Corrigendum: The impact of road traffic context on secondary task engagement while driving.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1139373.].

Beyond the billboard: A review of other external sources of driver distraction.

Road corridors contain countless sources of distraction, each carrying the potential to draw drivers' eyes and minds off roads, thus increasing the risk of a crash. While the impact of billboards on driver distraction has received considerable attention, empirical data for other types of roadside advertising signs is very limited. Furthermore, the existing research examining other potential external sources of distraction is fragmentary, which makes it difficult to develop evidence-based road safety policies to mitigate risk. Therefore, the aim of this study was to conduct an exploratory review to ascertain and synthesise the available distraction-related literature for various types of roadside advertising signs (excluding billboards) and other potential external sources of distraction in the road corridor. Based on distraction-related theory and existing literature, 58 predefined categories of potential distraction sources were developed to guide an exploratory literature search using the Scopus database. Fourteen documents relating to external distraction sources were identified in the database search with a further five studies found using a backwards citation chaining search (N=19). However, no studies for non-billboard types of roadside advertising signs were found. Studies included those that investigated driver distraction in relation to construction zones, commercial logos contained within official traffic management Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) and service (logo) signs, drones, murals, roadside memorials and wind turbines. While one study investigated whether an external source of distraction can have a positive effect on driver behaviour, the remainder focused on the potential negative impacts on road safety of these sources of distraction. A key finding of the review is that crash risk increases when drivers continue to visually and cognitively engage with a source of distraction. Overall, the studies provide insights into the types of distractions that can be encountered in road corridors and the impact they can have on driver behaviour. However, more research is required before the mechanisms and pathways involved in these types of distractions can be effectively conceptualised, and thereby mitigated to reduce the burden of distraction risk and road trauma.

Is it all about mobile phones? Exploring drivers' perceptions of government information and road rules on distracted driving.

Distracted driving is a traffic safety issue worldwide. While the development of comprehensive information and road rules about distracted driving by governments is essential to address the issue, there is evidence showing that existing road rules and information may not always deter drivers from engaging in distractions while driving. Therefore, this study explored drivers' views on government information and road rules concerning distracted driving, aiming to understand how these rules and information have shaped drivers' perceptions and behaviour towards distractions. Interviews (n = 35) were conducted with Queensland drivers aged between 21 and 70 years and a thematic analysis was used to explore the data. Based on the findings, government information on distracted driving was believed by participants to be incomprehensive, not effectively communicated, and focused on mobile phone use. Road rules and enforcement measures often prioritise mobile phone use and contain grey areas that may confuse drivers about legal and illegal distractions. The results showed that the perceived risk of distractions varies among drivers, with some distractions not being considered as risky as other behaviours (e.g., using a smartwatch). Findings showed that government practices are believed to influence drivers' perceptions and behaviour about distracted driving, encouraging an inaccurate perception about driver safety and with the potential to prompt drivers to engage with distracting behaviours without knowledge nor consideration of the risks. The results of this study offer important insights for policymakers in developing and disseminating comprehensive information and road rules for distracted driving.

Not the same: How delivery, ride-hailing, and private riders' roles influence safety behavior.

In recent years, the growth of motorcycle-based ride-hailing and delivery services has led to an increase in traffic crashes involving these riders. Previous studies have indicated that the behavior of ride-hailing and delivery riders is influenced by work demands and individual characteristics. However, the extent to which risky riding behaviors depend on the type of riding and the interaction between road traffic context and risky behaviors remains unclear. Addressing these gaps, this study investigates factors influencing risky behaviors among motorcycle riders in Hanoi, Vietnam. By examining various rider traits (such as rider type, gender, and age) and aspects of the road traffic environment (such as police presence, number of road lanes, and weather), we aim to understand their contribution to risky riding behaviors. Through the observation of 9164 motorcycle riders (i.e., delivery, ride-hailing, and private motorcycle riders) at 31 intersections and decision tree analysis, the study underscores the significant impact of rider type on risky behaviors. Key findings include a higher tendency for both delivery riders and ride-hailing riders to run red lights, neglect to use turn signals, and the notable distraction of mobile phone use. Additionally, private riders are found to show a higher incidence of not wearing helmets even in locations with a police presence. These findings highlight the critical need for strategies to enhance road safety for all motorcycle riders. However, it is essential to recognize that the reasons behind risky behavior vary across different groups of motorcycle riders, from private to commercial riders. Therefore, we need more targeted strategies that address the specific factors influencing each group to effectively improve road safety for all.

How do perceptions of procedural justice, police legitimacy, and legitimacy of laws influence intentions to drug drive?

INTRODUCTION: There is a need for improved drug driving enforcement to promote greater driver compliance with drug driving laws. In Australia, Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) suffers from operational challenges that undermine its effectiveness in reducing drug driving. OBJECTIVE: To identify potential improvements to RDT, this study investigated the extent to which drivers perceive RDT to be procedurally just and that the policing of drug driving and the associated laws are legitimate. These perceptions were then compared with those applying to Random Breath Testing (RBT) and examined in relation to their respective influence on intentions to drug and drink drive in the future. METHOD: A sample of 1,483 licensed drivers from three Australian states completed an online survey. RESULTS: Those participants who reported engaging in drug driving perceived RDT to be less procedurally just than non-drug drivers. Similarly, drug drivers perceived the police and associated drug driving laws to be less legitimate than non-drug drivers. Furthermore, drug drivers who had been tested at an RDT operation in the past perceived RDT to be less procedurally just and considered drug driving policing and laws to be less legitimate, compared with the corresponding perceptions of drink drivers who had been tested at an RBT operation. A regression analysis indicated that stronger intentions to drug drive in the future were associated with lower perceptions of police legitimacy and the legitimacy of drug driving laws, but not with the elements of procedural justice. However, follow-up analyses indicated that the influence of procedural justice on intentions was mediated by the two legitimacy variables, thus weakening its direct impact on intentions. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The results highlight the need for road safety authorities to enhance the perceived legitimacy of drug driving enforcement and associated laws. Changes to current police practices and/or drug-driving laws may also be needed to enhance the effectiveness of RDT.

Questioning penalties and road safety Policies: Are they enough to deter risky motorcyclist Behavior?

Reducing risky behaviors and traffic violations is crucial for preventing road trauma among private and commercial motorcyclists. While legal interventions such as road rules and police enforcement have been somewhat effective, there is a gap in understanding how motorcyclists perceive these deterrents and the psycho-social factors influencing their effectiveness. This research aims to explore the interplay between motorcyclists' psycho-social predispositions and their responses to legal interventions. It also compares two distinct groups of riders - private and commercial motorcyclists - within the urban environment of Da Nang, Vietnam, providing a nuanced consideration of the influence of work-related impacts on risky behavior, which can enable targeted interventions. We propose a theoretical model integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior and Deterrence Theory to analyze how psycho-social and punitive factors influence riders' traffic violations. A total of 423 delivery riders and 411 private riders in Da Nang participated in the study. The results show that attitude, perceived behavioral control, and perceptions of deterrence significantly impact riders' intentions to engage in risky behaviors, with delivery riders being particularly responsive to law enforcement and penalties. To enhance policy effectiveness, interventions should employ tailored enforcement strategies that account for the unique motivations and perceptions of each rider group. For example, increasing the visibility and consistency of law enforcement could be particularly impactful for delivery riders, who are more sensitive to immediate deterrents. Policy adjustments should also focus on reshaping riders' attitudes toward safety and adjusting their perceived control over riding situations. By tailoring interventions to effectively influence each group's behavior, we can ultimately reduce traffic incidents.

Distracted on duty: A theory-based exploration of influences leading to mobile phone distracted riding among food delivery workers.

Using mobile phones while riding is a form of distracted riding that significantly elevates crash risk. Regrettably, the factors contributing to mobile phone use while riding (MPUWR) among food delivery riders remain under-researched. Addressing this literature gap, the current study employs the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model and various socio-economic factors to examine the determinants of MPUWR. The research incorporates data from 558 delivery workers in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The study utilizes two analytical methods to empirically test the hypotheses, considering non-linear relationships between variables: Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) and Artificial Neural Network (ANN). The results reveal mixed impacts of factors connected to job resources. Although social support appears to deter MPUWR, work autonomy and rewards seemingly encourage it. Furthermore, a predisposition towards risk-taking behaviour significantly impacts the frequency of mobile phone usage among delivery riders. Interestingly, riders with higher incomes and those who have previously been fined by the police exhibit more frequent mobile phone use. The findings of this study present valuable insights into the crucial factors to be addressed when designing interventions aimed at reducing phone use among food delivery riders.

"It's okay because I'm just driving": an exploration of self-reported mobile phone use among Mexican drivers.

Introduction: Technological advancements have the potential to enhance people's quality of life, but their misuse can have a detrimental impact on safety. A notable example is the escalating issue of distracted driving resulting from the use of mobile phones behind the wheel, leading to severe crashes and injuries. Despite these concerns, both drivers' usage patterns and their risk-related associations remain scarcely documented in Mexico. Therefore, this descriptive study aimed to examine the mobile phone usage of Mexican drivers, its relationships to risk awareness and near-miss/crash involvement, and the self-reported underlying reasons for this behavior. Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized a sample of 1,353 licensed Mexican drivers who took part in a nationwide series of interviews regarding their onboard phone use settings. Results: A significant percentage of drivers (96.8%) recognize using a mobile phone while driving as high-risk behavior. However, only 7.4% reported completely avoiding its use while driving, with 22.4% identified as high-frequency users. Frequency was also found positively associated with the self-reported rate of near-misses and crashes. Furthermore, qualitative data analysis highlights the emergence of a 'sense of urgency' to attend to phone-related tasks in response to daily demands and life dynamics, offering a potential explanation for this behavior. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest common patterns of onboard mobile use among Mexican drivers concerning driving situations and associated risks. This underscores the need for increased efforts to discourage onboard phone use in the country.

Measurement invariance of the driving inattention scale (ARDES) across 7 countries.

The Attention-Related Driving Errors Scale (ARDES) is a self-report measure of individual differences in driving inattention. ARDES was originally developed in Spanish (Argentina), and later adapted to other countries and languages. Evidence supporting the reliability and validity of ARDES scores has been obtained in various different countries. However, no study has been conducted to specifically examine the measurement invariance of ARDES measures across countries, thus limiting their comparability. Can different language versions of ARDES provide comparable measures across countries with different traffic regulations and cultural norms? To what extent might cultural differences prevent researchers from making valid inferences based on ARDES measures? Using Alignment Analysis, the present study assessed the approximate invariance of ARDES measures in seven countries: Argentina (n = 603), Australia (n = 378), Brazil (n = 220), China (n = 308). Spain (n = 310), UK (n = 298), and USA (n = 278). The three-factor structure of ARDES scores (differentiating driving errors occurring at Navigation, Manoeuvring and Control levels) was used as the target theoretical model. A fixed alignment analysis was conducted to examine approximate measurement invariance. 12.3 % of the intercepts and 0.8 % of the item-factor loadings were identified as non-invariant, averaging 8.6 % of non-invariance. Despite substantial differences among the countries, sample recruitment or representativeness, study results support resorting to ARDES measures to make comparisons across the country samples. Thus, the range of cultures, laws and collision risk across these 7 countries provides a demanding assessment for a cultural-free inattention while-driving. The alignment analysis results suggest that ARDES measures reach near equivalence among the countries in the study. We hope this study will serve as a basis for future cross-cultural research on driving inattention using ARDES.

Road rule enforcement and where to find it: An investigation of applications used to avoid detection when violating traffic rules.

INTRODUCTION: One of the primary countermeasures in place to prevent road rule violations is legal enforcement, yet there are numerous applications that can undermine such efforts by notifying drivers of enforcement locations. However, the capabilities of these applications and how they can impact offending behavior is currently unknown. METHOD: Two studies were conducted to understand which of these applications are being used by drivers and how these applications are impacting road rule violations. Study 1 consisted of a content analysis that involved searching the Google Play Store and Apple iTunes Store for applications that could be used to avoid road rule violations using pre-determined keywords. Meanwhile, Study 2 consisted of 468 licensed Australian drivers (54.5% males) over the age of 17 years (Mage = 35 years) who completed a survey. RESULTS: A total of 73 applications were identified for Study 1, with most of the applications displaying speed camera locations. It was found that applications that notify drivers of traffic enforcement locations are widely prevalent, can be used on a variety of interfaces and include numerous additional features. Study 2 found that those who use the applications were more willing to speed than those who do not use the applications, while there was no difference in phone use while driving between those who do and do not use the applications. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: The findings have important implications for stakeholders, policy, and future research. For example, it is suggested that specific functions of these applications need to be regulated to reduce road rule violations and crash risk. Meanwhile, enforcement initiatives need to evolve at a faster rate to keep up to date with the changing technology that can undermine them.