Exploring How Mobile Technologies Impact

Exploring How
Mobile Technologies
Impact Pedestrian Safety
April 2014
NYC Media Lab Research Brief
Prepared for AT&T
by the Integrated Digital Media program
at the Polytechnic School of Engineering
of New York University
Research team:
Nikki Zeichner
Phoenix Perry
Miranda Sita
Laura Barbera
Tim Nering
This paper was prepared for AT&T as part of a NYC Media Lab Open Seed Project with NYU
Polytechnic School of Engineering’s Integrated Digital Media Program.
Launched by a consortium including the New York City Economic Development Corporation, NYU
and Columbia University, NYC Media Lab is a public-private partnership that connects companies
with university R&D, faculty and students. AT&T is a charter corporate member of NYC Media Lab.
For more information, visit http://nycmedialab.org.
Cover photo by Jeremy Cox of Flickr (jeremywcox).
For more information, visit http://nycmedialab.org.
Table of contents
Summary
1
The Intersection of Mobile Device Use and Pedestrian Safety
2
What Sets New York City Apart
4
New York City’s Response
5
Research on Mobile Device Use by Distracted Pedestrians
8
Opportunities to Improve Traffic Safety with Mobile Technologies
9
Conclusion
14
References
15
Summary
has
This paper provides software and mobile device
skyrocketed, changing the way people behave in many
developers with an overview of recent applications of
environments, including on city streets. Much of the
mobile technologies addressing traffic safety. It also
emphasis of governments, advocacy organizations,
spotlights potential solutions mobile technologies can
researchers and technologists concerned with the
contribute to improving safety conditions on New York
safety implications of mobile device use in traffic has
City streets.
Consumer
adoption
of
mobile
devices
rightly focused on the behavior of drivers, and, in
particular, the dangers of texting while driving.
This paper outlines the impact of vehicle-pedestrian
crashes, provides a synopsis of the city’s approach to
This paper provides software
and mobile device developers
with an overview of recent
applications of mobile
technologies addressing
traffic safety.
traffic safety, examines research on hazards of mobile
device use by distracted pedestrians, and reviews
technologies leveraging smart phones and wireless
networks that aim to empower pedestrians and reduce
driver distraction.
The research team approached smart phone use and
traffic safety from a technological perspective: How might
mobile technologies make pedestrians in urban areas
safer, especially to mitigate smart phone distraction and
to increase pedestrians’ environmental connectedness
Research examining texting while driving is bountiful
and what opportunities exist for technological solutions
and the findings unequivocally demonstrate hazards.
to complement the efforts of governments, advocacy
More recently, there is also a growing body of research
organizations and businesses to reduce injuries and
and evidence that supports the claim that pedestrians
deaths.
may be increasing traffic safety risks by walking in
traffic while focused on their smart phone.
1
The Intersection of Mobile Device Use and Pedestrian Safety
The number of mobile phones in the U.S. has
cited by the New York City Police Department as the
increased from 340,000 in 1985 to 302.9 million in
cause of about a third of all crashes, beating the next
2010.1
category by more than 2 to 1.4
Rapidly increasing mobile phone use has
been linked with dangerous, distracted driving.
According to the U.S. Center for Disease Control and
Prevention, nine people are killed and more than 1,060
are injured every day in the U.S. due to distracted
driving.2 The CDC defines three types of distraction
– visual, manual, and cognitive.
It recognizes
that texting while driving is “especially dangerous
because it combines all three types of distraction.”
“Driver inattention” was cited
by NYPD as the cause of
about a third of all crashes,
beating the next category by
3
While fatalities attributed to texting while driving
more than 2 to 1.
is imprecise, the category “driver inattention” was
160
< 16
511
16 - 20
21 - 25
1003
Age Group
26 - 30
453
314
359
342
36 - 40
310
41 - 45
562
404
46 - 50
51 - 55
310
91
15
452
358
137
56 - 60
> 65
1254
556
305
31 - 35
61 - 65
1429
985
287
271
493
Pedestrians
Drivers
National Estimates of Cases
Figure 1: CPSC National Estimates (total from 2004-2010) of injuries related to cellphone use by pedestrians (n=5482) and drivers (n=5879).5
2
In 2011, Transportation Alternatives and the Drum
To reduce injuries from distracted driving, states
Major Institute for Public Policy co-authored a report,
and the federal government have passed legislation
“Walking in Traffic Violence: Pervasiveness of Motor
banning phone use while driving.10 In 2010, the Federal
Vehicle Crashes with Pedestrians in New York City,”
Motor Carrier Safety Administration banned commercial
to draw attention to the overall dangers faced by
vehicle drivers from texting while driving.11 And, in
pedestrians.6 The report argued that, in New York
2009 AT&T launched the “It Can Wait” campaign to
City, pedestrian injuries and fatalities due to crashes
spread awareness about the dangers of mobile device
with cars remain high compared to rates in similar,
use while driving and to encourage teen drivers to
densely populated cities. “New Yorkers are twice as
sign the “It Can Wait” pledge. Sprint, T-Mobile and
likely to be killed in a car crash as in Berlin, Tokyo,
Verizon joined AT&T’s effort, which has yielded over 4
or Paris.”7 The New York State Department of Motor
million pledges and a widespread education campaign
Vehicles reports little change in recent years in the
throughout high schools across the United States.
rates of pedestrian injuries and deaths in New York
Working together, these companies have deployed
City resulting from crashes with cars, with a significant
social media, multimedia content production and mobile
increase in the number of crashes in 2013 (Table 1).
apps to maximize the campaign’s reach.12
Pedestrian casualties from car crashes in NYC
YEAR
CRASHES
INJURIES
DEATHS
2006
10,958
10,744
156
2007
11,035
10,859
135
2008
10,973
10,722
151
2009
10,715
10,433
158
2010
11,266
11,084
149
2011
10,794
10,660
143
2012
10,925
10,809
135
2013
14,8457
Table 1: Car/Pedestrian Crashes, 2006-20138
3
Not released
What Sets New York City Apart
New York City is the only U.S. city where over half of
all households do not own a car.13 With the exception
of Portland, Oregon, pedestrians in New York City are
safer here than in any other major city in the United
States.14
Despite the city’s prominent pedestrian
culture and history of strategic transportation planning
designed to empower pedestrians and ensure their
safety, pedestrian safety remains a critical issue. In
2012, New York City experienced 10,925 crashes
between pedestrians and cars.15
of
For victims ages 7 to 17, the numbers climbed to more
Transportation reported a reduction in traffic fatalities
than 10 percent of pedestrians and nearly 30 percent of
of 35% from 2001 to 2012, a recent study of vehicle-
cyclists.”17 According to American College of Surgeons,
pedestrian crashes between 2007 and 2010 by
“nearly one in five patients ages 13 to 17 were sending
researchers at Hunter College suggests that injuries
text messages, listening to music, or otherwise distracted
of this kind in New York City are, in fact, grossly
by a mobile device at the time of their accident.”18
Although
the
New
York
City
Department
underreported, and that pedestrians face more danger
than the numbers may indicate.16
Researchers have begun to investigate the direct
relationship between mobile device use and pedestrian
injuries in New York City. In one study, researchers found
that of the 1,400 pedestrian and cyclist injuries treated at
New York’s Bellevue Hospital Center between 2008 and
2011, “[a]bout 8 percent of both pedestrians and cyclists
said they were injured while using an electronic device,
including a cellphone or music player.
4
New York City’s Response
The relatively consistent number of pedestrian injuries
Again, in September 2012, in response to growing
and fatalities in New York City between 2006 and
awareness of pedestrian distraction, the New York City
2012 comes despite the Bloomberg administration’s
Department of Transportation launched the LOOK!
numerous pedestrian-friendly projects, programs, and
Safety Campaign.
research around traffic and pedestrian safety in the
messages on crosswalks, this campaign aimed to
City during this time. 19
influence pedestrian behavior by providing visual cues
In August 2010, Mayor Bloomberg, along with then
Through outdoor advertising and
at intersections.
City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and then
DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, issued a
comprehensive study of street safety in New York,
based on data gathered pursuant to the amendment
of Local Law 11 in April 2008.20 This report examined
7,000 vehicle-pedestrian crash records and concluded
that “…speeding, running red lights and failure to
yield” were main causes of serious pedestrian crashes
with vehicles in New York City.21
LOOK! Campaign Message, 2012.22
Based on these findings, the DOT undertook
The campaign was modeled after a similar campaign
numerous steps to calm traffic in neighborhoods
in London that was designed to alert tourists to traffic
in midtown Manhattan.
Left-turn visibility was
hazards.23 The London campaign, like New York City’s,
improved, countdown signals were installed at
deployed simple, clear messaging to mitigate risk-taking
pedestrian crossings, and streets and intersections
behavior on the part of pedestrians when in proximity
were comprehensively re-engineered with the goal of
to vehicular traffic.
improving pedestrian safety. The city at this time also
London campaign focused on a series of key findings
launched an anti-speeding campaign to raise safety
around “risk-taking” behavior. In its research, Transport
awareness among motorists and restricted traffic in
for London, distinguished between behaviors based on
some residential neighborhoods to a 20 mile-per-hour
intent and perception of risk. They found that “intentional
speed limit.
risk-taking as a pedestrian is… more likely if people
5
Contextual research around the
do not believe that there is a high likelihood of any
These intentional, high-risk actions are highly influenced
undesirable consequences happening. The end result is
by social cues, e.g. tourist areas where jaywalking
that they perceive their behavior as being relatively low
behavior is highly present, or safety barriers are routinely
risk.”24
ignored.
Intentional
Crossing
between
Ignoring
barriers
Crossing
stationary
traffic
on red
Crossing
Crossing
between
moving
traffic
halfway
Low perceived risk
High perceived risk
First step
free
Talking
with friends
Taking
Avoiding
obstructions
a photo
Herding
Unintentional
Figure 2: Intentionality and Perception of Risk. Transport for London Report.25
6
LOOK! complements other DOT campaigns on road
safety that have been launched since 2006 (“Heads
Up”, “That’s Why It’s 30”, “You The Man”).
26
These
campaigns are intended to work in tandem with
• Crossing countdown signals;
• Barriers at high-risk intersections;
• Road engineering for maximum bilateral visibility;
engineering-oriented approaches recommended by the
• Multi-modal solutions (e.g., auditory feedback as a
2010 DOT action plan, including approaches such as:
crossing indicator).27
As a candidate for office in 2013, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed
Mayor Bill de Blasio took
office and reaffirmed
his intention to make
pedestrian safety
a “central focus” of
his newly-elected
administration and quickly
produced a “Vision Zero”
Action Plan that outlined a
series of policy initiatives
directly aimed at improving
pedestrian safety on New
York City streets.
onto the “Vision Zero” traffic safety project to reduce traffic
fatalities by 100%.28 Weeks after he took office, and prompted
by widely publicized pedestrian fatalities in early 2014, the
Mayor reaffirmed his intention to make pedestrian safety
a “central focus” of his newly-elected administration29 and
quickly produced a “Vision Zero” Action Plan that outlined
a series of policy initiatives directly aimed at improving
pedestrian safety on New York City streets.30
The “Vision Zero” proposals supplement the 2010 New York
City DOT plan with additional law enforcement initiatives,
legislative measures, engineering proposals, and city
government response protocols, as well as a new series of
outreach, education, and engagement initiatives to improve
pedestrian safety. The proposal calls for a permanent task
force in the Mayor’s Office of Operations to synchronize and
promote these initiatives. The “Vision Zero” plan promotes
a multi-agency, synergistic effort to combat pedestrian
injury and fatality through a wide variety of comprehensive
mitigation strategies.
7
Research on Mobile Device Use by Distracted Pedestrians
As vehicle-pedestrian crashes are overwhelmingly
proposed New York law that would have made it a crime to
attributed to driver-caused hazards such as speeding,
“enter and cross a crosswalk while engaging in the use of an
intoxication and distraction,31 policymakers, traffic
electronic device.”
safety advocates, and mobile carriers have rightly
• A 2009 study in the Journal of the American Academy
focused on mobile phone use and texting as a lethal
of Pediatrics examined the influence of talking on a cell
source of distraction for drivers. Yet, pedestrian smart
phone for pedestrian injury risk in youths, and found that
phone distraction has recently attracted attention and
participants aged 10-11 were less attentive to traffic, did not
led researchers to explore the relationship between
leave a safe amount of time to cross, and experienced more
pedestrian mobile device use and injury. Some recent
collisions and close calls when using a cell phone than test
research includes:
subjects who did not.33
• A 2007 study from researchers including Jack
• A 2011 study by researchers in the Department of
Nasar, then of Brooklyn Polytechnic, looked at
Psychology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham
mobile phones, distracted attention and pedestrian
considered how talking on the phone, texting and listening
safety. They found that “mobile phone users crossed
to music impact crossing the street, using college students
unsafely into oncoming traffic significantly more”
as test subjects.34 This study found in particular that “texting,
than other observed groups. The study found that
which involves not only communication interchanges but
“For pedestrians as with drivers, cognitive distraction
also reading and typing, may be more cognitively distracting
from mobile phone use reduces situation awareness,
and demanding than talking.” It also found that all of these
increases
behaviors distract from the crossing environment and lead
unsafe
behavior,
putting
pedestrians
at greater risk for accidents.”32 This study cites a
to higher risk of injury.
8
• A similar 2012 study examined the ways in which
They sampled injury reports from 100 national hospitals and
gait velocity and trajectory changed for walkers when
produced estimates of pedestrian mobile phone use-related
interacting with the screen on a mobile device.35 This
injuries reported at 3,800 hospitals throughout the U.S.38 They
small-scale experiment measured the movement of
found that the number of pedestrian injuries due to pedestrian
33 university students as students texted on smart
mobile phone use had increased from 506 injuries in 2004 to
devices while moving through an obstacle course.
1506 injuries in 2010.
The participants who texted while walking moved
same rate, the researchers predicted over 3,000 injuries per
33 percent slower and deviated from their intended
year by 2015.39 Researchers also noted that injuries are likely
course 61 percent more often than those who did not
greater than reported by the NEISS data. “Many people who
use their phones.36
suffer an injury may not go to the emergency room; they may
• A 2013 study by researchers at Ohio State
University examines the causal relationship between
pedestrian use of mobile devices and pedestrian
injuries.
37
These authors use data from 2004 to 2010
from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System
If injuries continue to increase at the
go to their primary care doctor, not go to a doctor, may not
report the cell phone as the cause, or may die (newspapers
report incidents of pedestrian mobile phone users getting hit
and killed by cars, busses and trains).”40 Sixteen to twentyfive year olds were most impacted by distracted walking.41
(NEISS), a database of hospital data maintained by
the U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission.
Opportunities to Improve Traffic Safety with Mobile
Technologies
New smartphone-based approaches to improve traffic
safety using technological and design-based solutions
New smartphone-based approaches
have the potential to reduce smart phone distraction
to improving traffic safety [have]
and increase pedestrian safety in urban areas. Some
solutions complement increased enforcement and
the potential to reduce smart phone
penalties for using mobile devices while driving by
distraction and increase pedestrian
integrating the mobile device into the city’s dynamic
safety in urban areas.
street traffic ecosystem.
9
These technologies have the potential to increase
environmental
awareness,
yet
each
presents
opportunities and shortcomings:
• Apps that rely on camera technology to increase
ability to see ahead;
Kinect-based technologies in their
current formats may actually increase
distraction by demanding more focus
on the device.
• Velocity-detectors that silence alerts from incoming
texts when a smart phone is in motion;
• Apps and wearable devices deploying Natural
User Interface principles;42
• Sensor-based technologies to warn pedestrians of
oncoming traffic;43
• Enabling communication between mobile devices
and vehicles;
By enabling the user to see more, camera-based and
motion-sensing Kinect-based technologies in their
current formats may actually increase distraction by
demanding more focus on the device. (Kinect is a
motion-controlled technology used in gaming consoles
and smart phones.) For example, Type N Walk44, and
Walk N Text for Android45, use a mobile device’s
camera to replace the full screen background image
on a smart phone with live video of the environment
ahead. The texting surface is displayed on top of the
live video. Scientists at the University of Manitoba
used Kinect to create CrashAlert, a tablet that warns
texters of obstacles that are within six feet.46 Critics of
these apps note that pedestrians still must look up to
see obstacles. 47
10
Velocity-sensing technology can effectively reduce
distraction for drivers but cannot distinguish between
drivers and passengers in a vehicle, nor can it ascertain
smart phone users riding public transportation. AT&T’s
DriveMode48 app for Android and Blackberry uses a
smart phone’s velocimeter to detect motion greater
than 25 mile-per-hour. When exceeding this speed, the
app sends a customizable auto-reply away message
in response to incoming texts and email messages
and can be set to disable the phone’s touch screen
and audio alerts. This approach is positive since it
eliminates sensory cues that invite distraction but
users may avoid the inconvenience of disabling the
app to adjust to diverse traffic conditions encountered
in urban areas.
Velocity-sensing technology can
effectively reduce distraction for
drivers but cannot distinguish
between drivers and passengers
in a vehicle, nor can it ascertain
smart phone users riding public
transportation.
Another
are
To better understand users and the functionality that
connected with their surroundings is deploying
users expect of the smart phone interface, developers
Natural
principles
should consider four elements that influence design:
so the smart phone interface does not interfere
(1) the user; (2) the task; (3) the device; and (4) the
with
environment. 49 Instead of the device separating people from
11
approach
User
walking
to
Interface
and
ensure
(NUI)
pedestrians
design
negotiating
intersections.
their surroundings, NUI challenges developers to
understand why people use their devices in certain
environments then create interfaces with fewer
distractions and potential impairments to safety.50
NUI solutions can help pedestrians stay alert and use
their smart phone without engaging with the mobile
device itself by incorporating wearable devices that
extend smart phone functionality to apparel and
gesture based technologies that require swipes and
not keystrokes.
NUI solutions can help
pedestrians stay alert and
use their smart phone by
incorporating wearable
devices that extend smart
phone functionality to
apparel and gesture based
technologies.
12
Perhaps the most promising traffic safety technology
under development deploys wireless communications
to
directly
connect
drivers
with
pedestrians.
General Motors developed vehicle technology that
Vehicle-to-pedestrian
technologies [aim] to tap
communicates with smart phones within 200 yards
existing wireless networks,
using the WiFi Direct protocol. The system is integrated
network connected
with vehicle sensors, and when triggered, will alert the
driver to oncoming pedestrians.51 Honda is developing
similar vehicle and smart phone linking systems using
dedicated short-range communications (DSRC).52
These vehicle-to-pedestrian technologies originated
with the U.S. Department of Transportation Connected
Vehicle research and development initiative53 that
aims to tap existing wireless networks, network
connected vehicles and smart phones to give drivers
a “360-degree awareness of hazards and situations
they cannot even see.”54
13
vehicles and smart
phones to give drivers a
“360-degree awareness of
hazards and situations they
cannot even see.”
Conclusion
The rapid ascent of smart phones in every corner of
daily life has positively and adversely changed the
way people move through urban spaces. For drivers,
using a smart phone in a vehicle is irresponsible
and increasingly regarded by policy markers and
the public as criminal. Pedestrians, whose life can
depend on the behavior of drivers, are unquestionably
safer at New York City intersections when they heed
the New York City DOT’s advice and LOOK! Yet,
as researchers and most smart phone users know,
despite mounting evidence of the hazardous impact
Pedestrians, whose life can
depend on the behavior of
drivers, are unquestionably
safer at New York City
intersections when they
heed the New York City
DOT’s advice and LOOK!
of smart phone use in traffic, mobile devices can
prove irresistible, and for use by pedestrians on
streets, may demand natural user interfaces that
common denominator among pedestrians, cyclists and
enable pedestrians to stay alert and focused on their
drivers alike. These technologies deserve further refinement,
surroundings. Conversely, smart phone technology
demand new innovation and depend on public acceptance
itself may facilitate improved traffic safety when
and wide-scale adoption for the promise of technological
integrated with the diverse ecosystem of New York
smart phone based solutions to meaningfully contribute to
City streets since the smart phone is frequently a
reducing traffic injuries and fatalities.
14
References
The Wireless Association. Pedestrian Injuries Due to Mobile Phone Use in Public Spaces citing CTIA. n.p., 2011. Web. <http://
facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/jnasar/crpinfo/research/AAP3092Accidents_Final2013.pdf>
1
2
Center for Disease Control. “Distracted Driving.” CDC, n.d. Web. <http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/distracted_driving/>
3
Ibid.
New York City Mayor’s Office (New York). Mayor Bloomberg, Speaker Quinn and Transportation Commissioner Sadik-Khan Release
City’s Most Comprehensive Pedestrian Safety Study to Date and Announce Installation of 1,500 Pedestrian Countdown Signals Across
the City. PR-356-10, 2010. Web. <http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc_ped_safety_study_action_plan.pdf >
4
Consumer Products Safety Commission. National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) Dataset. CPSC, 2013. Web. <http://
www.cpsc.gov/en/Research--Statistics/NEISS-Injury-Data/>
5
Transportation Alternatives. Walking in Traffic Violence: Pervasiveness of Motor Vehicle Crashes with Pedestrians in New York City.
n.p., 2011. Web. <http://transalt.org/files/news/reports/2011/Community_Board_Traffic_Violence_Report.pdf>
6
7
Ibid.
Aaron, Brad. “Bratton’s Bad Data on Pedestrian Injuries Won’t Get Us to Vision Zero.” Streetsblog 16 Jan. 2014, Web. <http://www.
streetsblog.org/2014/01/16/brattons-bad-data-on-pedestrian-injuries-wont-get-us-to-vision-zero/>
8
9
Transportation Alternatives. Walking in Traffic Violence.
10
New York. Use of mobile telephones. New York, §1225-c. Web. <http://www.safeny.ny.gov/phon-vt.htm>
National Highway and Transportation Safety Administration. “Regulations.” NHTSA, n.d. Web. <http://www.distraction.gov/content/
dot-action/regulations.html>
11
12
AT&T. It Can Wait. n.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.itcanwait.com>
Office of Transportation Policy and Strategy, NYS Department of Transportation. “New York Household Travel Patterns: A Comparative Analysis.” US DOT, 2001. Web. <http://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub4859.pdf>
13
NYC Department of Transportation. The New York City Pedestrian Safety Study and Action Plan. NYC DOT, 2010. Web. <http://www.
nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/nyc_ped_safety_study_action_plan.pdf>
14
New York State Department of Motor Vehicles. “Summary of New York City Motor Vehicle Crashes”. NYS DMV, n.d. Web. <http://
dmv.ny.gov/sites/default/files/legacy_files/statistics/2012nyc.pdf>
15
Tuckel, Peter, and Milczarski , William. Pedestrian-Cyclist Accidents in New York State: 2007 – 2010. Hunter College, CUNY, September 2011. Web. <http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/communications/repository/files/Pedestrian%20Cyclist%20Accidents_3.pdf>
16
Flegenheimer, Matt. “Crosswalks in New York Are Not Havens, Study Finds.” April 2, 2013. New York Times. Retreived at: http://
www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/nyregion/study-details-injuries-to-pedestrians-and-cyclists-in-new-york-city.html
17
American College of Surgeons (2012). “Pedestrian accidents are more severe for seniors and more preventable for young people:
Trauma surgeons examine injury differences, supervision, and mobile device use in pedestrian collisions with motor vehicles.” Press
Release, October 1, 2012.
18
19
15
Ibid.
New York City (New York). A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to pedestrian safety.
[New York, NY:] City Council [2008]. Web. <http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=447127&GUID=F8B7D92CD55C-4BC6-B102-453292D61CA5>
20
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
Transport for London (2010). “Visitor Road Safety.” Retrieved from: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/visitor-pedestrian-safety-final-report.pdf
23
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid.
26
DOT Press Release on “LOOK!”. Retrieved at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/pr2012/pr12_46.shtml
DOT, 2010. “The New York City Pedestrian Safety Study & Action Plan.” Retrieved at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/
nyc_ped_safety_study_action_plan.pdf
27
28
City of New York. “Vision Zero”. NYC. n.d. Web. <http://www.nyc.gov/html/visionzero/pages/home/home.html>
Goodman, David J., and Flegenheimer, Matt. “De Blasio Announces Steps to Reduce Traffic Deaths.” New York Times 16 Jan.
2014. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/16/nyregion/de-blasio-announces-steps-to-reduce-traffic-deaths.html>
29
City of New York, 2014. “Vision Zero Action Plan.” Retrieved at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/visionzero/pdf/nyc-vision-zero-action-plan.
pdf
30
Aaron, Brad. STREETSBLOG NYC. Retrieved at: http://www.streetsblog.org/2013/03/18/dot-speeding-the-leading-cause-of-nyc-traffic-deaths-in-2012/
31
Hecht, Peter, Nasar, Jack, and Wener, Richard. “Mobile phones, distracted attention, and pedestrian safety.” Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 2008. 40:69-75
32
Stavrinos, Despina, Byington, Katherine, and Schwebel, David. “Effect of Cell Phone Distraction on Pediatric Pedestrian Injury Risk.”
Pediatrics, 2009. 123:179
33
Schwebel, David, Stavrinos, Despina, Byington, Katherine, et al. “Distraction and pedestrian safety: How talking on the phone, texting and listening impact crossing the street.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2012. 45:266-271
34
Lamberg, Eric M., and Lisa M. Muratori. “Cell Phones Change the Way We Walk.” Gait & Posture, Volume 35, Issue 4 pp 688 – 690
(2012) Retrieved at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22226937
35
36
Ibid.
Nasar, Jack, and Troyer, Derek. “Pedestrian Injuries Due to Mobile Phone Use in Urban Spaces.” Accident Analysis and Prevention
21 Mar. 2013. Web. <http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/jnasar/crpinfo/research/AAP3092Accidents_Final2013.pdf>
37
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
40
Ibid.
41
Ibid.
16
Wigdor, Daniel and Dennis Wixon. “Brave NUI World: Designing Natural User Interfaces for Touch and Gesture.” Burlington: 2011.
42
See WalkSafe, an app developed by researchers at Dartmouth College and University of Bologna that uses the device’s camera to
identify oncoming traffic and sends text or vibration warnings. Grifantini, Kristina. “Smart-phone App Warns Pedestrians of Oncoming
Cars.” November 28, 2011. MIT Technology Review. See also CrashAlert, which relies on Kinect technology to warn texting pedestrians of objects ahead. Soper, Taylor. “This App Uses Kinect Technology to Prevent You from Running into Things While Texting.” May
31, 2013. GeekWire.
43
“Head’s Up! Texting and Walking: There’s an App for That. Gajitz. Retrieved at: http://gajitz.com/heads-up-texting-and-walkingtheres-an-app-for-that/
44
Ibid.
45
Danigelis, Alyssa. “Crash Alert App Clears Way to Walk and Text.” Discovery News, April 26, 2013. Retrieved at: http://news.discovery.com/tech/apps/crashalert-app-clears-way-to-walk-and-text-130426.htm
46
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
Blake, Joshua. “Introduction to Natural User Interfaces (NUI) and Kinect.” Retrieved at http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/k4wdev/
Introduction-to-Natural-User-Interfaces-NUI-and-Kinect.
49
Lim, Ji Jung and Cary Feria. “Visual Search on a Mobile Device while Walking” (2012) Master’s Thesis. Paper 4145, Lamberg, Eric
M., and Lisa M. Muratori. “Cell Phones Change the Way We Walk.” vGait & Posture, Volume 35, Issue 4 pp 688 – 690 (2012).
50
See Vehicle-to-Pedestrian “system that alerts drivers to the presence of pedestrians, cyclists, road construction workers and others
who have a high chance of coming in contact with a moving vehicle.” Newcomb, Doug. “How Your Smartphone Could Stop a Car From
Running You Over.” July 27, 2012. Wired.
51
See Vehicle-to-Pedestrian, which “uses a smartphone’s GPS and dedicated short range communications (DSRC) to warn drivers
when a pedestrian steps out from behind a parked car or other obstruction. A light flashes on the dashboard to tell the driver of an approaching pedestrian, while the hapless walker gets an alert on their smartphone.” Lavrinc, Damon. “Honda Thinks Smartphones Can
Save Pedestrians From Bad Drivers.” September 3, 2013. Wired.
52
Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. “Connected Vehicle.” US DOT, 2014.
Web. <http://www.its.dot.gov/safety_pilot/index.htm>
53
54
Ibid.
17

Download Report