This is the seventeenth in a series reporting thefindings of the annual behavioural research seminarin road safety. The seminar, organised by the RoadSafety Division of the Department for Transport,provides a forum for the discussion of currentresearch as well as the exchange of ideas in thisarea of behavioural research.

Price 33.00

Behavioural R

esearch in Road

Safety 2007

Seventeenth S

eminar

DfT

Behavioural Research in

Road Safety 2007 Seventeenth Seminar

March 2009

Behavioural Research in Road Safety 2007: Seventeenth Seminar

March 2009

Although this report was commissioned by the Department for Transport (DfT), the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the DfT.

While the DfT has made every effort to ensure the information in this document is accurate, DfT does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of that information; and it cannot accept liability for any loss or damages of any kind resulting from reliance on the

information or guidance this document contains.

Department for Transport Great Minster House 76 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DR Telephone 020 7944 8300 Web site www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/behavioural/

Queens Printer and Controller of Her Majestys Stationery Office, 2009, except where

otherwise stated

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for

non-commercial research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The copyright source of the material must be acknowledged and the title of the publication specified.

For any other use of this material, apply for a Value Added Click-Use Licence at www.opsi.gov.uk/ click-use/index.htm or e-mail licensing@opsi.gov.uk

To order further copies contact: DfT Publications Tel: 0300 123 1102 E-mail: dftinf@capita.co.uk

ISBN 978 1 904763 82 6

If you would like to be informed in advance of forthcoming Department for Transport priced publications, or would like to arrange a standing order, call 020 7944 4673.

Printed in Great Britain on paper containing at least 75% recycled fibre.

mailto:dftinf@capita.co.ukwww.opsi.gov.ukwww.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/behavioural

Contents

1 In-depth analysis of road traffic collisions: reflections on twenty years 5 of research D. D. Clarke, P. Ward, W. Truman and C. Bartle

2 On the Spot accident study the characteristics of pedestrian accidents 24 R. Cuerden and D. Richards

3 Contributory factors in road accidents 48 J. Broughton

4 Methods for data modelling 58 B. Sexton

5 Road traffic injury and disadvantage: people and areas 77 R. A. Lyons, H. Ward, N. Christie, S. Macey, P. Norman and S. Griffiths

6 Traffic injury risks for children in deprived areas: a qualitative study of 94 parents views N. Christie, H. Ward, R. Kimberlee, E. Towner and R. Thoreau

7 Car drivers attitudes towards motorcyclists and their relationship to 103 accidents D. Crundall, P. Bibby, D. D. Clarke, P. Ward and C. Bartle

8 A comparison of drivers eye movements in filmed and simulated dangerous 112 driving situations P. Chapman, E. van Loon, S. Trawley and D. Crundall

9 Do we really drive as we feel? 124 N. Kinnear, S. W. Kelly, S. Stradling and J. A. Thomson

10 Possible application of the PRIME theory of motivation to promote safer 136 driving R. West

iii

Behavioural Research in Road Safety 2007

11 Testing the effects of a volitional intervention on drivers compliance with speed limits: selected findings from a study on implementation intentions M. A. Elliott and C. J. Armitage

151

12 The drink-drive rehabilitation project C. M. Inwood

162

13 Work-related road safety CD-ROM evaluation: Phase I results to date B. Lang

176

14 Assessing fuel-efficient driver behaviour through tachograph information N. Reed

191

15 An economic evaluation of the Kerbcraft child pedestrian training pilot project J. Powell, E. Towner, K. Whelan and G. Errington

208

16 Influences on pedestrian risk-taking in young adolescents: the conflicting role of parents and peers A. K. Tolmie, J. A. Thomson, H. C. Foot, R. OConnor, E. Karagiannidou, M. Banks, P. Sarvary and C. ODonnell

215

17 Understanding inappropriate high speed: qualitative results from the HUSSAR project R. Fuller, B. Hannigan, H. Bates, M. Gormley, S. Stradling, P. S. Broughton, N. Kinnear and C. ODolan

225

18 A typology of speeding drivers: extent of, and motives for, exceeding the speed limit S. Stradling, M. Gormley, R. Fuller, P. S. Broughton, N. Kinnear, C. ODolan and B. Hannigan

236

19 Did we need a long-term study of driving with Intelligent Speed Adaptation or would the earlier short-term studies have been sufficient? O. Carsten, S. Jamson, K. Chorlton and F. Lai

253

20 Do attitudes and intentions change across a speed awareness workshop? F. P. McKenna

265

iv

1

In-depth analysis of road traffic collisions: reflections on twenty years of research

David D. Clarke, Pat Ward, Wendy Truman and Craig Bartle School of Psychology University of Nottingham Nottingham NG7 2RD

Abstract

The Action Analysis Group at the University of Nottingham uses sequence analysis and a range of related techniques to study various psychological problems and processes. Past projects have looked at machine-learning techniques for data analysis, language change, humancomputer interaction, and road accidents.

Road accident projects undertaken for the Department for Transport/Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) over the last 20 years have investigated, in depth, right-turning accidents, overtaking accidents, young driver accidents, motorcycle accidents, work-related road traffic accidents and in-car fatal accidents. Our research shows that police accident reports are information-rich sources that can be a valuable tool for providing information about the causation of a variety of accidents. This paper describes our technique and main findings from each project, and also examines some procedural problems that have affected our work.

Introduction

The causality of real road accidents can be a difficult phenomenon to study. One possible solution to this is the use of methodology that investigates road accidents after they have occurred, rather than the more familiar psychological research that relies, for its method, on the examination of driver behaviour in controlled environments.

One such well-known approach involves the use of multi-disciplinary accident investigation (MDAI) teams that travel to the site of accidents soon after they occur in order to collect data. Research such as that of Sabey and Taylor (1980) is based on the work of MDAI teams. Findings were concerned with the proportional contributions

5

Behavioural Research in Road Safety 2007

to road accidents of the user, the environment and the vehicle. It is from this work that the much-quoted figure of 95% was identified as the proportion of road accidents involving human error. Sabey and Taylor (1980) cited research carried out in the United States that produced much the same figure. They went on to assess driver errors behind this figure by examining the contribution of perceptual errors, lack of skill, manner of execution and various forms of impairment, such as alcohol.

However, in a review of the work of multi-disciplinary team research worldwide, Grayson and Hakkert (1987) pointed out several disadvantages to such a method. Operational costs are very high, and typically only a small number of accidents can be studied, unless research can be carried out over several years. Even with a long time-period, sometimes only small numbers of accidents can be studied effectively, as was noted, for example, by Larsen and Kines (2002). Although Sabey and Taylor (1980) did study over 2,000 accidents, such a figure is the exception rather than the rule. There can also be a bias towards injury accidents because of the notification procedure.

This last point is a criticism that cannot be levelled at more recent UK research. Hills and Cuerden (2005) conducted a large, well-organised project in the UK, phase 1 of which was completed recently. Phase 1 of this work sampled over 6,000 accidents from two areas of the UK. Nearly 85% of the accidents attended were categorised as slight (as opposed to serious or fatal). The accidents sampled were also, by definition, of a heterogeneous nature.

A further criticism of MDAI work in general concerns the conclusions reached. Despite the vast amount of information collected in such work, definitive conclusions are very limited (Grayson and Hakkert, 1987) and have been applied mainly to vehicle design and engineering efforts rather than human behaviour and road design. According to Grayson and Hakkert (1987), these limitations tend to disappear if an in-depth but not immediate response on-the-spot approach is taken. They comment that it is also important that any in-depth technique is only really of use if applied to specific areas rather than a large heterogeneous sample of information.

Many studies have used in-depth techniques applied to secondary data sources, such as police reports, interviews and questionnaires. Fell (1976) was among the first to claim that an accident causal schema could be constructed from such sources. Fell was of the opinion t