Narrative persuasion and stigma: Using news accounts to denormalize texting while driving

Exploring the Behaviour Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework in interventions for mobile phone driver distraction: A scoping review

Mobile phone use while driving remains a significant traffic safety concern. Although numerous interventions have been developed to address it, there is a gap in the synthesis of relevant information through a comprehensive behaviour change lens. This scoping review uses the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to examine the literature to (a) identify behavioural constructs targeted in interventions for mobile phone use while driving, (b) determine if the intervention success varied by sociodemographic group (e.g., age, gender, driving experience), and (c) map interventions to TDF domains to highlight areas for future research. Following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews, we searched seven databases and identified 5,202 articles. After screening, 50 articles detailing 56 studies met the following inclusion criteria: (a) intervention studies, (b) providing details on methods and results, (c) written in English, and (d) targeting any driver behaviour related to mobile phone use while driving with a bottom-up approach, using not regulation or law enforcement, but individuals' psychological processes, such as cognitive, behavioural, and emotional. Findings show that most interventions targeted young drivers and were typically effective. Except for a few studies, the effectiveness of interventions targeting different sociodemographic groups either remained untested or revealed nonsignificant differences. This finding points to a gap in the literature, indicating a need for further investigation into the efficacy of interventions for different groups, and for tailoring and testing them accordingly. The interventions also often targeted multiple TDF domains, complicating the interpretation of the relative efficacy of specific domains. Most frequently targeted domains included beliefs and consequences, emotions, knowledge, social influence, social/professional role and identity, and behavioural regulation. Physical skills and optimism domains were not targeted in any intervention. Further, almost all interventions addressed deliberate engagement in mobile phone distractions, while the automatic and fast processes involved in such behaviours were often overlooked. Mobile phone distractions are in part habitual behaviours, yet the existing mitigation efforts mostly assumed intentional engagement. More focus on the habitual nature of mobile phone distractions is needed.

Deterring illegal smartphone use while driving: Are perceptions of risk information associated with the impact of informal sanctions?

Advertising campaigns have used threat appeals to increase the perceptions of risk associated with dangerous driving behaviours. Building on recent research that suggests increasing the pertinence of informal sanctions (sense of guilt, fear of peer disapproval, or fear of hurting oneself and others) decreases the likelihood of illegal smartphone engagement while driving, this study aimed to determine if perceptions of risk information, that is, how effective drivers believe the information is in deterring their illegal use, is associated with perceptions of informal sanctions. An online survey of 1027 Victorians who self-reported illegal smartphone use while driving asked participants to rate the personal deterrent effectiveness of five types of risks associated with illegal smartphone use while driving. A hierarchical linear regression model explored the associations between the most effective risks and each informal sanction. Female drivers were more likely than male drivers to experience guilt, fear of social loss and fear of physical loss when using their smartphones illegally. More frequent illegal smartphone engagement while driving was associated with decreased impact of informal sanctions. Female drivers were more likely than male drivers to perceive each risk as effective. The most effective piece of information was, "Contributes to 16% of Victorian road deaths and serious injuries annually"; it was also the least known (32.7% males, 26.7% females). This message, alongside, "Increases risk of a crash comparable to those associated with driving under the influence of alcohol or cannabis" and, "A 2 s glance at your phone while driving at 50 km/h effectively means driving blind for 27 m", were associated with stronger perceptions of guilt, fear of peer disapproval, or fear of hurting oneself and others when thinking about using a smartphone illegally while driving. These results suggest tailoring and targeting these specific risk information may be effective in deterring illegal smartphone use while driving.

"Does that mean I can't use my phone to pay when I'm in the Maccas drive thru?": Younger drivers' uncertainty and attitude toward smartphone law and punishment

This study employed a mixed methods approach (a survey [n = 2,774] and focus groups [n = 16]) to understand the perceptions of younger drivers (18-25) on current smartphone laws in the Australian state of Victoria. First, by analysing quantitative data gathered from an online survey regarding smartphone laws, perceptions of punishment when breaking the law, and attitudes to both the law and fines, this study found younger drivers were less likely to understand the law around phone use while driving, even after direct or indirect experience with police. Additionally, the severity and impact of fines were perceived as more impactful and severe among younger drivers, women, and those on lower incomes, and the most common types of illegal use younger drivers engaged with were navigation, music applications, and hands-free calling, mostly facilitated through Bluetooth with their device placed out of sight. Consequently, focus groups were conducted with a subset of these younger drivers to explore these findings in more depth. It was revealed that smartphone laws were perceived to be ambiguous, at times unreasonable, and difficult to access conclusive information regarding the law or receive information throughout the Graduated Licencing Program. Additionally, of full licenced drivers breaking smartphone laws (n = 807), 61.7 percent never used a cradle. Among probationary drivers breaking the law (n = 209), 76.1 percent never used a cradle. This suggests rampant surreptitious illegal use. As such, younger drivers learning to drive are also learning methods to avoid punishment while breaking smartphone laws. This included not using a cradle and opting instead for Bluetooth connectivity or engaging in hand-held use, a choice that continued into Full Licensed driving. The severity of punishment was not common knowledge and was perceived to be incommensurate to the risks associated with certain types of use. In their opinion all of these factors reduced the legitimacy of the law. Addressing these factors with evidence-based countermeasures may increase compliance and road safety.

"Like it's wrong, but it's not that wrong:" Exploring the normalization of risk-compensatory strategies among young drivers engaging in illegal smartphone use

INTRODUCTION

Young drivers are the most vulnerable road users and most likely to use a smartphone illegally while driving. Although when compared with drink-driving, attitudes to illegal smartphone risk are nearly identical, smartphone use among young drivers continues to increase.

METHOD

Four in-depth focus groups were conducted with 13 young (18-25 years) drivers to gain insight into their perceptions of the risks associated with the behavior. Our aim was to determine how drivers navigate that risk and if their behavior shapes and informs perceptions of norms.

RESULTS

Three key themes emerged: (a) participants perceived illegal smartphone use as commonplace, easy, and benign; (b) self-regulatory behaviors that compensate for risk are pervasive among illegal smartphone users; and (c) risk-compensation strategies rationalize risks and perceived norms, reducing the seriousness of transgression when compared with drink-driving. Young drivers rationalized their own use by comparing their selfregulatory smartphone and driving skills with those of "bad drivers," not law abiders. Practical Applications: These findings suggest that smartphone behaviors shape attitudes to risk, highlighting the importance for any countermeasure aimed at reducing illegal use to acknowledge how a young person's continued engagement in illegal smartphone use is justified by the dynamic composition of use, risk assessment and the perceived norms.