Young Adults Evaluations of Cell Phone Manners

Transcription

1 Young Adults Evaluations of Cell Phone Manners ~ Mikiyasu Hakoama & Shotaro Hakoyama Abstract Cell phones have become an indispensable tool in our daily lives. While the cell phone provides convenience, people s cell phone manners have rapidly become a great concern. Cell phone use while driving, in particular, has been identified as negligent driving. The current study examined college students cell phone manners. Of the 488 participants aged 25 and under, 332 (68%) were females and 76.2% were aged 20 or younger (M = 19.45, SD = 1.51). Participants rated people s cell phone manners in general as well as their own manners. Participants age was negatively correlated with their perception of people s cell phone manners in general. Participants self-rating of their own cell phone manners was significantly higher than their rating of other people s cell phone manners. These findings suggest that expectations for cell phone manners increase across time or that there are cohort effects. Participants cell phone use while driving was also discussed. Keyword: college, driving, etiquette, self-rating, students Introduction The cell phone has become one of the most rapidly growing technologies in the world (Rebello, 2010). While cell phone subscriptions were not even one billion worldwide in 2001 with the majority of the subscriptions from the industrialized nations, cell phone subscriptions have increased fivefold due mainly to rapid growth in developing countries (Kelly, 2009). For instance, a study in Norway reported that almost 100% of 16 year-olds owned a cell phone in 2001 while less than 20% of 16-year olds were cell phone owners in 1997 (Ling, 2001). Cell phones have become almost as important as wallets (International Telecommunication Union, 2004). Also, studies have reported that the presence of cell phones contributes to a sense of 140

2 security in possibly dangerous situations, which leads to the perception that the cell phone is a must-have device (Nasar, Hecht, & Wener, 2007). Moreover, an addictive disorder can develop when use of and dependency on the cell phone become extreme (Chóliz, 2010). The increased acceptance of cell phones in recent years has attracted research attention including cell phone dependency/addiction (Billieux, Linden, D,acremont, Ceschi, & Zermatten, 2007; Ezoe et al., 2009; Hakoyama & Hakoyama, 2011; Zulkerfly & Baharudin, 2009), cell phone cultures and behaviors (Bakke, 2010; Campbell & Park, 2008; Ling, 2004), text messaging (Pettigrew, 2009), health risks from cell phone radiation (Lahkola, Tokola, & Auvinen, 2006), gender differences in cell phone use (Bianchi & Phillips, 2005; Junco, Merson, & Salter, 2010; Wei & Lo, 2006), cell phone use while driving (Caird, Willness, Steel, & Scialfa, 2008; Horrey & Wickens, 2006; McCartt, Hellinga, & Braitman, 2006) and cell phone etiquette (Lipscomb, Totten, Cook, & Lesch, 2007). Increased cell phone usage has contributed to a general increase in rudeness among Americans (Farkas & Wadsworth, 2002). Cell phones have become a source of disruption in academic domains such as high schools and universities (Wise, 2003). Some universities forbid the use of cell phones in the classroom, in part, to keep students from cheating during exams especially when cell phones have texting and camera features (Wise, 2003). Lipscomb, Totten, Cook, and Lesch (2007) examined college students perception of cell phone etiquette by inquiring about the situations and settings in which cell phone usage was inappropriate. They found that inappropriate situations include during class and worship/church, in a library, and in a theater while the movie is playing. They also found that college students viewed it as appropriate to use cell phones while on public transportation, in a supermarket, and while driving, provided that a hands-free set was used. 141

3 Numerous studies have focused on cell phone use while driving (e.g., Caird, Willness, Steel, & Scialfa, 2008; Horrey & Wickens, 2006; McCartt, Hellinga, & Braitman, 2006) and found that cell phone use while driving is common and the number of such drivers were increasing (McCartt, Hellinga, & Bratiman, 2006). A number of researchers examined the effects of cell phone use and talk while driving and found that talking on a cell phone while driving contributed to a higher risk of car accidents (e.g., Beede & Kass, 2006; Hunton, & Rose, 2005). Specifically, numerous meta-analyses confirmed that cell phone conversation while driving increases reaction time to events and stimuli (e.g., Caird, Willness, Steel, & Scialfa, 2008; Horrey & Wickens, 2006). Charlton (2009) compared drivers conversing on a cell phone with those conversing with a passenger and found that drivers talking on a cell phone were much more likely to be distracted and cause accidents than those talking with a passenger. While talking to a passenger caused a slight distraction, these drivers performed nearly as well as the non-conversing drivers. Strayer and Drew (2007) also indicated that in-vehicle conversations do not interfere with driving as much as cell-phone conversations do, as drivers are better able to synchronize the processing demands of driving with in-vehicle conversations than with cell-phone conversations. Caird, Willness, Steel, and Scialfa (2008) found that handheld and hands-free phones produced similar reaction time, resulting in a comparable risk of causing accidents. Horry and Wickens (2006) also indicated that hands-free cell phones do not eliminate or substantially reduce these costs, and some methodological or performance measurements may result in underestimation of these costs. The impairments associated with cell phone use while driving can be as profound as those resulting from drunk driving (Strayer, Drews, & Crouch, 2006). These 142

4 findings demonstrate clearly that talking on a cell phone while driving impairs the driver s performance to a degree that is likely to increase accidents. Elkind (1967) proposed that adolescents possess unique cognitive perspectives that make them uniquely egocentric, at times extremely self-conscious and, at other times, self-centered. They may proactively adopt such behaviors to belong to certain groups. On the other hand, they may think that their experiences are unique and therefore impossible for others to relate to them. Consequently, some adolescents act invincible. They may feel that nothing wrong will ever happen to them, and eschewing warnings, engage in cell phone talk while driving. Younger drivers may drive fearlessly and carelessly due to these developmental cognitive characteristics. Either because young drivers have different set of values in regard to public manners or due to their egocentric views, it is assumed that younger people pay less attention to their use of cell phone in public and while driving. The current study examined to what degree young people pay attention to their manners in relation to the use of cell phones in public and while driving. It is expected that many participants view cell phone talk while driving as similar to talking with a passenger and therefore tend to engage in cell phone talk while driving. Method Procedure Participants were recruited from students enrolled in courses in Human Development in a mid-sized, Midwestern university with an option to earn extra credit. Students were given a few days to complete a survey and submit to the designated place. It was expected to take minutes to fill out the survey. A total of 501 surveys were returned and analyzed. SPSS was utilized to analyze quantitative data. Survey Instrument 143

5 An anonymous survey was developed to examine current cell phone use among college students. The survey consisted of 44 questions that dealt with various aspects of cell phone use, including cell phone ownership, time spent on cell phone calls, monthly cell phone bills, communication networks, text messaging, cell phone dependency, cell phone manners, and operating cell phones while driving. Demographic data were also collected. The current study focused on questions related to cell phone manners in general and cell phone use while driving. Participants Of the 501 returned surveys, participants aged 25 and under were selected (N=488); 332 (68%) were females and 380 (78%) were aged 20 or younger (M = 19.45, SD = 1.51). Nearly 90% were White and 98% were single; all but 6 were fulltime students. Results Cell Phone Use in General Not surprisingly, almost everyone (99%) of the participants owned a cell phone and nearly 90% of them have owned a cell phone for more than three years. Only 7% of those who owned a cell phone used prepaid phones. Further, only 15% of the participants with cell phones paid their cell phone bills, 8% paid partial bills, but 74% did not pay at all. Cell Phone Manners in General The respondents were asked to rate peoples cell phone manners in public places in a 7- point scale (1 = very poor, 7 = very good). While 9.6% rated 6 or higher, 14.3% rated 2 or lower and 75.9% rated 3, 4 or 5 (M = 3.85, SD = 1.27). There was no gender difference in the males rating (M = 3.78, SD = 1.33) and the females rating (M = 3.85, SD = 1.24), t (433) = -.48, p = ns. The younger the age of their first cell phone ownership, the higher the rating was, r (415) = -.110, p =.025; indicating that those who started using their cell phones in younger ages tended to 144

6 view others cell phone manners as good. The respondent s age was also correlated with their perception of people s cell phone manners in public, r (426 ) = -.16, p =.001; the older the respondents, the more likely they were to rate people s cell phone manners lower. While the respondents aged 19 and younger were more likely to rate people s cell phone manner as good (rating of 6 or 7), the respondents aged 20 and older were more likely to rate it as poor (rating of 1 or 2), X 2 (2, N = 428) = 7.54, p =.023. Self-report of Cell Phone Manners Self-perception of cell phone manners were in general was asked in a 7-point scale (1 = very poor, 7 = very good). More than two thirds (69%) rated themselves 6 or 7; 22.3% rated themselves 5; only 8.7% rated themselves 4 or lower (M = 5.81, SD = 1.02). The respondents self-rating of their own cell phone manners was positively correlated with their perception of general public s cell phone manners, r (418) =.17, p <.001; indicating that those who viewed their own cell phone manners as good were more likely to view general public s cell phone manners also as good. The participants perception of their own cell phone manners (M = 5.82, SD = 1.03) was significantly better than that of the general public (M = 3.85, SD = 1.26), t (419) = 27.20, p <.001; participants viewed their cell phone manners as better than general public. Further, there was a significant gender difference in the participants rating of their own cell phone manners, t (263.63) = -2.01, p =.045; Female participants rating (M = 5.67, SD = 1.13) was significantly higher than that of male participants (M = 5.88, SD =.98). Another question asked the respondents about their cell phone manners in terms of how careful they were in turning off/silencing their cell phones when they should, such as during the meeting or class. Nearly two thirds (64%) reported that they were very careful and always turn off/silence their phones while a third (33%) reported that they sometimes forget to do so and get 145

7 embarrassed. Only 1.7% reported that either they frequently forget to turn off/silence their phones. Also, only 1.7% reported that they do not pay much attention to their cell phone manners. There was a significant association between the respondents cell phone manners and the age of their first cell phone ownership, X 2 (2, N = 471) = 10.18, p =.006. While three quarters (74%) of the respondents who obtained their cell phones at age 16 or older reported that they always turn off/silence their cell phones when they should, only 59% of the respondents who were aged 15 or younger when they received their phones did. No gender difference was found, X 2 (2, N = 488) =.04, p = ns. Cell Phone Use While Driving When asked to rate how dangerous the cell phone talk is while driving using a 7-point scale (1 = not at all dangerous, 7 = very dangerous), 42.6% rated 6 or higher while only 2.3% rated 2 or lower (M =.5.17, SD = 1.29). Those who rated the cell phone manners of the general public lower tended to rate cell phone talk while driving more dangerous, r (424) = -.129, p =.008. No gender difference was found, t (495) = -1.38, p = ns. The participants in this study were also asked to rate how frequently they witness drivers talking on their cell phones in a 7-point scale (1 = I do not witness at all, 7 = I witness all the time). More than two thirds (68%) rated 6 or higher while only 0.4% rated 2 or lower (M = 5.89, SD = 1.10). Witnessing drivers talking on the cell phones was correlated with the participants perception of cell phone talk while driving as dangerous, r (484) =.22, p <.001; with their view of general public s cell phone etiquette, r (425)= -.14, p =.003; and with their view of their own cell phone manners r (477) =.10, p =.023. These results indicate that those who thought of using cell phone while driving dangerous, who thought of general public s cell phone manner as 146

8 not very good, and who thought of their own cell phone as good tended to witness more drivers talking on the cell phones. These respondents were also asked to select one of the three choices regarding the cell phone use while driving: absolutely dangerous even when using a headset, OK to talk on the cell phone as long as the driver uses a headset as it is no different from talking with a passenger, using cell phones while driving is not any more dangerous than operating other instruments (e.g., radio, CD player, AC). While 24% reported that cell phone talk is absolutely dangerous, 27% reported that using cell phones is no more dangerous than operating other instruments and approximately one half (49%) reported that it is fine as long as a driver uses a headset (handsfree). No gender difference was found, X 2 (2, N = 496) = 4.03, p = ns. When the respondents were asked whether they respond to their cell phone calls while driving, nearly one half (49%) reported that they usually answer their calls and 43% reported that they check their calls and decide whether or not to answer. Only 8.3% reported that they never answer their calls while driving. This tendency was significantly associated with the participants view on how dangerous it is to use cell phone while driving, X 2 (4, N = 446) = 31.77, p <.001. Those who view cell phone use while driving as absolutely dangerous were less likely to answer their cell phone calls than their counterparts who viewed cell phone use while driving as not dangerous. No gender difference was found, X 2 (2, N = 455) =.78, p = ns. Ordinal regression analysis revealed that the number of months one owned a cell phone and the view that cell phone use while driving is dangerous predicted the participants tendency to answer cell phone calls while driving. For a one-unit increase in the view on cell phone use while driving, the expected ordered log odds increases by.402 as one moves to the next higher category of the tendency not to answer the cell phone calls. For every unit increase in months of 147

9 cell phone ownership, there was a.015 decrease in the expected log odds as one moves to the next higher category of the tendency not to answer. There was no statistically significant effect of the length of cell phone talk per day, the importance scale of having a cell phone, or ethnicity, see Table 1. Table 1. Drivers Tendency to Answer Their Cell Phone Calls While Driving Model -2 Log Likelihood Chi-square df p Intercept only Final Pseudo R 2 (Nagelkerke):.14 Parameter estimates Estimate Location: View on cellphone use while driving as dangerous.402*** Months had a cell phone -.015*** Length of cell phone talk per day Importance of having a cell phone Ethnicity (White) Ethnicity (African American).316 Test of parallel lines -2 Log Likelihood Chi-square df p Null Hypothesis General Note: *** p <.001 Discussion As previously demonstrated (Rebello, 2010; Ling, 2001; Telecommunication Union, 2004), cell phones have become a part of our lives, and for many, it has become as important as wallets. With almost everyone in this study owning a cell phone, it is obvious that cell phones have become indispensable tools for young adults. However, young people s views of people s cell phone etiquette do not seem to be very positive. Especially those who were 20 years and 148

10 older tended to view others cell phone manners as not very good. Interestingly, participants evaluation of their own cell phone manners was much better than their view of the general public s cell phone manners. This result may be associated with the adolescent egocentrism (Elkind, 1967) that makes it difficult to objectively evaluate one s own behaviors in relation to those of others. While two thirds of the participants reported that they were very careful to turn off/silence their phones when they should (e.g., during class), those who owned a cell phone at a younger age, especially at age 15 or younger, were more likely to admit that they tended to be less careful. This result may be an indication that cell phone etiquette is acquired at the time of cell phone ownership rather than gradually developing. Therefore, those who were too young to be morally conscientious regarding their own actions when they began using their cell phones may tend to remain careless of their cell phone manners. Multiple views and behaviors in relation to cell phone use and talk while driving were revealed. While nearly a quarter (24%) reported that talking on the cell phone while driving is absolutely dangerous, more people (27%) reported that it is not any more dangerous than operating other instruments such as the radio. Approximately one half (49%) reported that using and talking on the cell phone is fine as long as the driver uses a hands-free set. These results clearly illustrate that research findings on the effects of cell phone use and talk while driving are not effectively disseminated. These results further predicted the participants responses to their cell phone calls while driving; only eight percent of the respondents reported that they never answer their calls while driving; more than 40 % reported that they tended to answer their calls and about the same number of participants reported that they answer depending on who is calling. Months of cell phone ownership and the view on cell phone use/talk while driving 149

11 predicted the respondents tendency to answer their cell phone calls while driving. Those with longer cell phone history and those who view cell phone talk while driving as not dangerous were more likely to engage in cell phone talk while driving. Despite ample studies suggesting that cell phone talk while driving has multiple negative impacts such as delays in braking reaction that results in accidents (e.g., Caird, Willness, Steel, & Scialfa, 2008; Horry & Wickens, 2006; Strayer, Drews, & Crouch, 2006), young drivers appear to be unaware of these dangers. Similarly, while hands-free cell phone talk creates a similar distraction as hand-held phone talk, many of the participants in this study felt that handsfree talk eliminated any negative influence of cell phone talk while driving. These results clearly indicate that much more effort must be made to inform the public of the potential consequences of cell phone talk while driving. While beliefs do not necessarily transform into behaviors, according to the results of the current study, those who believed that cell phone use and talk while driving is absolutely dangerous were also more likely to report that they never answer their cell phone calls while driving, which indicates that beliefs, to some extent, impact behavior. Therefore, promotional efforts must be made to share research on the increased risk associated with cell phone talk while driving. This should contribute to changing young adults views on cell phone use while driving, a first step in modifying drivers use of cell phone while driving. Further, considering that those who obtained a cell phone at a younger age remain careless in their cell phone manners, informing research-based findings related to cell phone use would be more effective when addressed to younger people. One possible approach would be to partner with cell phone industries and include statements that alert purchasers to the risk of talking while driving in the instruction manuals. Similar to cigarette and alcoholic beverage packages contain warning 150

12 statements for health risks, incorporation of warning statements regarding the use of cell phone while driving should be effective in increasing risk awareness. The current study focused on college students aged 25 and under and some age and gender differences in cell phone manners were revealed. Future studies that focus on older adults will be beneficial in making comparisons to better illustrate variations in cell phone related manners and behaviors. It is assumed that an examination with diverse samples will reveal variations associated with demographic factors including gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic backgrounds. 151

13 References Bakke, E. (2010). A model and measure of mobile communication competence. Human Communication Research, 36, Beede, K. E., & Kass, S. J. (2006). Engrossed in conversation: The impact of cell phones on simulated driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38, Bianchi, A., & Phillips, J. G.(2005). Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 8, Billieux, J., Linden, M., D,acremont, M., Ceschi, G., & Zermatten, A. (2007). Does impulsivity relate to perceived dependence on and actual use of mobile phone? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, Caird, J. K., Willness, C, R., Steel, P., & Scialfa, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance. Accident analysis and prevention, 40, Campbell, S. W., & Park, Y. J. (2008). Social implications of mobile telephony: The rise of personal communication society. Sociology Compass, 2, Charlton, S. G. (2009). Driving while conversing: Cell phones that distract and passengers who react. Accident analysis & prevention, 41, Chóliz, M. (2010). Mobile phone addiction: Point of issue. Addiction, 105, 374. Elkind, D. (1967). Egocentrism in adolescence. Child Development, 38, 1,025-1,034. Ezoe, S., Toda, M., Yoshimura, K., Naritomi, A., Den, R., & Morimoto, K. (2009). Relationships of personality and lifestyle with mobile phone dependence among female nursing students. Social Behavior and Personality, 37, Farkas, S. & Wadsworth, D. (2002). Uncommon courtesy. Public Perspective, May/June, Hakoyama, M., & Hakoyama, S. (2011). The impact of cell phone use on social networking and development among college students, The American Association of Behavioral and Social Sciences Journal, 15, 1-20, Retrieved from Horrey, W. J.,& Wickens C. D. (2006). Examining the impact of cell phone conversations on driving using meta-analytic techniques. Human Factors, 48, Hunton, J., & Rose, J. M. (2005). Cellular telephones and driving performance: The effects of attentional demands on motor vehicle crash risk. Risk Analysis, 25,

14 International Telecommunication Union (2004). Social and Human Considerations for a more Mobile World Background Paper. Retrieved from Junco, R., Merson, D., & Salter, D. W. (2010). The effect of gender, ethnicity, and income on college students' use of communication technologies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 13, Kelly, T. (2009). Mobile 2.0 beyond voice? Research agenda. Keynote address at International Communication Association preconference, Chicago, IL. Lahkola, A. Tokola, K., & Auvinen, A. (2006). Meta-analysis of mobile phone use and intracranial tumors. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 32, Ling, R. (2002). Adolescent girls and young adult men: Two sub-culture of the mobile telephone. REVISTA DE ESTUDIOS DE JUVENTUD, 57, Retrieved from en_two_sub-cultures_of_the_mobile_telephone Ling, R. (2004) The mobile connection: The cell phone s impact on society. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman. Lipscomb, T. J., Totten, J. W., Cook, R. A., & Lesch, W. (2007). Cellular phone etiquette among college students. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31, McCartt, A. T., Hellinga, L. A., & Braitman, K. A. (2006). Cell phones and driving: Review of research. Traffic Injury Prevention, 7, Nasar, J., Hecht, P., & Wener, R. (2007). 'Call if you have trouble': Mobile phones and safety among college students. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31, Pettigrew, J. (2009). Text messaging and connectedness within close interpersonal relationships. Marriage & Family Review, 45, Rebello, J. (2010). Global wireless subscriptions reach 5 billion. Retrieved from Wireless-Subscriptions-Reach-5-Billion.aspx Strayer, D. L., & Drew, F., A. (2007). Cell phone induced driver distraction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, Strayer, D., L., Drews, F., A., & Crouch, D., J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human Factor and Ergonomics society, 48,

15 Wei, R., & Lo, V. (2006). Staying connected while on the move: Cell phone use and social connectedness. New Media Society, 8, Wise, J. A. (2003). Mobile phone use as pert of young people s consumption styles. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26, Zulkefly, S. N., & Baharundin, R. (2009). Mobile phone use amongst students in a university in Malaysia: It's correlates and relationship to psychological health. Open Journal of Scientific Research, 37,