TRAFFIC SAFETY FACTS
Research Note

DOT HS 812 665

Summary of Statistical Findings

January 2019

Driver Electronic Device Use in 2017
Summary
Passenger vehicle driver handheld cell phone use decreased
from 3.3 percent in 2016 to 2.9 percent in 2017 (Figure 1), a
statistically significant decrease. The percentage of drivers speaking with visible headsets while driving decreased
from 0.5 percent in 2016 to 0.4 percent in 2017 (Figure 1); thiswas not a statistically significant decrease. Drivers’ visible
manipulation of handheld devices decreased from 2.1 percent in 2016 to 2.0 percent in 2017 (Figure 1); this was not a
statistically significant decrease. These results are from the

National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS), which
provides the only nationwide probability-based observed
data on driver electronic device use in the United States.
The NOPUS is conducted annually by the National Center
for Statistics and Analysis of the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration. The percentages provided in thisresearch note are interpreted as the percentage of drivers
nationwide at a typical daylight moment.

Figure 1

Percentage of Drivers Using
Electronic Devices While Driving

Driver Use of Electronic Devices, 2006–2017
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%

6.2%

6.0%
5.0%

4.8%

0.6%

0.7%

1.0%

4.9%

0.6%

0.9%

0.4%

0.6%

0.6%

0.6%

0.9%

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Handheld Cell Phone Use

4.8%

5.2%

NOPUS observes three types of driver electronic
device use while driving: “holding phones to theirears,” “speaking with visible headsets on,” and “visibly
manipulating handheld devices.” The results of theseobservations follow.

Drivers Holding Phones to Their Ears While
Driving
The percentage of drivers holding cell phones to their ears
while driving decreased from 3.3 percent in 2016 to 2.9 percent in 2017 (Table 1). This percentage is based on an esti-

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

2.2%

1.3%

1.5%

1.7%

0.6%

0.6%

0.5%

0.4%

2011

2012

2013

2014

Visible Headset Cell Phone Use

Results

4.3%
4.6%

3.8%

3.3%

2.2%

2.9%

2.1%

2.0%

0.6%

0.5%

0.4%

2015

2016

2017

Visible Manipulation of Handheld Devices

mated 415,953 passenger vehicles driven by people using
handheld cell phones at a typical daylight moment in 2017.
An estimated 5.3 percent of drivers were using some type ofphone, either handheld or hands-free, at a typical daylight
moment in 2017 (refer to the section Estimating Overall
Cell Phone Use, Both Handheld and Hands-Free for moredetails on this estimate).
The 2017 NOPUS found that handheld cell phone use continued to be higher among female drivers than male drivers(Figure 2). It also found that handheld cell phone use continued to be highest among 16- to 24-year-old drivers and lowest among drivers 70 and older (Figure 3).

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

2
Figure 2

Percentage of Drivers Holding
Phones to Their Ears While Driving

Driver Handheld Cell Phone Use by Gender, 2006–2017
Female

Male

12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%

8.0%

7.6%

5.7%
4.1%
2006

5.0%

2007

4.9%

2008

6.5%

6.2%

4.0%
2009

4.0%
2010

6.1%

3.9%
2011

6.2%
4.5%

2012

6.0%

5.1%

4.4%

3.8%

3.6%

3.6%

3.6%

3.5%

3.0%

2.4%

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

4.6%

4.2%

3.8%

Figure 3

Percentage of Drivers Holding
Phones to Their Ears While Driving

Driver Handheld Cell Phone Use by Age, 2006–2017
Age 16–24

Age 25–69

Age 70 and Older

12%
10%
8%
6%

8.3%
4.5%

8.8%

8.3%

6.3%

5.9%

7.6%

7.3%

5.0%

4.9%

6.5%
4.8%

4%
2%
0%

5.9%
5.4%

0.6%

1.0%

1.3%

0.9%

1.3%

1.6%

1.2%

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

5.9%

5.8%

4.7%
0.6%

4.3%
0.8%

4.0%
1.1%

3.4%
0.9%

3.0%
0.8%

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Drivers Speaking With Visible Headsets On While Driving
Table 2 shows the percentages of drivers speaking with­visible headsets on while driving in 2016 and 2017, by major
characteristics.
The percentage of drivers speaking with visible headsets
while driving decreased from 0.5 percent in 2016 to 0.4

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis­ ercent in 2017, as shown in Figure 1 and Table 2. For driversp
who appeared to be 16 to 24 years old, that estimate decreased
significantly from 1.0 percent in 2016 to 0.3 percent in 2017 asshown in Table 2 and Figure 4.

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

3
Figure 4

Percentage of Drivers Speaking With
Visible Headsets On While Driving

Drivers Speaking With Visible Headsets On by Age, 2006–2017
Age 16–24

Age 25–69

Age 70 and Older

2.0%
1.4%

1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%

0.9%

0.7%

0.6%

0.6%

0.6%

0.3%
2006

0.6%

0.1%
2007

0.6%

0.5%

0.1%
2008

0.2%

0.9%

2009

0.7%

0.7%

0.6%

0.7%

0.3%

0.3%

2010

2011

2012

0.7%

0.8%

0.4%

0.4%

2013

2014

1.0%
0.7%
0.5%
0.3%
2015

0.5%
0.5%

0.3%
0.2%

2016

2017

Note: Missing data points signify insufficient data to produce reliable estimates.

Drivers Visibly Manipulating Handheld Devices While Driving
The percentage of drivers visibly manipulating handheld
devices while driving decreased from 2.1 percent in 2016 to
2.0 percent in 2017 (Figure 1 and Table 3). Table 3 presents
the percentages of drivers visibly manipulating handheld
devices in 2016 and 2017 by major characteristics.
The 2017 NOPUS observed a significant increase in visible
manipulation of handheld electronic devices for drivers in

the Northeast, from 1.1 percent in 2016 to 2.8 percent in 2017
(Table 3).
Additionally, Figure 5 shows that since 2007, young drivers
16 to 24 years old have been observed manipulating electronic devices at higher rates than older drivers have been.

Figure 5

Drivers Visibly Manipulating Handheld Devices by Age, 2006–2017

Percentage of Drivers Visibly
Manipulating Handheld
Devices While Driving

Age 16–24

Age 25–69

Age 70 and Older

5.0%
4.8%

3.7%

4.0%
3.0%
1.7%

2.0%

1.0%

0.9%

1.1%

1.0%

0.5%

0.0%

0.4%

0.2%

0.4%

0.5%

2006

2007

2008

2009

0.6%

1.5%
0.8%
2010

1.1%

3.0%

2.9%

1.4%

1.6%

0.3%
2011

2012

2013

2.0%

0.1%
2014

4.9%

4.5%

2.1%

2.0%

0.5%

0.3%

2015

2016

3.9%

1.9%
0.7%
2017

Note: Missing data points signify insufficient data to produce reliable estimates.

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

4
Table 1The Percentage of Drivers Holding Phones to Their Ears While Driving, by Major Characteristics
Driver Group1
All Drivers6
Males
Females
Drivers by Age Group6
16–24
25–69
70 and Older
Drivers by Race6
White
Black
Other Races
Drivers on
Expressway Exit Ramps
Other Surface Streets
Drivers Traveling ThroughLight Precipitation
Light Fog
Clear Weather Conditions
Drivers ofPassenger Cars
Vans and SUVs
Pickup Trucks
Drivers in the
Northeast
MidwestSouth
West
Drivers in
Urban Areas
Rural Areas
Drivers Traveling During
Weekdays
Rush Hours
Non-Rush Hours
Weekends
Drivers With5
No Passengers
At Least One Passenger
Drivers With5
No Passengers
Passengers All Under Age 8
Passengers All 8 and Older
Some Passengers Under 8,
and Some 8 or Older2016% of Drivers
95%
Holding Phones
Confidence
to Ears2
Interval3
3.3%(2.9, 3.8)
3.0%
(2.5, 3.4)
3.8%
(3.3, 4.5)

2017
% of Drivers
95%
Holding Phones
Confidence
to Ears2
Interval3
2.9%(2.6, 3.3)
2.4%
(2.1, 2.8)
3.6%
(3.2, 4.2)

2016–2017 Change
95%
Change in
Confidence
Percentage7
Interval4-0.4(-0.7, -0.1)-0.5(-0.9, -0.2)-0.2(-0.7, 0.3)

P-Value5
0.01
0.01
0.41

4.2%
3.4%
0.9%

(3.3, 5.4)
(3.0, 3.9)
(0.5, 1.6)

3.8%
3.0%
0.8%

(3.1, 4.5)
(2.7, 3.4)
(0.4, 1.4)

-0.5
-0.4
-0.1

(-1.5, 0.6)(-0.7, -0.1)(-0.8, 0.5)

0.40
0.02
0.67

3.3%
4.6%
2.4%

(2.9, 3.8)
(3.5, 6.0)
(1.7, 3.3)

2.9%
4.3%
1.7%

(2.6, 3.3)
(3.2, 5.6)
(1.3, 2.2)

-0.4
-0.4
-0.7

(-0.7, -0.1)(-1.4, 0.7)(-1.4, 0.1)

0.01
0.51
0.09

3.3%
3.3%

(2.7, 4.1)
(2.8, 3.9)

2.5%
3.2%

(2.1, 3.0)
(2.7, 3.7)

-0.8
-0.1

(-1.3, -0.4)(-0.5, 0.2)

0.00
0.45

3.4%
2.5%
3.3%

(2.7, 4.2)
(1.2, 5.1)
(2.9, 3.8)

3.8%
1.4%
2.8%

(2.7, 5.4)
(0.6, 3.1)
(2.5, 3.2)

0.4
-1.1
-0.5

(-1.1, 1.9)(-2.8, 0.7)(-0.8, -0.2)

0.60
0.22
0.00

3.1%
3.3%
3.8%

(2.5, 3.8)
(2.9, 3.8)
(3.2, 4.6)

2.8%
2.8%
3.3%

(2.4, 3.2)
(2.5, 3.2)
(2.7, 4.0)

-0.3
-0.5
-0.6

(-0.9, 0.3)(-0.9, 0.0)(-1.3, 0.1)

0.29
0.05
0.10

1.9%
4.2%
3.9%
2.4%

(1.3, 2.9)
(3.4, 5.1)
(3.1, 5.0)
(1.6, 3.7)

1.9%
3.5%
3.5%
2.1%

(1.7, 2.3)
(2.9, 4.2)
(2.9, 4.3)
(1.4, 3.2)

0.0
-0.7
-0.4
-0.3

(-0.8, 0.9)(-1.1, -0.3)(-1.1, 0.2)(-0.9, 0.2)

0.95
0.00
0.17
0.24

3.3%
3.2%

(2.9, 3.9)
(2.6, 4.1)

3.0%
2.7%

(2.7, 3.3)
(2.0, 3.5)

-0.3
-0.6

(-0.7, 0.1)(-1.2, 0.1)

0.09
0.07

3.8%
3.8%
3.7%
2.0%

(3.3, 4.3)
(3.2, 4.4)
(3.2, 4.3)
(1.6, 2.6)

3.3%
3.4%
3.3%
1.8%

(2.9, 3.8)
(2.8, 4.1)
(2.8, 3.9)
(1.5, 2.1)

-0.4
-0.4
-0.4
-0.3

(-0.8, -0.1)(-0.9, 0.1)(-1.1, 0.2)(-0.8, 0.2)

0.02
0.13
0.18
0.22

4.2%
1.2%

(3.7, 4.8)
(1.0, 1.6)

3.5%
1.5%

(3.1, 4.0)
(1.2, 1.8)

-0.7
0.2

(-1.1, -0.3)(-0.2, 0.7)

0.00
0.34

4.2%
3.8%
0.9%

(3.7, 4.8)
(2.5, 5.9)
(0.7, 1.2)

3.5%
3.8%
1.2%

(3.1, 4.0)
(2.7, 5.4)
(0.9, 1.6)

-0.7
-0.1
0.2

(-1.1, -0.3)(-2.3, 2.2)(-0.2, 0.7)

0.00
0.96
0.35

1.5%

(0.7, 3.2)

1.9%

(0.9, 3.9)

0.4(-1.4, 2.2)

0.68

Drivers of passenger vehicles stopped at a stop sign or stoplight between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m.
The percentage of drivers holding a phone to their ears, based on the subjective assessments of roadside observers.
The Wilson Confidence Interval is used in the estimated percentages in the driver group (e.g., drivers in urban areas), which is in the form: {(2nEFFp + t2) ± t√(t2 + 4nEFFpq)}/(2(nEFF + t2)), where p is the estimated percentage of drivers holding phones to ears, nEFF = n/DEFF is the effective sample size (where n is the sample size and DEFF is thedesign effect), t = t(1–α/2)(df), is a multiplier from the t-distribution with df degrees of freedom, and q = 1 – p. For percentages, these endpoints are multiplied by 100.
4
The regular symmetric interval was used for the estimated change in percentage point, which is in the form: p ± t(1–α/2)(df)√v(p), where p is the estimated change inpercentage point, v(p) is its estimated variance, and t(1–α/2)(df) is a multiplier from the t-distribution with df degrees of freedom. The degrees of freedom used in 2017 isdifferent from that used in 2016.
5
A p-value of 0.05 or less indicates that there is a statistically significant difference (at the alpha=0.05 level) between the 2016 and 2017 estimates for the group in question,
indicated with bold type.
6
Age, gender, and racial classifications are based on the subjective assessments of roadside observers.
7
Belt use rate, 95 percent Confidence Interval, annual changes have been rounded to the nearest tenth. Annual changes have been computed based on unrounded estimatesand may not equal those based on displayed values.
Data Source: NOPUS, NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2016, 2017
1
2
3

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

5
Table 2The Percentage of Drivers Speaking With Visible Headsets on While Driving, by Major Characteristics
Driver Group1
All Drivers6
Males
Females
Drivers by Age Group6
16–24
25–69
70 and Older
Drivers by Race6
White
Black
Other Races
Drivers on
Expressway Exit Ramps
Other Surface Streets
Drivers Traveling ThroughLight Precipitation
Light Fog
Clear Weather Conditions
Drivers ofPassenger Cars
Vans and SUVs
Pickup Trucks
Drivers in the
Northeast
MidwestSouth
West
Drivers in
Urban Areas
Rural Areas
Drivers Traveling During
Weekdays
Rush Hours
Non Rush Hours
Weekends
Drivers With5
No Passengers
At Least One Passenger
Drivers With5
No Passengers
Passengers All Under Age 8
Passengers All 8 and Older
Some Passengers Under 8,
and Some 8 or Older2016% of Drivers
95%
Speaking with
Confidence
Headsets2
Interval3
0.5%(0.4, 0.7)
0.6%
(0.4, 0.8)
0.5%
(0.3, 0.7)

2017
% of Drivers
95%
Speaking with
Confidence
Headsets2
Interval3
0.4%(0.4, 0.6)
0.4%
(0.3, 0.5)
0.5%
(0.4, 0.6)

2016–2017 Change
95%
Change in
Confidence
Percentage7
Interval4-0.1(-0.3, 0.1)
-0.2(-0.4, 0.0)
0.0(-0.2, 0.3)

P-Value5
0.40
0.13
0.81

1.0%
0.5%
NA

(0.6, 1.5)
(0.4, 0.7)
NA

0.3%
0.5%
0.2%

(0.2, 0.6)
(0.4, 0.6)
(0.1, 0.7)

-0.7
0.0
NA

(-1.2, -0.1)(-0.2, 0.1)
NA

0.02
0.69
NA

0.4%
1.1%
0.9%

(0.3, 0.6)
(0.6, 1.8)
(0.5, 1.5)

0.4%
0.7%
0.5%

(0.3, 0.5)
(0.5, 1.0)
(0.3, 0.8)

0.0
-0.3
-0.4

(-0.2, 0.2)(-1.0, 0.3)(-1.0, 0.3)

0.91
0.29
0.24

0.5%
0.5%

(0.4, 0.8)
(0.4, 0.7)

0.5%
0.4%

(0.4, 0.7)
(0.3, 0.5)

0.0
-0.1

(-0.3, 0.2)(-0.4, 0.1)

0.79
0.34

0.7%
NA
0.5%

(0.3, 1.8)NA(0.4, 0.7)

0.5%
NA
0.5%

(0.2, 1.2)NA
(0.3, 0.6)

-0.2
NA
-0.1

(-1.1, 0.6)
NA(-0.3, 0.1)

0.56
NA
0.53

0.5%
0.6%
0.3%

(0.4, 0.7)
(0.4, 0.9)
(0.2, 0.5)

0.4%
0.5%
0.3%

(0.3, 0.6)
(0.4, 0.7)
(0.2, 0.5)

-0.1
-0.1
0.0

(-0.3, 0.2)(-0.4, 0.2)(-0.2, 0.2)

0.45
0.43
0.84

0.6%
0.2%
0.6%
0.7%

(0.4, 0.9)
(0.1, 0.4)
(0.4, 0.8)
(0.3, 1.5)

0.7%
0.3%
0.4%
0.5%

(0.6, 1.0)
(0.2, 0.5)
(0.3, 0.5)
(0.3, 0.9)

0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.2

(-0.2, 0.5)(-0.2, 0.2)(-0.4, -0.0)(-0.8, 0.5)

0.41
0.66
0.04
0.61

0.6%
0.3%

(0.4, 0.9)
(0.2, 0.5)

0.5%
0.3%

(0.4, 0.6)
(0.2, 0.6)

-0.1
0.0

(-0.4, 0.1)(-0.2, 0.2)

0.37
0.92

0.6%
0.6%
0.5%
0.4%

(0.4, 0.8)
(0.4, 1.0)
(0.3, 0.8)
(0.2, 0.7)

0.5%
0.6%
0.5%
0.3%

(0.4, 0.6)
(0.4, 0.8)
(0.3, 0.6)
(0.2, 0.5)

-0.1
-0.1
0.0
-0.1

(-0.3, 0.2)(-0.3, 0.2)(-0.3, 0.2)(-0.4, 0.2)

0.59
0.56
0.78
0.35

0.7%
0.2%

(0.5, 1.0)
(0.1, 0.4)

0.6%
0.1%

(0.5, 0.7)
(0.1, 0.2)

-0.1
-0.1

(-0.4, 0.2)(-0.2, 0.1)

0.50
0.46

0.7%
0.1%
0.2%

(0.5, 1.0)
(0.1, 0.4)
(0.1, 0.4)

0.6%
0.4%
0.1%

(0.5, 0.7)
(0.2, 0.8)
(0.1, 0.2)

-0.1
0.2
-0.1

(-0.4, 0.2)(-0.1, 0.5)(-0.3, 0.1)

0.50
0.16
0.17

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Drivers of passenger vehicles stopped at a stop sign or stoplight between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m.
The percentage of drivers speaking with visible headsets while driving, based on the subjective assessments of roadside observers.
3
The Wilson Confidence Interval is used in the estimated percentages in the driver group (e.g., drivers in urban areas), which is in the form: {(2nEFFp + t2) ± t√(t2 + 4nEFFpq)}/(2(nEFF + t2)), where p is the estimated percentage of speaking with visible headsets while driving, nEFF = n/DEFF is the effective sample size (where n is the sample size andDEFF is the design effect), t = t(1–α/2)(df), is a multiplier from the t-distribution with df degrees of freedom, and q = 1 – p. For percentages, these endpoints are multiplied by 100.
4
The regular symmetric interval was used for the estimated change in percentage point, which is in the form: p ± t(1–α/2)(df)√v(p), where p is the estimated change inpercentage point, v(p) is its estimated variance, and t(1–α/2)(df) is a multiplier from the t-distribution with df degrees of freedom. The degrees of freedom used in 2017 isdifferent from that used in 2016.
5
A p-value of 0.05 or less indicates that there is a statistically significant difference (at the alpha=0.05 level) between the 2016 and 2017 estimates for the group in question,
indicated with bold type.
6
Age, gender, and racial classifications are based on the subjective assessments of roadside observers.
7
Belt use rate, 95 percent Confidence Interval, annual changes have been rounded to the nearest tenth. Annual changes have been computed based on unrounded estimatesand may not equal those based on displayed values.
NA: Data was not sufficient to produce a reliable estimate.
Data Source: NOPUS, NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2016, 2017
1
2

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

6
Table 3

The Percentage of Drivers Visibly Manipulating Handheld Devices While Driving, by Major Characteristics
Driver Group1
All Drivers6
Males
Females
Drivers by Age Group6
16–24
25–69
70 and Older
Drivers by Race6
White
Black
Other Races
Drivers on
Expressway Exit Ramps
Other Surface Streets
Drivers Traveling ThroughLight Precipitation
Light Fog
Clear Weather Conditions
Drivers ofPassenger Cars
Vans and SUVs
Pickup Trucks
Drivers in the
Northeast
MidwestSouth
West
Drivers in
Urban Areas
Rural Areas
Drivers Traveling During
Weekdays
Rush Hours
Non-Rush Hours
Weekends
Drivers With5
No Passengers
At Least One Passenger
Drivers With5
No Passengers
Passengers All Under Age 8
Passengers All 8 and Older
Some Passengers Under 8,
and Some 8 or Older2016% of Drivers
Manipulating HandHeld Devices2
2.1%
1.7%
2.8%

95%
ConfidenceInterval3(1.7, 2.6)
(1.3, 2.1)
(2.2, 3.4)

2017
% of Drivers
Manipulating HandHeld Devices2
2.0%
1.7%
2.5%

95%
ConfidenceInterval3(1.6, 2.6)
(1.3, 2.2)
(1.9, 3.2)

2016–2017 Change
95%
Change in
Confidence
Percentage7
Interval4-0.1(-0.5, 0.3)
0.1(-0.4, 0.5)
-0.3(-0.9, 0.4)

4.5%
2.0%
0.3%

(3.5, 5.8)
(1.6, 2.5)
(0.1, 0.7)

3.9%
1.9%
0.7%

(3.1, 5.0)
(1.5, 2.5)
(0.3, 1.4)

-0.6
-0.1
0.4

(-1.8, 0.7)(-0.5, 0.4)(-0.2, 1.0)

0.35
0.78
0.15

1.9%
3.0%
2.4%

(1.6, 2.3)
(2.0, 4.6)
(1.7, 3.2)

1.7%
3.8%
2.4%

(1.3, 2.3)
(2.7, 5.3)
(1.7, 3.3)

-0.2
0.8
0.0

(-0.6, 0.2)(-1.0, 2.5)(-0.7, 0.7)

0.30
0.39
0.94

2.0%
2.2%

(1.4, 2.7)
(1.9, 2.6)

1.9%
2.1%

(1.4, 2.6)
(1.6, 2.7)

0.0
-0.1

(-0.6, 0.6)(-0.6, 0.4)

0.95
0.58

2.8%
NA
2.1%

(2.0, 3.9)
NA
(1.7, 2.5)

2.6%
1.5%
2.0%

(1.6, 4.0)
(0.4, 5.9)
(1.5, 2.5)

-0.2
0.5
-0.1

(-1.7, 1.3)(-2.1, 3.1)(-0.5, 0.3)

0.77
0.67
0.54

2.4%
2.1%
1.4%

(1.9, 3.0)
(1.7, 2.6)
(1.0, 1.9)

2.4%
2.0%
1.2%

(1.8, 3.2)
(1.5, 2.5)
(0.9, 1.7)

0.0
-0.2
-0.1

(-0.5, 0.6)(-0.7, 0.4)(-0.7, 0.4)

0.91
0.54
0.61

1.1%
2.1%
2.6%
2.0%

(0.6, 2.1)
(1.5, 3.0)
(1.9, 3.6)
(1.5, 2.6)

2.8%
1.4%
2.3%
1.6%

(1.4, 5.4)
(0.9, 2.2)
(1.6, 3.3)
(1.1, 2.5)

1.7
-0.7
-0.3
-0.4

(0.5, 2.9)(-1.6, 0.2)(-1.0, 0.4)(-1.0, 0.3)

0.01
0.11
0.36
0.24

2.4%
1.3%

(2.0, 3.0)
(0.9, 1.9)

2.4%
1.1%

(1.9, 3.1)
(0.7, 1.6)

0.0
-0.2

(-0.5, 0.5)(-0.7, 0.2)

0.94
0.31

2.3%
2.3%
2.2%
1.7%

(1.8, 2.8)
(1.7, 3.0)
(1.8, 2.7)
(1.3, 2.2)

2.0%
2.3%
1.7%
2.0%

(1.5, 2.7)
(1.7, 3.3)
(1.3, 2.4)
(1.6, 2.5)

-0.2
0.0
-0.5
0.3

(-0.7, 0.3)(-0.7, 0.8)(-1.0, 0.1)(-0.1, 0.7)

0.39
0.91
0.08
0.12

2.6%
0.9%

(2.2, 3.2)
(0.6, 1.2)

2.5%
0.8%

(2.0, 3.3)
(0.6, 1.2)

-0.1
0.0

(-0.6, 0.4)(-0.3, 0.3)

0.62
0.87

2.6%
1.9%
0.8%

(2.2, 3.2)
(1.0, 3.6)
(0.6, 1.1)

2.5%
1.8%
0.7%

(2.0, 3.3)
(1.1, 2.7)
(0.5, 1.0)

-0.1
-0.2
-0.1

(-0.6, 0.4)(-1.5, 1.2)(-0.4, 0.2)

0.62
0.79
0.55

0.6%

(0.3, 1.2)

1.3%

(0.5, 2.9)

0.7(-0.5, 1.9)

0.24

P-Value5
0.68
0.80
0.37

Drivers of passenger vehicles stopped at a stop sign or stoplight between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m.
The percentage of drivers visibly manipulating handheld devices while driving, based on the subjective assessments of roadside observers.
3
The Wilson Confidence Interval is used in the estimated percentages in the driver group (e.g., drivers in urban areas), which is in the form: {(2nEFFp + t2) ± t√(t2 + 4nEFFpq)}/(2(nEFF + t2)), where p is the estimated percentage of drivers visibly manipulating handheld devices, nEFF = n/DEFF is the effective sample size (where n is the sample size andDEFF is the design effect), t = t(1–α/2)(df), is a multiplier from the t-distribution with df degrees of freedom, and q = 1 – p. For percentages, these endpoints are multiplied by 100.
4
The regular symmetric interval was used for the estimated change in percentage point, which is in the form: p ± t(1–α/2)(df)√v(p), where p is the estimated change inpercentage point, v(p) is its estimated variance, and t(1–α/2)(df) is a multiplier from the t-distribution with df degrees of freedom. The degrees of freedom used in 2016 isdifferent from that used in 2015.
5
A p-value of 0.05 or less indicates that there is a statistically significant difference (at the alpha=0.05 level) between the 2015 and 2016 estimates for the group in question,
indicated with bold type.
6
Age, gender, and racial classifications are based on the subjective assessments of roadside observers.
7
Belt use rate, 95 percent Confidence Interval, annual changes have been rounded to the nearest tenth. Annual changes have been computed based on unrounded estimatesand may not equal those based on displayed values.
NA: Data was not sufficient to produce a reliable estimate.
Data Source: NOPUS, NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis, 2016, 2017
1
2

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

7

NOPUS Data Collection and Estimation
NOPUS is the only nationwide probability-based observational survey of driver electronic device use in the UnitedStates. The survey observes usage as it actually occurs at
randomly selected roadway sites and thus provides the best
tracking of the extent to which people in the United States
use cell phones and other electronic devices while driving.
The survey data is collected by trained data collectors at
probabilistically sampled intersections controlled by stop
signs or stoplights, where data collectors observe, from theroadside, drivers and other occupants of passenger vehicles.
Data is collected from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Only stopped vehicles
are observed to allow time to collect the variety of information required by the survey, including subjective assessments of occupants’ age and race. Observers collect data on
the driver, right-front passenger, and up to two passengers
in the second row of seats. Observers do not interview occupants, so that NOPUS can capture the untainted behavior of
occupants. The 2017 NOPUS data was collected from June 5
to June 19, while the 2016 data was collected from June 6 toJune 25.
Statistically significant increases in the use of handheld
phones, headset use, and manipulation of handheld devices
from 2016 to 2017 are shown, respectively, in Table 1, Table 2,
and Table 3 by having a result with a p-value 0.05 or less inthe tables’ far-right column.
The NOPUS uses a complex multistage probability sample,
statistical data editing, imputation of unknown values, andcomplex estimation procedures. The sample sites for the2017 NOPUS were entirely from the 2015 NOPUS sample
redesign. Table 4 shows the observed sample sizes of the2017 NOPUS. 50,577 vehicles were observed at the 1,615 datacollection sites. Due to ineligibility, construction, danger in
the area, or road closure, the observations could not be completed at some of the sampled observation sites.
Table 4Sites and Vehicles Observed in the 2017 NOPUS
Number of

2016

2017

Percentage Change

Sites Observed

1,600

1,615

0.9%

Vehicles Observed

48,17750,577

5.0%

Data collection, estimation, and variance estimation for NOPUS are conductedby Westat, Inc., under the direction of NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics andAnalysis under Federal contract number DTNH22-13-D-00284.

NOPUS Categories and Definitions
NOPUS observes three types of driver electronic device use
while driving: “holding phones to their ears,” “speaking
with visible headsets on,” and “visibly manipulating handheld devices.”
Drivers are counted as “holding phones to their ears” if they
are holding to their ears what appear to the data collectors
to be phones. This would include behaviors such as drivers
NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

engaging in conversation, listening to messages, or conducting voice-activated dialing while holding phones to theirears. However, a data collector may not have knowledge ofvarious types of wireless phones. Thus, the device that has
been identified as a “phone” may only reflect his/her conception of what constitutes a “phone.” Also, the corded carphones and satellite phones may or may not have been identified as “phones.”
Drivers are counted as “speaking with visible headsets on”
if they appear to be speaking and wearing a headset witha microphone. This would include behaviors such as talking, engaging in conversation, or conducting voice-activateddialing via a wireless earpiece on the driver’s right ear or
via an ear bud connected by wire to a cell phone. Talking
via a visible Bluetooth headset (usually on the driver’s rightear) would also be included in this category. However, it
would not include drivers using headsets that do not involve
cell phones (e.g., iPods), since these headsets do not involve
microphones. Note that the wireless earpieces that are
obscured by hair or clothing or are on the driver’s left ear
would not be included because they would not be visible to
the roadside observer. In addition, some wireless ear buds
would not be included as they are too small to be observed
from the roadside. The drivers with headsets who are notspeaking at the time of observation are not included because
they might have recently completed a call or be waiting foran expected call. Each driver in the survey is observed forabout 10 seconds before the data collector decides whether or
not the driver is speaking. Also, note that the drivers counted
as speaking through a visible headset might have been talking to a passenger or using voice-activated computer software rather than using a phone.
Drivers are counted as “visibly manipulating handheld
devices” if they appear to be manipulating some type ofelectronic device such as a cell phone, a smart phone, tablet, video game, or some other device. This would include
behaviors such as text messaging, using a Web-capable
smart phone (e.g., an iPhone) or a tablet (e.g., iPad) to view
travel directions, check e-mails or calendar appointments, orsurf the Internet, manual dialing, playing handheld games,
and holding phones in front of their faces to converse orcheck messages via speakerphone or use voice-activateddialing. Manipulation of the non-handheld devices (adjusting volume on stereos, pressing buttons on a dashboard GPS
unit, etc.) is not included in this category. Also, note that adriver characterized by the survey as “manipulating handheld device” may or may not have been speaking.
There are means by which the drivers can use cell phonesthat would neither be recorded as “holding phones to theirears” nor as “speaking with visible headsets on” nor as “visibly manipulating handheld devices” in the NOPUS. These
would include: (1) a driver using a cell phone headset but
is not speaking during the approximately 10-second period
when he/she is being observed, and (2) a driver using technologies that cannot be observed from the roadside. The
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

8

unobservable technologies would include: a wireless earpiece obscured by hair or clothing or on the left ear, a driverconversing via a speakerphone with the phone on the passenger seat or in a cell phone holder on the vehicle dashboard, a driver using a phone that is built into the vehicle(e.g., OnStar), and a driver using the cell phone hands-free
via a Bluetooth car kit or via a Bluetooth system that is built
into the vehicle (e.g., Sync). It is possible that at some point in
the future, NOPUS may be able to capture such behaviors bydirecting a device that can detect cell phones in-use in thepassing vehicles.
The racial categories “Black,” “White,” and “Members of
Other Races” appearing in the tables reflect subjective characterizations by roadside observers regarding the race ofoccupants. Likewise, observers record the age group (8-15;
16-24; 25-69; and 70 or older) that best fits their visual assessment of each observed occupant.
“Expressway Exit Ramps” are defined as the access roads
from roadways with limited access, while “Other Surface
Streets” comprise all other roadways.
“Weekday Rush Hours” are defined to be 7 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.
and 3:30 p.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays, while “Weekday NonRush Hours” comprise all other weekday hours (9:30 a.m. to
3:30 p.m. and 5 p.m. to 6 p.m.).
Since NOPUS is not a census and is based on a probability sample, it is impossible to produce State-by-State driverelectronic device use results. However, NOPUS produces
regional estimates of the use rates based on the following
categories:• Northeast: ME, VT, NH, MA, RI, CT, NY, PA, NJ• Midwest:

MI, OH, IN, IL, WI, MN, IA, MO, KS, NE, SD, ND• South:WV, MD, DE, VA, KY, TN, NC, SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, AR, LA,
OK, TX, DC• West:

AK, WA, OR, CA, NV, ID, UT, AZ, NM, CO, WY, MT, HI

Please note that since 2015, we use an objective area type classification to replace the subjective area type based on trained
data collectors’ best judgement. Each NOPUS site is assigned
an objective area type characterization based on the Census
Bureau definitions of urbanized areas and urban clusters(see www.census.gov/geo/reference/ua/urban-rural-2010.
html). It is defined as:

Estimating Overall Cell Phone Use, Both
Handheld and Hands-Free
NHTSA’s 2007 Motor Vehicle Occupant Safety Survey(MVOSS) estimated that for drivers using cell phones whiledriving, 55 percent tended to use handheld cell phones and45 percent tended to use hands-free phones. Applying the
proportion 0.8182 (= 45/55) of these percentages to the 2.9
percent estimate of drivers using handheld cell phones in2017 from NOPUS shows an estimated 2.4 (= 0.8182×2.9) percent of drivers using hands-free cell phones. Thus, a total of
5.3 (= 2.9+2.4) percent of drivers are estimated to be using
either a handheld or a hands-free cell phone while driving at
a typical daylight moment in the United States in 2017. Please
note that the MVOSS estimates are based on self-reported
use from both day and nighttime driving while the NOPUS
estimates are observed during daylight hours.

State Laws on Driver Electronic Device Use(Enacted as of March 2017)
Many States restrict cell phone use by drivers. As of July
2017, no State completely bans all forms of cell phone use
by drivers. However, Table 5 shows that a ban on driving
while talking on a handheld cell phone was in place in 15
States (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois,
Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and West
Virginia), the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, andthe U.S. Virgin Islands (available at www.ghsa.org/html/
stateinfo/laws/cellphone_laws.html). All these laws are primary enforcement—an officer may cite a driver for using ahandheld cell phone without any other traffic offense taking
place.
Forty-seven States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands ban text messaging for all
drivers (Table 6). In 43 States, the District of Columbia, Guam,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands texting laws are primary enforcement, and 4 States have secondary enforcementof texting for drivers. Of the 4 States without an all driver
texting ban, 2 prohibit text messaging by novice drivers and
1 restricts school bus drivers from texting.
Table 5

States and U.S. Territories With Laws† Banning Handheld
Cell Phone Use While Driving• Urban:	A site which intersects an urbanized area or urban cluster (i.e.,an area of at least 2,500 people);

California

Connecticut

Delaware

Hawaii

Illinois

Maryland

NevadaNew
Hampshire

New Jersey

New York

OregonRhode Island

Vermont

Washington West Virginia

District ofColumbia

Puerto Rico

Guam

U.S. Virgin
Islands• Rural: 	All other sites.

†

States and the District of Columbia with laws in effect as of July 2017

NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590

9
Table 6

States and U.S. Territories With Laws† Banning Text-­
Messaging While Driving
Alabama

AlaskaArkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida*Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

KansasKentuckyLouisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

MichiganMinnesota

Mississippi

Nebraska*

NevadaNew
Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North
Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio*

Oklahoma

OregonPennsylvania

Rhode Island

South
CarolinaSouth
Dakota*Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

District ofColumbia

Puerto Rico

Arkansas also bans the use of handheld cell phones whiledriving in a school zone or in a highway construction zone.
This law is secondarily enforced. Texas has banned the useof cell phones and texting in school zones.

References
Santos, A., McGuckin, N., Nakamoto, H. Y., Gray, D., & Liss, S.
(2011, June). Summary of travel trends: 2009 National Household
Travel Survey (Report No. FHWA-PL-ll-022). Washington,
DC: Federal Highway Administration. Available at http://
nhts.ornl.gov/2009/pub/stt.pdf.

For More Information
Additional data and information on the survey design andanalysis procedures will be available in upcoming publications to be posted on the website at www.nhtsa.gov/
research-data.
For more information on NHTSA’s policy on distracted
driving, please visit www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/
distracted-driving.

Guam

U.S. Virgin
Islands†

States and the District of Columbia with laws in effect as of July 2017
Note: States with* have secondary enforcement of texting for drivers.

Suggested APA format citation:
National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2019, January).
Driver electronic device use in 2017 (Traffic Safety Facts
Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 812 665). Washington,
DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

This research note and other general information
on highway traffic safety may be accessed at: wwwnrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/CATS/index.aspx
NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
13812-012419-v4