Programs & Labs
Technology to monitor teen driving raises privacy questions
Max Donath
Several researchers at the University of Minnesota are working to address the high crash—and high fatality—rate of teenage drivers by developing in-vehicle technology to monitor and correct inexperienced drivers’ unsafe behaviors behind the wheel.
ITS Institute director Max Donath described the technology in the concurrent session titled “Using ITS to Reduce Teenage Road Mortality: Impact on Privacy.” Lee Munnich, director of the Humphrey Institute’s State and Local Policy Program, moderated, and Colin Bennett, political science professor with the University of Victoria, followed with a perspective on privacy as it relates to the research.
The Teen Driver Support System (TDSS) aims to address the primary causes of most fatal teen-driver crashes. Speeding, Donath says, is a much more significant issue for teenagers than for other drivers, as is lack of seat belt use. Alcohol impairment is another contributing factor.
Donath also noted that many crashes occur during a driver’s first 1,000 miles. “Clearly, if we can do something during the first 1,000 miles, maybe we can effect some change,” he said.
The TDSS uses a combination of forcing, feedback, and reporting functions. The forcing function consists of ignition interlocks: a seat belt interlock requires all occupants to engage their seat belt, and an alcohol interlock requires the driver to pass an in-vehicle Breathalyzer test before the vehicle will start.
In-vehicle technology will monitor and correct teen drivers' unsafe behaviors behind the wheel.
Feedback is provided by real-time in-vehicle warnings about illegal or unsafe speeds. The reporting function records vehicle information for later review. Donath explained that some drivers might purposely take risks when they feel anonymous; conversely, if they know their behavior is being reported, they may change it, he said.
“All current [driver reporting] systems today are much too passive,” Donath said. Speed limits vary according to the road, for example, so setting a system for one maximum speed won’t work.
Consequences, incentives, and rewards need to be tied to driving performance, Donath said. He is encouraged by the potential for the TDSS in a graduated driver license program, for which it could help parents or licensing agencies monitor novice drivers as they gradually improve their skills and gain experience before a full license is granted. It could also record when a new driver violates the rules or drives recklessly.
Donath acknowledged the need to plan for potential privacy issues. Any system needs to be transparent, accurate, and secure, he said.
Following Donath, Bennett raised some questions about privacy. A major consideration is whether the technology will do what it’s intended to do and how its effectiveness will be evaluated. Also, public acceptability and trust is imperative for the type of systems Donath described, he said.
The use of the data should be regulated, with clear provisions in place prohibiting secondary uses, Bennett added. “This is where ‘function creep’ comes in. Rules get bent over time…Are we talking about teenagers today, and the elderly tomorrow? What incentive is there for preventing this information from being used for other purposes?…That’s what makes for distrust in the system.”
Donath responded that evidence shows these interventions do work depending on their use and the feedback they provide. The period of time when teenagers are just learning to drive presents a rare—if not the only—opportunity to have some control and influence, he added. “Minnesota has one of the weakest graduated driver license programs in the country,” Donath said. “If we can demonstrate that these [technologies help] kids learn to drive better, then we should deploy them. These young drivers face a significant risk.”