Cyclists’ phone use can cause distractions and impose risks towards traffic safety. To prevent phone-related distractions, the Netherlands introduced a ban on handheld (HH) phone use for cyclists in July 2019. The effects of traffic rules on phone use and their underlying mechanisms are, however, uncertain. Comparing survey results from the Netherlands before (N = 553) and after (N = 484) the ban, using Denmark (before N = 568, after N = 519) as comparison group, this study explores whether introducing a ban is associated with changes in phone use, traffic rule beliefs, perceived risk, sense of guilt, and perceived annoyance. Comparison of phone function use before and after the Dutch ban revealed a significant decrease in the proportion using HH phone for conversation, while there was no change for other functions. In Denmark, proportions remained stable for all functions. Changes in the Netherlands possibly correspond to specific phone functions characteristics, e.g., how effortless one can pause and resume the function. The results additionally identified an increase in correct traffic rule identification, sense of guilt for HH phone use, and perceived annoyance, while there was no significant change in perceived risk of HH phone use. The study found that banning HH phone use was associated with increase in correct rule identification, but only to limited changes in HH phone use. Banning HH phone use might have greater effects in changing behaviours over time as a result of social mechanisms related to changes in sense of guilt and perceived annoyance.

@en

Phone use is likely to distract cyclists and possibly increase crash risk. Therefore, handheld phone use among cyclists is forbidden by law in some countries, even though cyclists use compensatory strategies to attempt to mitigate distractions and related effects. Both demographic, environmental, and psychological factors have been associated with cyclists’ phone use. This study extends the existing literature by including traffic rule beliefs as an explanatory measure in predicting cyclists’ handheld phone use and additionally explores how well cyclists know these rules in different legislative contexts. Online questionnaire responses were collected in 2019 among 1055 cyclists living in Denmark (N = 568), where handheld phone use for cyclists was forbidden, and in the Netherlands (N = 487), where it was legal. Responses on phone use, traffic rule knowledge, cycling behaviour, demographic, and psychological measures were used to identify factors contributing to the likelihood of handheld phone use in three regression models; one for all respondents and one for each country. In the combined model, believing there are no rules on handheld phone use increased the likelihood of handheld phone use while cycling. Other significant factors were subjective norm, perceived behavioural difficulty, self-identity as a safe cyclist as well as demographic factors. The country-specific models found that male gender was only associated with more handheld phone use in the Netherlands, while believing there was no ban was only connected to an increase in the likelihood of using handheld phone in Denmark. Correct traffic rule knowledge was almost three times higher in Denmark, where handheld phone use was forbidden. The results identify subjective norms, potential overconfidence, and traffic rule awareness (when there is a ban) as relevant factors in reducing the likelihood of cyclists’ handheld phone use. Findings from country-specific models possibly point to a connection between culture and traffic rules. Future research should focus on underlying mechanisms and awareness of traffic rules.

@en

Background

The risk of being seriously injured or killed is higher for moped riders compared to drivers of other motor vehicles. Existing knowledge indicate that traffic violations are of key importance in young moped riders crash involvement. Within the frame of the Theory of Planned Behavior the purpose of this study was to identify beliefs underlying engagement in violations among adolescent moped riders.

Method

Data was collected by means of focus group interviews. 35 moped riders aged 15-17 participated. In total four focus groups were conducted. A moderator facilitated the focus group interviews using a semi-structured interview guide. Inspired by the procedure for belief elicitation studies the interview guide included key words to ensure elicitation of the behavioural beliefs underlying engagement in traffic violations (advantages/disadvantages), normative beliefs (persons approving/disapproving engagement in violations) and control beliefs (barriers/facilitators). The interviews were transcribed and the analysis was supported by coding in Atlas.ti.8.

Results

Five categories of violations were identified (illegal maneuvers, impaired riding, wrong location, lack of vehicle maintenance, non-use of mandatory safety equipment). With regard to the underlying behavioural beliefs a distinction between direct advantages (e.g. saving time, fun, convenience) and indirect advantages (e.g. avoid maintenance costs, avoid involving parents) was relevant. The disadvantages mainly included being apprehended by the police or being injured. Regarding the normative beliefs results revealed that engagement in violations was widely approved by friends as well as parents. Disapproval of violations was mainly believed to occur among persons disapproving moped riding. In relation to control beliefs police control was believed to be the key barrier. A strong belief in own ability to keep control of the moped despite engagement in violations was the key facilitator.

Conclusion

Engagement in violations among young moped riders provides several advantages and only few disadvantages. Violations are supported by friends and parents. Police control is a barrier for engagement in violations but compensated by a strong believe in own ability to handle the moped safely despite engagement in violations.@en

Introduction: Moped riders have a comparably high risk of getting seriously injured or killed in road traffic crashes. The moped is the first motor vehicle legally available to adolescents, but knowledge about young moped riders is limited. The few existing studies indicate that violations are a key factor in crash involvement. Method: Using the Theory of Planned Behaviour, the purpose of this study is to explore and identify key beliefs underlying engagement in violations among adolescent moped riders. We conducted four focus groups including 35 participating adolescents aged between 15 and 17. We analysed the data using a four step directed content analysis approach. Results: Engagement in violations was associated with affective and functional advantages such as excitement, saving time, convenience and avoidance of expenses and parent involvement. Level of approval varied across violations and was expressed directly as well as indirectly by both parents and peers. Strong beliefs in good riding skills and the ability to keep control over the moped facilitated engagement in violations. Actual and expected apprehension by the police was the main barrier, thus preventing engagement in violations. Conclusion: Advantages associated with engagement in violations, approval from peers, parents and general society, and a strong belief in the ability to avoid negative consequences facilitate engagement in violations among young moped riders. Inclusion of the identified beliefs in preventive measures is discussed.

@en