Comparing distance and time as driving exposure measures to evaluate fatal crash risk ratios

Abstract

BackgroundThe use of an appropriate driving exposure measure is essential to calculate traffic crash rates and risks. Commonly used exposure measures include driving distance and the number of licensed drivers. These measures have some limitations, including the unavailability of disaggregated estimates for consecutive years, low data quality, and the failure to represent the driving population when the crash occurred. However, the length of driving time, available annually from the American Time Use Survey (ATUS), can be disaggregated by age, gender, time-of-day, and day-of week, and addresses the temporal discontinuity limitation of driving distance on the United States (U.S.) national scale. ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to determine if the length of driving time as a driving exposure measure is comparable to driving distance by comparing distance-based and time-based fatal crash risk ratios by driver age category, gender, time-of-day, and day-of-week. MethodsThe 2016–2017 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) provided driving distance, and 2016–2017 Fatality Analysis Reporting System provided the number of drivers in fatal crashes. The distributions of driving distance and length of driving time by driver age category (16−24, 25−44, 45−64, and 65 years or older), gender, time-of-day, day-of-week were compared. Two negative binomial regression models were used to compute the distance-based and time-based fatal crash risk ratios. ResultsThe distributions of driving-distance were not different from the length-of-driving-time distributions by driver age category, gender, time-of-day, and day-of-week. Driving distance and the length of driving time provide similar fatal crash risk ratio estimates. ConclusionsThe length of driving time can be an alternative to driving distance as a measure of driving exposure. The primary advantage of driving time over driving distance is that, starting from 2003, the disaggregated estimates of the length of driving time are available from ATUS over consecutive years, curtailing the discontinuity limitation of driving distance. Furthermore, the length of driving time is related to drivers’ perceived risks about their driving conditions and as a result, may be a better exposure measure than driving distance in comparing crash risks between drivers whose likelihood of traveling in hazardous driving conditions (e.g., nighttime) varies substantially.