Addressing the Driver's Role in Motor Vehicle Crashes: Past Failures, Future Successes

Transcription

1 Addressing the Driver's Role in Motor Vehicle Crashes: Past Failures, Future Successes Robert Foss, PhD Highway Safety Research Center University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill September 26, 2006 Center for Transportation Studies Seminar University of Minnesota

2 Preview: This will be reflections on national & state policy/program efforts to address driver behaviors As opposed to experimental studies of driver behavior Current approach (past failures) Effective programs/policies Understanding human behavior Knowing (& using) solid theory is essential Examples of success Flowing from well-established theoretical principles

3 Study Credits Vehicles, but Not Drivers, for Better Road Safety Cars are becoming safer, but the people who drive them are not Drunken driving rates have not changed much in 10 years, seat belt use has climbed at only a moderate pace, and people are driving faster.

4 MV Fatalities: A Decade of progress (?) 50,000 Fatalities ,000 30,000 20, Fatality rate Rate per 100 million VMT 10,

5 MV Injuries: A Decade of progress 35,000, ,000,000 Injuries ,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000, Injury rate Injury rate per 100 million VMT 40 5,000,

6 Alcohol involvement in fatal crashes 50% 45% BAC >.00 BAC >.08 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

7 Alcohol Involvement in Fatal Crashes - NC What $20,000,000 can do In 5 years: More than 30,000 DWI checkpoints 41,000 DWI arrests

8 Alcohol Involvement in Fatal Crashes - NC 40% 35% 35.0% 37.6% 34.0% 34.9% 35.8% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

9 The Past (& Present) the problems Humans difficult to change This isn t Rocket Science it s harder! Failure to use available knowledge Obsession with messaging Misuse of groups (focus & other) Association cause Efficacy effectiveness Driving ability vs. driving behavior

10 The Past (& Present) Common sense, personal experience Poor guidance Often wrong, always inadequate Cultural truisms Education (awareness) Punishment Attitudes cause behavior

11 Elements of Intervention Effectiveness Conceptual Soundness Implementation Fidelity Desired Outcome Difficult Astoundingly Difficult Distressingly Rare

12 A Typical Conceptual Model (Underage Drinking) Knowledge about risks of drinking Underage drinking (and driving) Penalty for (illegal) drinking

13 Theoretical Bases for Initiative to Reduce Underage Drinking Macro/Societal Level Micro/Individual Level Alcohol-related Public Policy mandated server training dramshop liability social host liability license restrictions excise tax mandated compliance checks alcohol sales restrictions advertising restrictions Social/ Institutional Structures alcohol distribution system social class religious composition business Legal Availability minimum drinking age hours of sale no service to intoxicated Formal Social Controls size of threat probability of detection probability of threat application speed of threat application Economic Availability alcohol price search and acquisition costs disposable income Physical Availability quantity accessible geographic density of outlets proximity to outlets Intervening Interpersonal Variables models of drinking social roles social interaction Individual Factors cognitions and perceptions personality biological conditioned responses Drinking Behavior minimum drinking age hours of sale no service to intoxicated Health outcomes Psychosocial outcomes Market Mechanisms income response to demand stimulation of demand Social Availability prevalence of alcohol images social class religious composition business Source: Wagenaar, 1997

14 A simple truth

15 Basic Social Psychology B = f (p,e) Target environment where possible because: Individuals respond to environment Ensures fidelity of implementation

16 Basic Social Psychology B = f (p,e) Implementation Fidelity Target Environment (Law, policy, etc.) Not individuals

17 Effective program Implement with fidelity Need second-order understanding Phenomena involved in implementation Communication complexity Dyadic, group, mass Organizational behavior Political functioning Well-supported theory invaluable!

18 GDL as example Environmental change Provides protection (environment) Lower risk exposure Reduced exposure Feasible way to achieve needed practice Experienced drivers as mentors Free of charge Works with little active enforcement Supports parents Provides motivation Reward rather than punishment

19 Crash Rate Ratios for 16 & 17 vs year-olds, NC GDL Passenger Restriction

20 16 year-old Nighttime crashes (9 pm 5 am) Jan-91 Jul-91 Jan-92 Jul-92 Jan-93 Jul-93 Jan-94 Jul-94 Jan-95 Jul-95 Jan-96 Jul-96 Jan-97 Jul-97 Jan-98 Jul-98 Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Jan-01 Jul-01 Jan-02 Jul-02 Jan-03 Jul-03 Jan-04 Jul-04 Month-Year

21 5 Years 6 Years Time to first crash: GDL drivers better 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% Pre-GDL GDL Cumulative Percentage Crash-Free (Survival). 10% 0% 1 Day 6 Months 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years 4 Years Time Since Licensure

22 Beyond environmental modification Conceptual Soundness Science, not folklore Common Sense Understand phenomenon Well-supported theory

23 Some useful theories General Deterrence Theory Theory of Planned Behavior Social Learning Theory (Social Cognitive Theory) Fuzzy-Trace Theory

24 Influencing Individual Behavior Using the Theory of Planned Behavior For behaviors where Person has needed skill Environmental constraints minimal Environmental facilitation minimal Person feels able and responsible Then

25 Influencing Individual Behavior B BI = w Individual n 1 i= 1 BiEi Bi = beliefs about possible consequences (i) of behavior Ei = evaluation of consequences of behavior NBj = normative beliefs about behavior by person j MCj = motivation to comply with expectations of person j + w 2 m j= 1 Social NB j MC j w 1, w2= weighting factors for beliefs about act, normative expectations

26 High visibility enforcement works B BI = w n 1 i= 1 BiEi + w 2 m j= 1 NB j MC j Publicity about enforcement should B i where i = perceived likelihood of detection

27 Promising educational approach B BI = Social Norms w n 1 i= 1 BiEi + w 2 m j= 1 NB j MC Beliefs about how members of a group generally behave (and should behave) Perceived norms influence behavior... even though we may not be consciously aware of them j

28 Social Norm Intervention/program A broad communication strategy Acquaint population with normative information Emphasize positive rather than negative Comprehensive, multi-channel, multi-faceted Use sophisticated marketing/advertising tactics To correct misperceptions or Publicize poorly known fact (about behavior)

29

30 Norm interventions present happy, normal people that target can identify with, associated with factual information documenting desirable normative behavior.

31 No preaching, no threats, no scare tactics. Message is respectful of target audience rather than condescending or implicitly judgmental.

32

33

34

35 UNC Social Norm Program Using a Direct Measure of Alcohol Consumption

36 Goals: Examine actual student drinking Develop and evaluate Social Norm program to reduce: Drinking Driving after drinking

37 Social Norms & Student Drinking Students overestimate drinking on college campuses Frequent & excessive drinking assumed normative Implicit pressure on students to drink Correcting misperceptions should help reduce student drinking (& driving)

38 UNC-CH BAC Survey Determine actual extent of drinking by UNC students Verbal Behavior Behavior Directly measured drinking

39 Fall 1997: Interviewed 1,846 randomly sampled UNC students All nights of week, 10 p.m. 3 a.m. Dorms, greek houses, offcampus apts 86% participation Breath alcohol measurements N = 1,790 (97%)

40 Overall BAC Distribution zero 32% 72% 8% 15% 20% 26% 19 2% 8% 8% 9% %.15% % % N = 1,790

41 BAC Distribution by Night of Interview Party nights (Thu-Sat) 32% 8% 15% 64% 13%11%12% 26% 19 20% zero % % >=.10% Other nights (Mon-Wed) 85% N = 1,789 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

42 Alcohol Fact: Whether it s Thursday, Friday or Saturday night, 2 out of 3 UNC students return home with a.00 Blood Alcohol Concentration.

43

44 2 out of 3 Campaign CTOPS (Freshman orientation) News conference (National attention) Posters Know the Fact incentives Newspaper ads Web site Opportunitistic actions

45 Posters

46 Basic Message Posters

47 Posters Reminder that this is not simply self-report data It s not what they say, it s what they blow.

48 Posters Full Message: Including Most of those who drink have four or less.

49 Posters Source of Fact to Lend Scientific Credibility Based on Fall 1997 breathalyzer data collected between 10 p.m. and 3 a.m at fraternities, sororities, residence halls, apartments.

50

51

52

53

54

55 1999 & 2002 Survey Findings 1999 Study Findings 1999: N = 2,540 students 2002: N = 1,886 students

56 Participation Type by Year 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% Breath only Survey only Breath & survey 0%

57 BAC Distribution, Night of Interview % 10% 9% 10% 32% 8% 15% 26% 19 74% 11% 9%6% zero % 20% % >=.10% % 10%7%7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1997 vs p < vs n.s.

58 BAC Distribution, Night of Interview % 9% 10% 32% 8% 15% 26% 19 11% 9% 6% % % 20% >=.10% % 7% 7% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 1997 vs p < vs n.s.

59 Heavy Drinking, Night of Interview 5+ (males) 4+ (females) 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 16% 32% 8% 15% 28% decrease 13% 20% 11% 26% 19 0% vs 02 p <.05

60 Heavy Drinking, Night of Interview (Drinkers only) 5+ (males) 4+ (females) 60% 50% 55% 8% 15% 40% 32% 49% 45% 20% 30% 26% 19 20% 10% 0% vs 02 p <.05

61 Measured drinking among drivers: % non-zero BAC % non-zero BAC

62 30% Driver BACs by Year (Drinkers only) % >.10% 25% 20% 15% 10% 27% 32% 13% 8% 15% 26% 19 15% 14% 20% 5% 0% 7% %

63 29% 27% 25% 23% 21% Self-reported Frequent Heavy Drinking National vs. UNC Harvard CAS 8% 15% UNC 32% 20% 26% 19 19% 17% 15%

64 Conclusions Comprehensive Norms program affected: Measured BAC Nightly drinking Nightly heavy drinking Frequent heavy drinking Driving after drinking

65 Social Norm approaches highly promising But, to succeed they require Strict adherence to SN principles Intense, long-term effort Commitment of time, $, creativity

66 Social Norm Programs - step-by-step Crucial steps Collect & analyze data Design comprehensive program Develop & test messages Revise messages Continue data collection & evaluation Develop, test, revise new messages Program must continue

67 National Social Norms Resource Center

68 Montana Social Norms Toolkit

69 Hobart & William Smith

70 University of Arizona

71 Social Norm Resources: MostofUs.org alcohol.hws.edu/ socialnorm.org

72 Ineffective Messaging