National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

NCHRP Report 622: Effectiveness of Behavioral Highway Safety Countermeasures (2008)
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)

Citation Manager

Preusser, David F, Chaudhary, Neil K, Tison, Julie, Williams, Allan F, Nichols, James L, Transportation Research Board. "Summary." NCHRP Report 622: Effectiveness of Behavioral Highway Safety Countermeasures. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
9
bottomleft bottomright
Page
9

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 9
9 probability of being imposed, and have a high degree of in- The following percentage of countermeasures are rated trusiveness (i.e., involve a real amount of money or time) are Proven or Likely to work in each class of countermeasures: most likely to work. If there is low intrusiveness, if sanctions are not well known to violators, are unlikely to be applied, or · Sixteen percent of Class 1: Voluntary Action; if the penalty is not very meaningful, success is unlikely. · Fifty-three percent of Class 2: Laws, Regulations, Policies; · Seventy-two percent of Class 3: Laws Plus Enhancements; and Proven · Sixty-seven percent of Class 4: Sanctions and Treatments. · Aggressive driving, speeding penalties (e.g., suspension, warning letters); By topic area, there are differences in expected effective- · Restrictions on plea bargains; ness. Effectiveness is most likely in the occupant restraint · Court monitoring; group where 82% of the countermeasures are rated Proven · Mandatory attendance at alcohol treatment; or Likely; followed by alcohol (67%); aggressive driving/ · Close monitoring of DUIs; speeding (50%); young drivers (38%); bicycles (33%); pedes- · Alcohol interlocks; trians (30%); elderly drivers (14%); motorcycles (11%); and · Brief interventions--alcohol; distracted/fatigued drivers (none at this time). · License plate impoundment; How effective are those countermeasures rated as Proven or · Vehicle immobilization; and Likely? Ideally, for all countermeasures rated as Proven, and for · Vehicle impoundment. many rated as Likely, it would be possible to derive a numerical estimate of the effect size, the expected percentage reduction in injuries. However, it is not always possible to estimate this num- Likely ber. Of the 47 countermeasures rated as Proven or Likely, about · Increased belt use law penalties and half of the outcomes relate not to reductions in crashes or in- · Simplifying and streamlining DUI statutes. juries, but to some intermediate measure (e.g., reductions in re- cidivism, increases in arrests or convictions, decreased drinking, increases in seat belt use). It is possible to estimate the impact of Unknown/Uncertain/Unlikely increases in seat belt use to decreases in injuries, but for many · Vehicle forfeiture (+); other intermediate measures, there is no credible way to do so. · GDL penalties (0); There also are a few cases where the expected effect relates to · Driving under the influence (DUI) fines (0); crashes or injuries, but not enough information is available to · DUI jail (0); extract a numerical estimate of the effect. · High BAC sanctions (+); and In addition to the effect size, there are other important · DWI (driving while intoxicated) courts (+). factors in determining the overall impact of any countermea- sure. One of these factors is the size of the population affected. For example, a measure affecting the general population Summary can have more impact than one affecting a specific subgroup Overall, 45% of the 104 countermeasures are considered (e.g., teenage drivers only). Another is the expected duration of effective (33% proven; 12% likely). By comparison, the other the effect. For example, although the effects of laws can vary 55% are less likely to work. This assessment is based on the over time, depending on such factors as the amount of public- fact that evidence for effectiveness is uncertain or unknown ity and enforcement, their permanence gives them an advantage and/or the criteria for what is likely to work are not met compared with programs that are one-time efforts. Duration (52%), or because research indicates that these countermea- can also refer to the length of time the positive effects of a pol- sures increase crashes (3%). icy last on individuals affected, for example, license suspension.