Plight of the distracted pedestrian: a research synthesis and meta-analysis of mobile phone use on crossing behaviour
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Pedestrians are commonly involved in vehicle collisions that result in injuries and fatalities. Pedestrian distraction has become an emerging safety issue as more pedestrians use their mobile phones while walking and crossing the street. Objectives The purpose of this research synthesis and meta-analysis is to determine the extent to which cell phone conversation, text messaging or browsing, and listening to music affect a number of common pedestrian behavioural measures. Methods A keyword search was developed with a subject librarian that used MeSH terms from selected databases including PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, Medline and TRID. Supplemental searches were also conducted with Google Scholar and Mendeley. Effect size coding Thirty-three studies met inclusion criteria and were subjected to data extraction. Statistical information (ie, M, SD, SE, 95% CI, OR, F, t ) was extracted to generate standardised mean difference effect sizes (ie, Cohen’s d) and r effect sizes. Results Fourteen experimental studies were ultimately included in an N-weighted meta-analysis ( k =81 effect sizes), and eight observational studies were included in a qualitative overview. Both mobile phone conversation and text messaging increased rates of hits and close calls. Texting decreased rates of looking left and right prior to and/or during street crossing. As might be expected, text messaging was generally found to have the most detrimental effect on multiple behavioural measures. Limitations A variety of study quality issues limit the interpretation and generalisation of the results, which are described, as are future study measurement and methods improvements.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it