Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City home
Log In
Around the Block

How “Distracted Walking” Hype Puts Pedestrians at Risk

In some quarters it's almost become an article of faith that pedestrian deaths are on the rise in the U.S. because of "distracted walking." The victim-blaming impulse allows policymakers, opinion shapers, and the broader public to conveniently avoid honestly confronting our car-centric transportation system and the horrific volume of death and misery it generates.

The idea that pedestrian distraction is a significant source of harm is starting to shape public policy in tangible ways. The Honolulu City Council recently passed a bill to outlaw looking at a mobile device while crossing the street -- on foot, at least. If you're driving, it would still be lawful to look at your dash-mounted phone while crossing an intersection. (The mayor has yet to take a position on the bill.)

A closer look at the research on pedestrian distraction that has fed the developing conventional wisdom reveals that it doesn't support laws like the one under consideration in Honolulu. Systemic Failure deflates the hype:

The mass hysteria over Distracted Walking originated with a paper published by Jack Nasar (Ohio State University) and his student Derek Troyer. They argued that the increasing use of cell phones had caused a spike in pedestrian injuries. They were featured in major newspapers, such as the NY Times. Cell phones, it was reported, had caused over 1,000 serious injuries per year. And that was just the “tip of the iceberg” it was argued because many injuries don’t require hospitalization.

In absolute terms, those numbers may seem catastrophic. But in relative terms, they are insignificant. Just 3% of the pedestrian hospitalizations involved a cell phone. That is according to Nasar’s own numbers.

The 3% figure accounts for any kind of injury, not just ones involving motor vehicles. And the 3% figure covers use of a cell phone in any kind public space, not just sidewalks.

If the Honolulu bill passes, it could simply serve as a pretext for arbitrarily harassing pedestrians. And as Systemic Failure notes, it could even increase traffic risks by creating a more permissive atmosphere for driving behaviors that pose a greater threat.

Meanwhile, automakers are making in-dash computer systems a standard feature in cars without arousing much alarm from safety scolds.

More recommended reading today: The State Smart Transportation Initiative reviews the share of road spending paid by drivers in each state. And the Bike League writes in the wake of Oregon's new bike tax, you should gird yourself for copycat legislation in other states.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog New York City

Mayor Adams Abruptly Calls Off Planned Queensboro Bridge Pedestrian Path Opening

The Queensboro Bridge's long-awaited pedestrian path was in the works to open this weekend — until Mayor Adams intervened.

March 14, 2025

DOT Report Reveals How Eric Adams Kneecapped Progress on Bus and Bike Lanes

The agency offers an explanation for its shortcomings, even trotting out a "We told you so" from the former mayor's transportation commissioner.

March 14, 2025

Public Grilling: Queens Panel Berates Opponents of Bob Holden’s E-Bike Registration Bill

Queens cyclists who came out to oppose an e-bike registration bill faced hostile questions from their local community board.

March 14, 2025

Friday’s Headlines: Ms. Hochul Goes to Washington Edition

Gov. Hochul "wants to talk about congestion pricing" when she meets with President Trump on Friday. Plus more news.

March 14, 2025

Open Streets Won’t Survive Without More Money From the City, Organizers Warn

Open streets have shrunk significantly — and more cuts could be coming if the city doesn't cough up more funding, volunteer organizers warned.

March 14, 2025
See all posts