Mobile phone penalties and road crashes: Are changes in sanctions effective?

被引:7
作者
Fry, Jane M. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Demog & Ageing Unit, Melbourne, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Demog & Ageing Unit, Level 5,207 Bouverie St, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
关键词
Road crash severity; Fines; Policy intervention; Mobile phone; Britain; HELD CELL PHONE; REGRESSION DISCONTINUITY; HAND-HELD; RISK PERCEPTION; TEXTING BANS; PUNISHMENT; ACCIDENTS; DRIVERS; ENFORCEMENT; FATALITIES;
D O I
10.1016/j.jsr.2022.12.001
中图分类号
TB18 [人体工程学];
学科分类号
1201 ;
摘要
Introduction: Road crashes are a major, preventable cause of death and serious injury. Being distracted by a mobile phone while driving can increase the risk of a crash by three to four times and increase crash severity. To reduce distracted driving, on 1 March 2017 the penalty for using a hand-held mobile phone while driving in Britain doubled to 200 pound and six penalty points. Method: We examine the effects of this increased penalty on numbers of serious or fatal crashes over 6 weeks either side of the intervention using Regression Discontinuity in Time. Results: We find no effect of the intervention, suggesting the increased penalty is not effective in reducing the more serious road crashes. Conclusions: We rule out an information problem and an enforcement effect, concluding the increase in fines was insufficient to change behaviour. With very low detection rates of mobile phone use, our result could occur if the per-ceived certainty of punishment remained very low after the intervention. Practical application: Future technology will increase the ability to detect mobile phone usage, and there may be fewer road crashes if the solution is to raise awareness of such technology and publicise numbers of offenders caught. Alternatively, a mobile phone blocking application could avert the problem.
引用
收藏
页码:384 / 392
页数:9
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]   Texting Bans and Fatal Accidents on Roadways: Do They Work? Or Do Drivers Just React to Announcements of Bans? [J].
Abouk, Rahi ;
Adams, Scott .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL-APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2013, 5 (02) :179-199
[2]   Per se drugged driving laws and traffic fatalities [J].
Anderson, D. Mark ;
Rees, Daniel I. .
INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF LAW AND ECONOMICS, 2015, 42 :122-134
[3]   Driving and telephoning: Relative accident risk when using hand-held and hands-free mobile phones [J].
Backer-Grondahl, Agathe ;
Sagberg, Fridulv .
SAFETY SCIENCE, 2011, 49 (02) :324-330
[4]   The response of criminals and noncriminals to fines [J].
Bar-Ilan, A ;
Sacerdote, B .
JOURNAL OF LAW & ECONOMICS, 2004, 47 (01) :1-17
[5]  
Bates L, 2012, CRIME PREV SECUR MAN, P90
[6]   CRIME AND PUNISHMENT - ECONOMIC APPROACH [J].
BECKER, GS .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1968, 76 (02) :169-217
[7]   Point-record driving licence and road safety: An economic approach [J].
Bourgeon, Jean-Marc ;
Picard, Pierre .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2007, 91 (1-2) :235-258
[8]   Did California's hand-held cell phone ban reduce accidents? [J].
Burger, Nicholas E. ;
Kaffine, Daniel T. ;
Yu, Bob .
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART A-POLICY AND PRACTICE, 2014, 66 :162-172
[9]   HOW USUAL BEHAVIOUR CAN AFFECT PERCEIVED DRIVERS' PSYCHOLOGICAL STATE WHILE DRIVING [J].
Cardamone, Angelo Stephen ;
Eboli, Laura ;
Forciniti, Carmen ;
Mazzulla, Gabriella .
TRANSPORT, 2017, 32 (01) :13-22
[10]  
Castriota S., 2019, IZA DISCUSSION PAPER