McNeill |1

Ashley McNeill
ENC 3250
Barbara Kyle
23 March 2015
Literature Review
In recent years the issue of texting and driving has become an
increasingly large issue. As a matter of fact it is documented in the National
Highway and Traffic Safety reports that, 12% of all fatal crashes involving at
least one distracted driver are estimated to be related to cell phone use
while driving (Sherin, 2014). This may seem like a relatively small number,
however this is an issue has the ability to increase if the public is not
properly educated on this issue. That is why it is imperative to start providing
this information now, and what better way to do so than to start with those
that are most likely to perform this act; teenagers and young adults. In order
to address this issue I am going to present my proposal to several high
school SADD Clubs, Students against drunk driving, for them to do
presentations on all forms of distracted driving instead of targeting only
drunk driving.
In order to provide evidence that there is already some support for my
topic I found a scholarly journal by Kevin Sherin that provides information on
past movements made to help rectify this issue. According to sherin many

McNeill |2

states have started to make laws banning the use of a cellular device while
driving. However, each of these laws comes with some restriction, because it
is near impossible to completely eliminate usage with everyone. An example
of these restrictions include, Arkansas has made movements to ban all
cellular usage, however at this moment are only capable of completely
banning usage with school bus drivers and drivers younger than the age of
18 (Sherin). There are several other states that share the same restrictions,
so it shows that it is in the general populations interest to protect the youth.
This would help me pose the argument that much of the youth are actually
the ones in the danger zone of committing this possibly fatal act.
The one downside to this argument is the fact that people have this
fear that if they are willing to let young adults have some of their privileges
taken away that it may affect their own rights. Jim Sollisch has the right idea
when he says that people have a slippery slope mentality. He says people
think, If we ban texting while driving, then soon well be banning eating
while driving. Before you know it, you wont be able to switch stations on
your radio. And you know where that will lead: to a totalitarian state
(Sollisch). While this is a situation where the progression escalates a little
quickly, it perfectly outlines the average persons state of mind. They do not
want to risk losing things just because of a single issue that they feel should
not affect them anyway. Why worry about a problem when it does not
directly relate to you?

McNeill |3

The truly motivating evidence that I came upon was the completely
anonymous survey I distributed to four local high schools. At each school I
gave the front desk secretary, with the permission of the principal, one
hundred surveys to be distributed randomly during the students home base.
Once I got them all back I counted out the number of students that got the
same answer and then divided them by the total of four hundred surveys. At
least two out of five admitted to texting while driving, thats forty percent,
and then another one out of five students admit to being in the car while the
driver was texting, thats twenty percent. All together at least sixty percent
of students were affected by texting and driving in some way. While this is a
relatively small sample size, it does provide a fairly relevant sample that can
be expounded upon as the project progresses.
Hopefully these sources will give me the ability to properly state my
argument, and convince people that this is an issue worth taking note of.

McNeill |4

Annotated Bibliography

Anonymous. "Texting While Driving." Paper copy interview.

This source was a survey made and distributed by me. This was helpful
because it provided information on how this issue is directly affecting us. Hopefully,
with this evidence it will help to motivate people into action. This is not an issue
that we can put off and say that it is not relevant to us and therefore it is not our
problem. These are students that we could possibly know on a personal level. They
could be a friend or family member, and if we do not start considering alternatives
to texting and driving, then we are not making efforts to protect our loved ones.

Sherin, Kevin. "Preventing Texting While Driving." American Journal of Preventative Medicine 47.5 (2014):
681-688. Web 1 march, 2015.
This article provides information about the issue of texting and driving, while also providing
alternatives to help prevent the issue. It also provides background into the methods that need to be taken
in order to properly address this issue; such as legal tactics and institutions that an individual needs to go
through in order to correctly fix this problem. On top of this the article also compacts previous information
given on this issue, such as previous laws and organization information, into one article.

Sollisch, Jim. "Inconvenient Truths to a Ban on Texting While Driving."

Csmonitor.com. The Christian Science Monitor, 17 May 2012. Web. 22 Mar. 2015.
This article was perfect for providing a possible counter argument to my
proposal. It provides the progression of thought people go through when making

McNeill |5
decisions. At first they will be supportive of an idea. However, as time goes on and
the debate gets deeper and more detailed people start getting a slippery slope
mentality. They start to think that if they take rights away from the youth that it
may lead to them losing some of their rights. It is definitely not an issue I had
considered at the beginning, but now that it has been brought to my attention it is
something worth considering.