Skip to main content

Mobile phones & driving & the rules of distraction

Making it illegal to hold your mobile phone while driving is designed to increase road safety, says Adam Hill. Cambridge Mobile Telematics has been looking at the numbers to see if it works
January 5, 2024 Read time: 3 mins
Put it down, it's the law (© Maksim Marchanka | Dreamstime.com)

Hands-free cellphone laws were passed in the US states of Ohio, Michigan, and Alabama in 2023, making it illegal to hold a phone while driving there. It’s relatively early days but Cambridge Mobile Telematics (CMT) has analysed the statistics to see whether drivers are taking any notice.

The company measures what it calls “phone motion distraction”, which happens when the phone screen is on and the phone is moving, indicating that the driver has it in their hand and therefore cannot be fully concentrated on the road ahead. The results are interesting: while CMT says that distracted driving is down in Ohio and Michigan – and more than 3,800 crashes have been prevented with new laws – it has actually increased in Alabama (see Look – no hands! below).

In some ways this fits a pattern: the company analysed another eight states that introduced hands-free legislation from 2018-21, and found that the average reduction in distraction was 13% in the first three months after the laws were introduced. However, by the end of 2022, distraction was up by 3% in these states compared to the month before the law.

 

"Every 10% increase in distracted driving raises the crash rate by 1.4%"

 

This is highly significant because CMT’s research suggests that every 10% increase in distracted driving raises the crash rate by 1.4%. This comes at a human and financial cost. NHTSA’s The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes from 2019 shows $340 billion in crash damages from 14.2 million crashes that year, averaging $23,954 per crash.

CMT says that, while distracted driving in Alabama fell slightly in the first month, it rose after that until, by month three, it was actually higher than before the law. Interestingly, a relative lack of media coverage may have been a factor. In Ohio, there were over 130 stories published about the initial drop in distracted driving and the prevention of crashes, while state governor Mike Dewine also tweeted about the results. In Michigan, CMT says, there were more than 20 articles about the hands-free bill performance after the first month. By stark contrast, it found one article in Alabama.

Despite this, any reduction in distraction levels is welcome: CMT estimates that, in the first month, Alabama was able to prevent 70% of crashes and $1.6 million in economic damages. “While the long-term performance in Alabama isn’t in line with Ohio and Michigan, these results show that even small improvements help reduce road risk and crashes,” CMT says.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Look – no hands!

Ohio
•    Start date: 4 April, 2023
•    Distraction 1 month before law: 1 minute and 39 seconds
•    Average distraction after law: 1 minute and 32 seconds
•    Overall distraction change: 7.5% reduction
•    Crashes prevented: 2,200
•    Fatalities prevented: 6
•    Economic damage prevented: $54 million

 

Michigan
•    Start date: 30 June, 2023
•    Distraction 1 month before law: 1:48
•    Average distraction after law: 1:34
•    Overall distraction change: 12.7% reduction
•    Crashes prevented: 1,600
•    Fatalities prevented: 4
•    Economic damage prevented: $38 million

 

Alabama
•    Start date: 16 June, 2023
•    Distraction 1 month before law: 2:05
•    Average distraction after law: 2:05
•    Overall distraction change: 0.3% increase
•    Crashes prevented: 70
•    Economic damage prevented: $1.6 million

Source: www.cmtelematics.com

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Front crash prevention slashes police-reported rear-end crashes, says IIHS
    January 29, 2016
    Vehicles equipped with front crash prevention are much less likely to rear-end other vehicles, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has found in the first study of the feature's effectiveness using US police-reported crash data. The study found that systems with automatic braking reduce rear-end crashes by about 40 per cent on average, while forward collision warning alone cuts them by 23 per cent. The automatic braking systems also greatly reduce injury crashes.
  • Cost Benefit: the economic case for cycling
    August 20, 2019
    Cycling is good for us for any number of reasons. David Crawford finds that it is now possible to access basic, low-cost data which will help make the economic case for improving infrastructure Cycling is enjoying a favourable press the world over as a ‘good thing’ in the economic, environmental and social spheres. A recent study on the Value of Cycling from the UK’s University of Birmingham, for example, shows that cycle-friendly urban settings can deliver annualised transport infrastructural support co
  • Data provides structural support for BQE
    July 28, 2025
    Thousands of bridges in the US are ageing and in need of care and attention. Kistler explains how its WiM technology is helping to preserve New York’s famous Brooklyn-Queens Expressway…
  • Enforcement comes in many guises
    June 22, 2016
    Colin Sowman looks at some enforcement case studies from around the world. It is a sad fact of life that unenforced laws are not adhered to by a sometimes sizable proportion of the public and once enforcement is seen to be lacking, some drivers can take this to extremes and authorities must decide how to regain control.