The rapid evolution of technology used by drivers has increased the complexity of the driving task and introduced new sources of distraction, necessitating the development of distracted driving legislation that keeps pace with these changes. As such, this study examined drivers’ views of a more comprehensive, technology-neutral approach to distracted driving rules, which extends beyond mobile phone use to include portable devices, in-built and mounted systems, and wearable devices. Guided by an extended Value-Belief-Norm theory, a policy acceptance model was developed and validated in assessing public support and acceptability of more comprehensive distracted driving legislation, examining how general and normative beliefs, as well as policy-specific perceptions, influence drivers’ acceptability, and identifying demographic differences in acceptability and its underlying factors. A sample of 494 drivers who reside in Queensland, Australia, participated in an online survey, which included both quantitative and open-ended questions. Findings revealed a relatively strong support for the proposed rules. Structural Equation Modelling identified personal norms, social norms, perceived fairness, and perceived effectiveness as significant predictors of acceptability, with the proposed policy acceptance model explaining 76.6% of the variance in acceptability. Group comparisons revealed that young drivers and males reported lower levels of perceived freedom, while those with greater familiarity with distracted driving reported higher levels of personal norms and problem awareness. Qualitative responses indicated that most participants viewed the proposed rules as more effective than current legislation, especially in addressing emerging technological distractions. However, concerns about enforcement, clarity, and the need for educational efforts were also raised. • Developed a policy acceptance model on technology-neutral distracted driving rules • Conducted a survey of 494 Queensland drivers on rule acceptability and perceptions • Personal/social norms, fairness, and effectiveness predicted acceptability • Young drivers and males reported lower perceived freedom • Relatively strong support, but concerns on enforcement, clarity, and education emerged
Rejali et al. (Fri,) studied this question.