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 11
11 Figure 2.1. Sites for SHRP 2 Naturalistic Driving Study, indicating the number of DAS units managed per year at each site. · Erie County, N.Y.: CalspanUniversity of Buffalo Research tions can more accurately be drawn. To begin to address the Center (CUBRC); questions of cost, efficiency, and measures of scope associ- · Seattle, Wash.: Battelle Memorial Institute; ated with a probability-based sampling approach for a study · Central Pennsylvania centered on State College: Pennsyl- of this size, a pilot study was conducted by Battelle Memo- vania State University; rial Institute to identify and assess potential challenges related · Central Indiana centered on Bloomington: Indiana Uni- to effectiveness, key differences, and relative costs of using versity; phone recruiting. · Tampa Bay, Fla.: CalspanUniversity of Buffalo Research Center (CUBRC); and Recruitment Pilot Test · Durham, N.C.: Westat. A work plan was developed and thoroughly tested and vali- dated by staff at Battelle with the objective of testing several Participant Management major aspects of the participant recruiting and screening This study will require the participation of more than 3,000 vol- process. The key objectives were as follows: unteers in total, spread across the study's six data collection sites. Managing these participants from recruitment through 1. Determine the extent to which a random selection approach the end of their participation will require several key activities can be used and how this approach compares with more as described below. traditional approaches; 2. Determine the incentives that will be required to get peo- ple to participate; and Participant Recruitment 3. Assess the participant-screening forms and participant- Previous naturalistic driving studies have typically recruited assessment protocols. volunteers through so-called traditional means, includ- ing media advertisements and posted flyers. However, a From the outcomes of this pilot study, it is expected that probability-based sampling approach can provide a less an approach that combines both the call-out and traditional biased, more representative sample from which generaliza- recruiting methods will provide a reasonable balance of ran-
OCR for page 12
12 domized selection with efficient and reliable methods for use the SHRP 2 NDS data set must adhere to data access pro- obtaining the participants needed in the SHRP 2 NDS within cedures, including attaining IRB approval, that will be devel- the narrow time frame allotted. oped as appropriate. Then, only the level of data required for A decision was made to use a centralized call center to con- the specified analyses will be made available. duct phone-based recruiting of volunteers to participate in the The main drivers of study vehicles are targeted as pri- NDS. Current expectations are that, initially, the phone-based mary participants in the study. Up to three other individu- recruiting approach will be used exclusively. It may then need als per primary participant, typically a participant's family to be supplemented with more traditional recruiting methods members--who can be expected to also regularly drive the centered around each site (e.g., newspaper ads and flyers placed study vehicle--are considered secondary drivers. Study per- on vehicles) to target the harder-to-fill cells in the experimen- sonnel will attempt to get informed consent from up to three tal design. For consistency, the call center will also field incom- of these secondary drivers and ask them to complete select ing inquiries generated by the traditional recruiting ads. By questionnaires. However, for secondary drivers who opt out centralizing as much of the recruitment process as is practical, or for others who may drive the vehicle less frequently, their the recruitment process can be kept much more consistent data that include inherently identifying information (such across sites, and substantial unnecessary duplication of activ- as facial images and GPS coordinates) will be de-identified. ities across sites (such as development of recruiting protocols, Efforts related to the protection of human subjects will be materials, and data entry software) can be avoided. discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5. All human subject protocols are subject to review by the appropriate IRBs. Consent and Privacy Participant Compensation It is important for the informed consent process, and the privacy it guarantees to participants and their data, to be Primary drivers who volunteer to participate will be compen- addressed in close coordination with nearly all of the other sated for their participation in the SHRP 2 NDS. The data S05 tasks and across the S07 sites. To this end, none of the collection system will be installed in participants' personal participants' directly identifying information (e.g., name, vehicles for either 1 or 2 years. Compensation for one year of address, social security number) will ever be associated with study participation will total $300, maximum; for two years of any of their data for any level of analysis. However, some study participation, the compensation will total $600, maxi- participant data may inherently incorporate identifying ele- mum. If a participant withdraws from the study prior to the ments (e.g., face video, voice recordings, some question- scheduled time, compensation for that participant will be pro- naire responses, vehicle inventory, crash time and location, rated at a rate of $25 per month of participation at the time of and some GPS information). To maintain participant privacy exit. No compensation will be provided to secondary (or other) in light of such factors, each research project that proposes to drivers of the study vehicle, whether consented or not.