حواس پرتی راننده جوان توسط پیام های متنی: مقایسه اثرات خواندن و تایپ کردن پیام های متنی در چین در مقابل انگلیسی

Abstract Background Reading and typing text messages while driving seriously impairs driving performance and are prohibited activities in many jurisdictions. Hong Kong is a bilingual society and many people write in both Chinese and English. As the input methods for text messaging in Chinese and English are considerably different, this study used a driving simulator approach to compare the effects of reading and typing Chinese and English text messages on driving performance. Method The driving performances of 26 participants were monitored under the following conditions: (1) no distraction, (2) reading and typing Chinese text messages, and (3) reading and typing English text messages. The following measures of driving performance were collected under all of the conditions: reaction time (RT), driving lane undulation (DLU), driving speed fluctuation (DSF), and car-following distance (CFD) between test and leading cars. Results RT, DLU, and DSF were significantly impaired by reading and typing both Chinese and English text messages. Moreover, typing text messages distracted drivers more than reading them. Although the Chinese text messaging input system is more complicated than the English system, the use of Chinese did not cause a significantly different degree of distraction. Conclusion Both reading and typing text messages while driving should be prohibited regardless of whether Chinese or English is used.

Introduction Driver distraction is one of the most common causes of traffic crashes. A distracted driver is two to nine times more likely to be involved in a crash than a driver who is not distracted (Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997 and Violanti and Marshall, 1996). Research has demonstrated that using a mobile phone while driving increases a driver’s mental workload (Drews et al., 2009, Makishita and Matsunaga, 2008 and Patten et al., 2004), distracts attention, increases reaction time delay (Al-Darrab et al., 2009, Consiglio et al., 2003 and Hosking et al., 2009), impairs driving maintenance by increasing deviation in the vehicle’s lateral position, and increases traffic violations such as speeding and running stop signs (Beede and Kass, 2006, Drews et al., 2009, Hosking et al., 2009 and Törnros and Bolling, 2005). It therefore increases the overall risk of traffic conflicts and crashes. Numerous studies have concluded that text messaging while driving is risky (Hallett et al., 2012, Harrison, 2011, Nemme and White, 2010, Owens et al., 2011 and Young et al., 2014). Text messaging impairs a driver’s cognition, decision-making ability, and ability to maneuver safely. A driver’s reaction time (RT), driving lane undulation (DLU), and driving speed fluctuation (DSF) are effective indicators of impaired performance due to distraction, as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Driving performance dependent variables, description, and references. Variable classification Variable Description Sample reference Reaction Time Reaction time (RT) The time from a hazard to braking onset Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997, Makishita and Matsunaga, 2008, Edquist et al., 2012, Consiglio et al., 2003, Christoforou et al., 2013, Hosking et al., 2009 and Beede and Kass, 2006 Lateral Control Driving lane undulation (DLU) Standard deviation of lateral position Horrey and Wickens, 2006, Törnros and Bolling, 2005, Owens et al., 2011, Hosking et al., 2009, Auberlet et al., 2012, Beede and Kass, 2006 and Stavrinos et al., 2013 Longitudinal Control Driving speed fluctuation (DSF) Standard deviation of speed Al-Darrab et al., 2009, Edquist et al., 2012, Drews et al., 2009, Törnros and Bolling, 2005 and Stavrinos et al., 2013 Car-following distance (CFD) Distance to the rear bumper of the lead vehicle Table options Text messaging is the primary form of communication among college students (Chiang, Tung, & Chen, 2002), as it supports peer-to-peer interaction and increases feelings of belonging; 98% of young drivers have texted while driving, regardless of the circumstances (Atchley, Atwood, & Boulton, 2011). Many young people text rather than talk while driving (Goodwin, O’Brien, & Foss, 2012). One study of U.S. college students revealed that 91% of frequent drivers have texted while driving, and that a considerable proportion were travelling with passengers at the time (Harrison, 2011). One Australian study conducted a follow-up survey of university students after a short training session and found that texting was still prevalent, despite the students’ awareness that it was dangerous and illegal (Nemme & White, 2010). Another attitudinal survey of young drivers revealed that a decrease in mindfulness increased the prevalence of texting while driving, and that this association was mediated by emotion-regulation motives (Feldman, Greeson, Renna, & Robbins-Monteith, 2011). A nationwide online survey in New Zealand conducted by Hallett et al. (2012) found that younger drivers were more likely to engage in reading and texting messaging, as age was found to be an important indicator of participant’s willingness to engage in this behavior. Therefore, further research on the factors that increase the prevalence of texting messages while driving among young people is essential for developing effective measures to combat this behavior. Legislation and enforcement measures have been introduced in response to this high-risk activity; these measures use a deterrence theory approach to minimize unsafe driving behavior. The use of hand-held phones while driving has been prohibited in Hong Kong since July 1, 2000 (ROAD SAFETY COUNCIL, 2003). In one study of mobile phone distraction, a driver’s attitude was found to be the most consistent predictor of his or her intention to use a mobile phone while driving (Walsh, White, Hyde, & Watson, 2008). A before-and-after study of the effects of hand-held mobile phone legislation in New York State revealed that 46 out of 62 counties experienced a reduction in fatal road crashes, and that all of the counties experienced a remarkable reduction in road casualties after similar legislation was implemented (Nikolaev, Robbins, & Jacobson, 2010). However, this deterrence-based traffic law enforcement approach has not always worked, and drivers continue to read and type text messages while driving. Ray (2014) suggested that, according to deterrence theory, to be effective, legislation prohibiting mobile phone use while driving must have consequences that are certain, swift, and severe. A questionnaire survey in China that examined the correlations between personality factors and driving behavior found that deterrence did not affect distracted driving (Nan et al., 2011). Harrison (1998) also argued that deterrence-based approaches that are not informed by psychological theory may not change driving behavior. In fact, in some cases, the use of a mobile phone while driving may increase in the short term after legislation is introduced (McCartt, Hellinga, & Bratiman, 2006). Additionally, a study of Kansas drivers (Nelson, Atchley, & Little, 2009) found that drivers’ tendencies to talk on the phone and text messages while driving remained high even after the implementation of relevant legislation. Moreover, some convicted drivers reported simultaneously engaging in other risky driving behavior such as speeding, running stop signs, and changing lanes carelessly (Beck et al., 2007, Harrison, 2011 and Owens et al., 2011). Hong Kong is a bilingual metropolis, and Chinese and English are both commonly used in reading and typing messages. However, because Chinese (shape based) and English (Latin alphabet based) characters are remarkably different in terms of their formation, text messaging in the two languages may make different cognitive demands on drivers and thus have different effects of their driving. Psychological and linguistic studies have observed that reading different languages requires variable mental workloads. The speed at which a person reads English and Chinese can differ, and may require different reaction processing times. When a user inputs a Chinese text message, he or she is required to select the correct characters from a list of homophones, as several different characters can have the same pronunciation. Inputting Chinese is more complicated than inputting English, as it requires the additional step of character selection. Therefore, analyzing the different effects of text messaging in Chinese and English on driving performance is worthwhile. The results may shed light on the extent of this problem among Chinese and English speakers. Driving simulator experiments have increasingly been used to safely and ethically model the relationship between traffic safety and driver behavior, especially prohibited behavior in hazardous situations. Studies have covered various topics, including red light jumping, incident perception, and young and novice driver behavior (Auberlet et al., 2012, Bella, 2008, Feldman et al., 2011, van Driel et al., 2007, Yan et al., 2007, Yan et al., 2009 and Yang et al., 2013). The driving simulator methodology has been prevalent in distracted driving studies (McCartt et al., 2006), especially in studies of mobile phone use while driving, which have examined the effects of conversation (Beede and Kass, 2006, Consiglio et al., 2003 and Törnros and Bolling, 2005), dialing, and text messaging (Drews et al., 2009, Horrey and Wickens, 2006, Hosking et al., 2009, Rudin-Brown et al., 2013 and Young et al., 2014). In the current study, a driving simulation was conducted to model the effects of reading and typing text messages on the driving performance of young drivers. The data measuring driving performance under various conditions were collected, and the different performance measures, including RT, DLU, DSF, and CFD, were compared. The demographic effects were also studied.

6. Conclusions This study examined the effects of text messaging on driver distraction using a driving simulator approach. In particular, it compared the distraction effects of reading or typing Chinese and English text messages. Driving performance factors including RT, DLU, and DSF, which reflect drivers’ ability to maintain driving performance under all of the distraction conditions, were significantly impaired by all of the tested distractions. However, in all of the distraction conditions, the CFD between cars was not significantly different from the no-distraction condition. Twenty-six participants, half of whom had previously texted while driving, took part in the simulated driving experiment. The results are summarized as follows. (1) Reading and writing text messages in both English and Chinese impaired driving performance. (2) Typing text messages impaired driving performance more than reading messages regardless of language. Texting while driving sometimes led to speeding (increased average driving speed). (3) Although the Chinese input system for text messages is more complicated than the English system, the text messages in both languages did not exhibit remarkable differences in terms of distraction effects. This study has implications for the development of future road safety enforcement and education strategies. In terms of enforcement, stricter penalties are essential to deter the use of hand-held mobile phones and text messaging. Furthermore, taking into account the complexity of the Pinyin phonetic Chinese input method, the distraction caused by typing Chinese messages could be stronger than that caused by typing English messages. This may be critical to the development of relevant enforcement strategies in Chinese communities. In terms of education, as mobile phone use is popular among young drivers, who are likely to have limited driving experience and limited defensive driving skills, it is important to highlight how text messaging impairs driving performance and its association with traffic crash risk. Future studies could further explore the different levels of impairment associated with various language and relevant input methods.