Can a Smartphone Application Be Used to Measure Practice Driving Behavior During the Learner Permit Period? A Step Toward Performance-Based Licensing.

Introduction: Supervised practice during the learner stage of graduated driver licensing is required in all U.S. states and some international jurisdictions. Several U.S. states require driving hours to be recorded in a paper logbook, making it susceptible to errors or falsification. A smartphone app that operates as an electronic logbook could serve as an alternative. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of the logbook format (i.e., paper versus electronic) on self-reported driving behavior. Design: Parent‒teen dyads were enrolled and assigned to electronic (n=147) and paper (n=131) logbook groups using a block design. Setting/Participants: This study was conducted in Maryland. Data were collected for 6 continuous months while teenagers held a learner permit between January 2020 and December 2021. Intervention: Electronic logbook to measure practice driving. Outcome measure: Self-reported driving between the electronic and paper logbook groups. For those using electronic logbooks, an agreement between self-reported trips and electronic logbook trips and perceptions of using an electronic logbook to measure driving. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in any measures of self-reported practice driving by logbook type (electronic versus paper). Agreement between self-reported and electronic logbook‒recorded trips ranged between 68.6% and 79.0% (allowing a difference of 2 trips per week). User satisfaction with the electronic logbook was high, with 93.0% of teenagers and 91.9% of parents stating that they would recommend the app to a friend. Conclusions: An electronic logbook is a viable approach to measuring practice driving. Eventually, it could become part of a system where practice requirements are verified, allowing states to move toward performance-based graduated driver licensing.

Salesperson knowledge of teen-specific vehicle safety features.

OBJECTIVE: Teen drivers experience elevated crash risk compared with experienced adult drivers. Active parental oversight can improve teen driving safety, and several manufacturers have released teen-focused safety features over the past decade. Still, parents don't always use these systems and often don't even know their vehicle is equipped. A recent survey found that parents who do know about such systems on their vehicle first learned of them from a salesperson at a dealership. The current study examined how salespeople discuss and sell teen-specific safety systems on vehicles to parents shopping for a new teen driver. METHODS: The study focused on four vehicle brands. Two researchers posed as the parents of a new teen driver who were shopping for a vehicle for their teen. They entered dealerships and conducted semistructured interviews with the salesperson that approached them, using prompts of increasing specificity about their teen driver and their interest in safety, and tracking at what point each salesperson mentioned their brand's teen-specific systems, what features they mentioned, and how accurate those mentions were. RESULTS: Thirty of the 40 participating salespeople were able to mention their brand's teen-specific system at some point during the procedure. Hyundai salespeople most consistently brought up their brand's teen features, and Chevy salespeople mentioned the most features while Ford salespeople mentioned the fewest. Salespeople often mentioned speed-related features, although the most commonly mentioned features varied by brand. No participating salespeople reported receiving training specifically about their brand's teen features. DISCUSSION: Most salespeople approached did mention their brand's teen-focused safety systems, but did not usually do so until they had received more targeted prompts. Information these salespeople did share was often vague and general. Salespeople are a key source of information about a vehicle's specific and relevant safety features, and parents without at least some vague preexisting knowledge about the systems or features that could be available on a vehicle of interest are not likely to leave a dealership with a clear idea of all available features that could aid their efforts to keep their teen drivers safe.

Learning to drive: Parental attitudes toward introducing teen drivers to advanced driver assistance systems.

OBJECTIVE: Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) have the potential to help mitigate the crash risk faced by new teen drivers. There has been little research on how these drivers use ADAS, as most only have access to these systems in their parents' vehicles when learning to drive because teens tend to drive older, less expensive vehicles when driving independently. This study examined how parental attitudes toward ADAS influence how and when parents introduce their teens to these systems when teaching them to drive. METHODS: Three web-based focus groups were conducted with parents who owned ADAS-equipped vehicles and who either had a teen with either a learner permit or a teen who recently began driving independently. The moderator-led discussion examined participant attitudes about teen driving risk, the perceived benefits or risks associated with teen use of ADAS, and parents' teaching strategies for ADAS. Researchers generated a list of likely themes from a review of existing literature and then coded participant responses according to those themes. RESULTS: Parents who chose to introduce ADAS to their new teen drivers did so while also reporting conflicting opinions about the reliability of vehicle technologies and the impact of such systems on driving safety and skill acquisition. Many parents reported some distrust of ADAS and concerns that some features could hinder the development of good driving habits, although most participants stated that ADAS have had a positive impact on their teen drivers' safety. Opinions were split about the best point at which to introduce ADAS to teens, with half preferring introduction at the outset and half preferring to wait until the teen had mastered basic driving skills. Attitudes varied according to individual vehicle systems, with a preference for blind spot monitoring and a general dislike of lane-keeping assistance. CONCLUSIONS: Specific concerns about the potential impact of ADAS on teen driving safety and skill acquisition do not prevent parents from using such systems, although the teaching strategies parents use vary according to their preferences for individual systems.

Characteristics of vehicles driven by teens and adults killed in crashes, 2013-2017.

INTRODUCTION: Teen drivers experience higher crash risk than their experienced adult counterparts. Legislative and community outreach methods have attempted to reduce this risk; results have been mixed. The increasing presence of vehicle safety features across the fleet has driven fatality numbers down in the past decades, but the disparity between young drivers and others remains. METHOD: We merged Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data on fatal crashes with vehicle characteristic data from the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI). The analysis compared the vehicle type, size, age, and the presence of select safety features in vehicles driven by teens (ages 15-17 years) and adult drivers (ages 35-50 years) who were killed in crashes from 2013 to 2017. Results were compared with a similar analysis conducted on data from 2007 to 2012. RESULTS: Teen drivers were more likely than their adult counterparts to be killed while driving older, smaller vehicles that were less likely to have the option to be equipped with side airbags. DISCUSSION: Teenage drivers remain more likely to be killed while driving older, smaller vehicles than adult drivers. Parents and guardians are mainly responsible for teen vehicle choice, and should keep vehicle size, weight, and safety features in mind when placing their teen in a vehicle. Practical Application: These findings can help guide safer vehicle choice for new teen drivers.

Can I reach that? Blind reaching as an accurate measure of estimated reachable distance.

Judgments of one's reach extent have been repeatedly found to be overestimated by about 10%. In 3 studies, a new dependent measure was employed in which participants viewed targets, closed their eyes, and then touched the location of the remembered target or pointed to its location if out of reach. This experimental paradigm yielded a much smaller but still present bias to over-estimate by about 2%. In addition, participants often reached for and touched target locations that were actually out of reach in a manner indicative of the typical 10% over-estimation bias. Surprisingly, participant response accuracy improved significantly and consistently across experimental trials even without visual or tactile feedback. This suggests that the proprioceptive information about the arm in space coupled with the remembered visual information about target location were sufficient to facilitate learning.

Passenger use of and attitudes toward rear seat belts.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to identify attitudes toward belt use in the rear seat and to gain insight into the experiences of rear-seat passengers. METHOD: A telephone survey conducted between June and August 2016 targeted adult passengers who had recently ridden in the rear and who did not always wear their seat belt when doing so. Respondents were questioned regarding their reasons for not buckling up and possible conditions under which they would be more likely to buckle up during rear-seat travel. RESULTS: Of 1163 recent rear-seat passengers, 72% reported always using their seat belt in the rear. Full-time belt use was lower among passengers who primarily travel in the rear of hired vehicles compared with personal vehicles. The most common explanation for not buckling up was that the back seat is safer than the front. Four out of five agreed they do not buckle up because of type of trip; two-thirds forget or do not see the need; and two-thirds agreed with reasons related to design, comfort, or usability issues. Nearly 40% agreed that they sometimes do not buckle up in the rear because there is no law requiring it. CONCLUSION: Many reasons for not using belts in the rear are similar to reasons in the front, such as forgetfulness, inconvenience, or discomfort. One difference is that many rear-seat passengers perceive using the belt is unnecessary because the back seat is safer than the front. More than half of part-time belt users and nonusers reported interventions such as rear seat belt reminders, stronger belt-use laws, and more comfortable belts would make them more likely to use their seat belt in the rear seat. Practical applications: This study identifies barriers to rear seat belt use that point to the need for a multi-faceted approach to increase belt use.