A recent U.S. survey found 72% of pedestrians use phones while walking. This behavior measurably increases risk, with texting adding 28% to crossing times and raising close-call odds. The data shows how device use intersects with pedestrian safety.
Key Takeaways
- In a 2021 U.S. observational survey, 72% of pedestrians admitted using phones while walking—behavioral baseline relevant to distracted walking
- In a 2018–2019 European study of pedestrian mobile phone use, 33% of pedestrians were observed using a phone while walking
- In a 2017 observational study, 29% of pedestrians were distracted by looking at a smartphone while crossing
- In a controlled study, “phone lock” interventions reduced distraction effects on crossing time by 25% compared with normal smartphone use
- A 2020 systematic review found that smartphone distraction while walking is associated with increased risk-relevant behaviors in 7 of 9 assessed outcomes
- In a 2019 randomized controlled trial of in-situ messaging (“put the phone away”), 24% fewer participants crossed with phone-in-hand compared to control
- In 2020, smartphone-based pedestrian distraction is consistently captured in experimental protocols measuring crossing time, variability, and missed hazard detection—3 primary measurement categories reported across the literature
- Pedestrians texting while crossing show a 28% average increase in crossing time versus control (behavioral change relevant to distracted walking)
- Phone distracted pedestrians missed critical gaps more often: 35% higher rate of unsafe gap selection reported in simulator studies
- In 2022, 4.32 billion people used social media globally (content consumption increases likelihood of phone use while walking)
- In 2022, smartphone shipments were about 1.23 billion units worldwide (device base enabling distracted walking)
- In 2023, global smartphone shipments were 1.17 billion units (continued device prevalence for distracted walking exposure)
- In the WHO Global Status Report on Road Safety 2018, 66% of global road traffic deaths occurred in lower- and middle-income countries—context for differing intervention reach for distracted walking
- In 2022, over 1.1 million people died in road traffic globally per WHO estimates (broad fatality environment for pedestrian-risk including distraction)
Most pedestrians use phones while walking, and distraction can sharply slow reaction, worsen stability, and raise near miss risk.
Related reading
01 · Category
Behavioral Prevalence9 stats
01
In a 2021 U.S. observational survey, 72% of pedestrians admitted using phones while walking—behavioral baseline relevant to distracted walking
02
In a 2018–2019 European study of pedestrian mobile phone use, 33% of pedestrians were observed using a phone while walking
03
In a 2017 observational study, 29% of pedestrians were distracted by looking at a smartphone while crossing
04
In a roadside observational study in the United States, 41% of pedestrians were using a handheld device while walking during the observation window
05
In a 2019 survey, 59% of respondents said they had seen others texting while walking in public spaces—context indicator of social exposure and normalization
06
In an eye-tracking study of crossing under phone distraction, participants spent 30% less time looking toward vehicles/approaching traffic compared with baseline crossing
07
In a controlled driving-simulation related pedestrian distraction experiment, phone use increased the likelihood of entering the conflict zone with inadequate vehicle gap by 2.1 times
08
Smartphone use while walking can reduce situation awareness: 20–40% longer response times to hazards are reported in studies comparing distracted vs. non-distracted pedestrians
09
In a 2021 observational study, 2.6% of pedestrians displayed phone-driven behaviors directly related to reduced situational scanning during crossing events
Interpretation
Behavioral Prevalence Interpretation
Behavioral prevalence data show that distracted walking is common, with phone use observed ranging from 29% to 72% across studies and even 59% of people reporting they have seen others texting while walking in public.
02 · Category
Intervention And Policy10 stats
01
In a controlled study, “phone lock” interventions reduced distraction effects on crossing time by 25% compared with normal smartphone use
02
A 2020 systematic review found that smartphone distraction while walking is associated with increased risk-relevant behaviors in 7 of 9 assessed outcomes
03
In a 2019 randomized controlled trial of in-situ messaging (“put the phone away”), 24% fewer participants crossed with phone-in-hand compared to control
04
A 2020 evaluation of floor/sidewalk messaging increased observed “phone away” behavior by 15 percentage points during crossing tasks
05
A laboratory study found that auditory warnings reduced unsafe crossings under phone distraction by 30% (intervention efficacy)
06
In 2022, the City of London reported delivering a behavior change campaign aimed at pedestrians using mobile phones while crossing, as part of Vision Zero style initiatives (documented in city safety updates)
07
In a 2022 city-led safety audit, pedestrian conflict points with high phone-distraction observations were prioritized for signal timing changes within 90 days (operations metric reported by the program documentation)
08
In an RCT on pedestrian digital signage interventions, observed compliance with “look up” messaging increased by 22 percentage points
09
In 2023, the US NHTSA reported that distraction remains a leading factor in crashes, and pedestrian-related distraction risks are addressed via public education; NHTSA’s distraction resources provide the behavioral-policy context
10
In 2022, the European Commission continued funding road safety research on vulnerable road users and distraction-related behavioral factors (projects and results listed in EU road safety calls)
Interpretation
Intervention And Policy Interpretation
Across intervention and policy efforts, the evidence consistently shows smartphones distraction can be meaningfully curbed, with results such as a 25% reduction in distraction effects from phone lock and up to a 30% drop in unsafe crossings from auditory warnings alongside campaigns that increased phone away behavior by 15 percentage points.
03 · Category
Safety Outcomes14 stats
01
In 2020, smartphone-based pedestrian distraction is consistently captured in experimental protocols measuring crossing time, variability, and missed hazard detection—3 primary measurement categories reported across the literature
02
Pedestrians texting while crossing show a 28% average increase in crossing time versus control (behavioral change relevant to distracted walking)
03
Phone distracted pedestrians missed critical gaps more often: 35% higher rate of unsafe gap selection reported in simulator studies
04
In a naturalistic conflict study, distracted pedestrians had 1.7× higher odds of close calls versus non-distracted pedestrians
05
Texting/phone use while crossing increases collision risk in simulated scenarios by a factor of 2.0 (relative to nondistracted walking)
06
In a 2020 experiment, distracted walking reduced the frequency of looking both left and right before crossing by 37% compared to nondistracted walking
07
In experiments, phone distraction reduced headway checks toward traffic by 40% compared with baseline walking
08
In a 2019 experiment, mean speed while walking decreased by 6% during phone use while walking compared to baseline (a gait adjustment marker for distracted walking)
09
In a systematic review, 64% of studies reported that distracted pedestrians had worse postural stability during crossing (safety-relevant walking control)
10
Smartphone distraction increased the probability of stepping into the roadway when no safe gap existed by 1.5× in lab crossing tasks
11
Street crossing under distraction shows a 25% increase in rate of near misses in observational analyses of conflict events
12
Distracted walking is repeatedly shown to increase cognitive load: dual-task interference studies report up to 2× worse detection performance for approaching hazards
13
In a 2018 study of distracted walking, stride length variability increased by 12% during smartphone use compared to normal walking
14
In a meta-analysis, distraction increased SDLP (lateral deviation) by a pooled effect size equivalent to a 1.3× increase (safety-relevant stability change)
Interpretation
Safety Outcomes Interpretation
Across safety outcomes, phone distraction clearly undermines pedestrian safety, with texting increasing crossing time by 28% and close-call odds rising to 1.7 times higher, while missed critical gaps and unsafe gap selection climb by 35% and collision risk doubles to 2.0 in simulations compared with nondistracted walking.
More related reading
04 · Category
Market And Devices6 stats
01
In 2022, 4.32 billion people used social media globally (content consumption increases likelihood of phone use while walking)
02
In 2022, smartphone shipments were about 1.23 billion units worldwide (device base enabling distracted walking)
03
In 2023, global smartphone shipments were 1.17 billion units (continued device prevalence for distracted walking exposure)
04
In 2021, 67% of smartphone users reported that they frequently use their phones outdoors (context for distracted walking)
05
As of 2024, Android and iOS together account for about 99% of smartphone market share globally (platform ubiquity for distracted walking)
06
In 2023, global wearables shipments reached 559 million units (watch/eyewear notifications can distract pedestrians even without phone-in-hand)
Interpretation
Market And Devices Interpretation
With smartphone shipments staying massive at about 1.23 billion in 2022 and 1.17 billion in 2023 alongside 67% of users frequently using phones outdoors, distracted walking is likely being steadily fueled by the ever-growing and ubiquitous device base, complemented by the 559 million global wearables shipped in 2023.
05 · Category
Fatality Burden2 stats
01
In the WHO Global Status Report on Road Safety 2018, 66% of global road traffic deaths occurred in lower- and middle-income countries—context for differing intervention reach for distracted walking
02
In 2022, over 1.1 million people died in road traffic globally per WHO estimates (broad fatality environment for pedestrian-risk including distraction)
Interpretation
Fatality Burden Interpretation
Nearly 66% of the world’s road traffic deaths in 2018 occurred in lower- and middle-income countries, and with over 1.1 million road users dying globally in 2022, the fatality burden from distracted walking falls disproportionately on places with fewer resources to prevent pedestrian risks.
report visual · Key figures
How common is distracted walking?
Across observational studies, phone use and smartphone distraction while crossing are widespread—highlighting a pervasive baseline behavior.
72%
In a 2021 U.S. observational survey, 72% of pedestrians admitted using phones while walking—behavioral baseline relevant
33%
In a 2018–2019 European study of pedestrian mobile phone use, 33% of pedestrians were observed using a phone while walki
29%
In a 2017 observational study, 29% of pedestrians were distracted by looking at a smartphone while crossing
41%
In a roadside observational study in the United States, 41% of pedestrians were using a handheld device while walking du
59%
In a 2019 survey, 59% of respondents said they had seen others texting while walking in public spaces—context indicator
source-verifiedncbi.nlm.nih.gov · sciencedirect.com · americancad.org2021
Reference
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
Marie Larsen. (2026, February 13). Distracted Walking Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/distracted-walking-statistics
MLA
Marie Larsen. "Distracted Walking Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/distracted-walking-statistics.
Chicago
Marie Larsen. 2026. "Distracted Walking Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/distracted-walking-statistics.
Sources & references
41 datasets cited across this report · attribution is report-level
+24 additional datasets cited (not shown individually)