MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015105096 · doi:10.1080/15389588.2020.1731922

Assessing the impact of the 2015 introduction of increased penalties and enhanced public awareness and enforcement activities on texting while driving among adults in Ontario, Canada

2020· article· en· W3015105096 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christine M. Wickens, Anca Ialomiteanu, Steven Cook, Hayley A. Hamilton, Maryam Haya, Tracey Ma, Robert E. Mann, Heather Manson, André J. McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueTraffic Injury Prevention · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of OntarioPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLaw enforcementEnforcementInjury preventionPoison controlEnvironmental healthOddsOccupational safety and healthDistracted drivingLogistic regressionSuicide preventionMedicineDemographyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Texting while driving (TWD) is considered a particularly hazardous form of distracted driving. It is highly prevalent among young drivers, but fewer studies of TWD among adult drivers exist and these prevalence rates may approach those of younger drivers. The effectiveness of measures to prevent distracted driving, and TWD specifically, is unclear. On September 1, 2015, Ontario introduced increased penalties for distracted driving accompanied by public education programs to increase public awareness of the new regulations. Provincial police also introduced enhanced enforcement efforts. The current study examined self-reported TWD in a representative sample of Ontario adults before and after introduction of the new legislation and the enhanced public education and enforcement efforts.Methods: Data were based on telephone interviews with 1,846 respondents who reported having driven in the past year. Data were derived from the 2015–2016 cycles of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) Monitor, an ongoing cross-sectional telephone survey of adults aged 18+ years in Ontario, Canada. A binary logistic regression analysis of TWD in the previous 30 days was conducted, adjusting for demographic characteristics (sex, age), driving exposure, and introduction of the legislation (before versus after).Results: The proportion of the sample reporting TWD declined significantly from 37.6% before the law was introduced to 24.2% after the law was introduced. The impact appeared to be most pronounced among drivers who reported TWD more frequently. Adjusted odds of TWD declined 42% following introduction of the legislation and associated enhanced public education and enforcement.Conclusions: These results identify a decrease in TWD following the introduction of enhanced penalties with corresponding public education and enforcement efforts, adding to the existing evaluative evidence base to inform transportation safety policy. These results also support the need to examine TWD and its determinants among all age groups.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraffic Injury PreventionSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207