Assessing the Ghanaian driver's susceptibility to distraction engagement

Sam, Enoch F. · 2025 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.55329/aodw5139

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the susceptibility of Ghanaian drivers to distraction engagement, addressing a critical gap in traffic safety research within low- and middle-income countries. Despite Ghana’s 2012 regulations prohibiting mobile phone use while driving, driver inattention remains the second leading cause of traffic fatalities and injuries. The research aims to identify the forms, instances, and predictors of distraction among private and commercial/professional drivers to inform targeted interventions. The study specifically examines voluntary distractions (deliberate engagement) and involuntary distractions (automatic attention capture), utilizing the Susceptibility to Driver Distraction Questionnaire (SDDQ) to assess underlying psychological and social factors. The methodology involved a survey of 257 licensed drivers (157 commercial/professional and 100 private) recruited via social media, personal contacts, and bus terminals in Accra between November and December 2023. Participants completed the SDDQ, which measures six constructs: self-reported distraction engagement, attitude, perceived control, injunctive norms, descriptive norms, and involuntary distraction. Additionally, participants assessed their likelihood of using mobile phones across four specific driving scenarios varying in complexity: busy dual-lane highways, rural roads, urban roads with heavy traffic, and motorways with light traffic. Data were analyzed using bivariate correlations, independent samples t-tests, and hierarchical multiple regression to identify predictors of distraction. Results indicated that self-reported distraction engagement was positively correlated with voluntary distraction facilitators, such as positive attitudes toward distraction and high perceived control, but negatively correlated with involuntary distraction. Significant differences emerged based on driver type and context; private drivers were more likely to engage in manual distractions like adjusting in-vehicle technology, while commercial drivers showed higher susceptibility to auditory distractions. Drivers reported a higher likelihood of mobile phone use in cognitively less demanding contexts, such as rural roads and urban slowdowns, compared to busy highways. Hierarchical regression revealed that gender, age, past mobile-phone-related crash experiences, driving context, attitude, injunctive norms, and involuntary distraction were significant predictors, with the final model explaining 49.2% of the variance in distraction engagement. The findings confirm the utility of the SDDQ in predicting distraction behaviors and highlight the importance of context-specific analysis. The study demonstrates that distraction is not uniform across driver types or environments, with voluntary engagement driven by social norms and perceived control, while involuntary distraction relates to external stimuli. These insights suggest that effective interventions must address both the psychological drivers of voluntary distraction and the environmental factors that trigger involuntary attention shifts. The research underscores the need for tailored safety measures in Ghana, particularly targeting the high prevalence of distraction in low-complexity driving scenarios and among specific driver demographics.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• visual
• mobile phones
• external distraction
• distraction detection algorithms
• temporal
• sex gender

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Empirical Findings: observational prevalence
• Theoretical Contribution: conceptual framework, theory or model