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration enacted an interim ban prohibiting commercial vehicle drivers from texting while driving. Public support is high for bans on hand-held cell phone use and texting while driving, at 71% and 94%, respectively (Tison, Chaudhary, & Cosgrove, 2011).

Use: As of July 2012, talking on a hand-held cell phone was prohibited in 10 States (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington, and West Virginia) and the District of Columbia (GHSA, 2012b; IIHS, 2012b). With the exception of Maryland, the cell phone bans in each of these States are primary laws. In addition, several local jurisdictions such as Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Chicago, Illinois, and Cheyenne, Wyoming, have enacted their own restrictions on cell phones. At present, no State restricts hands-free phone use for all drivers, although Alaska considered such legislation in 2011 (NCSL, 2012).

A number of States have recently passed, or are currently considering, laws that would prohibit text messaging while driving. As of July 2012, 39 States and the District of Columbia prohibit text messaging for all drivers (GHSA, 2012b; IIHS, 2012b). NHTSA has prepared a sample bill to assist States in crafting new legislation to prohibit texting while driving (NHTSA, 2010c).

Effectiveness: Evaluations in New York, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, and other countries consistently show that cell phone laws reduce hand-held phone use by about 50% shortly after the laws take effect (McCartt et al., 2006). Moreover, these reductions in hand-held cell phone use are maintained three to 7 years later (McCartt, Hellinga, Strouse, & Farmer, 2010). However, it is unknown whether these laws lead to increased use of hands-free devices. The effectiveness of hand-held cell phone bans in reducing crashes is still unclear. Nikolaev, Robbins, and Jacobson (2010) examined driving injuries and fatalities in 62 counties in New York State both before and after a hand-held cell phone ban took effect. Forty-six counties showed a significant decrease in injury crashes following the ban, and 10 counties showed a decrease in fatal crashes. Although encouraging, the study did not include a control group to account for other factors that may have decreased crashes. A study by the Highway Loss Data Institute investigated State-level automobile insurance collision claims in California,

Connecticut, New York and the District of Columbia. When compared to neighboring States, there was no change in collision claim frequency after these jurisdictions implemented hand-held cell phone bans (HLDI, 2009). However, the data from the Highway Loss Data Institute is proprietary and an independent analysis of the data has not been conducted. Also, not all crashes result in a collision claim, so collision claim rates may differ from crash rates.

Only one study has examined the effectiveness of laws prohibiting texting while driving. The Highway Loss Data Institute found States that enacted a texting ban showed a small increase in collision claim frequency compared to neighboring States without such bans (HLDI, 2010). One possible explanation is that texting drivers attempt to avoid detection by hiding their phones from view, which may result in more time with drivers’ eyes off the roadway. Again, however, this analysis has not been independently verified and is based on collision claims, not crashes.

phone can be observed relatively easily. However, some States with cell phone bans allow drivers to use a phone for specific purposes while driving (e.g., navigation), which can make enforcement more challenging. As with other traffic safety laws, paid advertising supporting highly visible law enforcement may be necessary to achieve substantial effects (see Chapter 4, Section 1.3).

Time to implement: A cell phone law can be implemented quickly, as soon as it is publicized.

Other issues:

• Cell phone blockers: In recent years, several manufacturers have created systems that can block a cell phone from making (or receiving) calls while a person is driving. These systems detect when the phone is in motion. During that time, incoming calls are

automatically diverted to voicemail and incoming texts are not shown until the driver reaches his or her destination. Typically, these systems allow exceptions for phone calls from pre-specified numbers, and all allow emergency calls to 911. Although these

systems are potentially applicable to all drivers, they have largely been targeted to parents of teen drivers. Researchers at the Texas Transportation Institute tried to evaluate a cell phone disabling device for teens; however, they encountered large dropout rates and very strong resistance to the device (Benden, Fink, & Stafford, 2012). As of the publication cutoff date, there have been no other published evaluations of cell phone blockers.