traffic accident statistics and risk perceptions in japan and the united states

Accident Analysis and Prevention 32 (2000) 827–835

Traffic accident statistics and risk perceptions in Japan and theUnited States

Hiroshi Hayakawa a,*, Paul S. Fischbeck a,b, Baruch Fischhoff a,b

a Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon Uni6ersity, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, USAb Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon Uni6ersity, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, USA

Received 5 May 1999; received in revised form 15 October 1999; accepted 18 October 1999

Abstract

Several recent studies have concluded that Japan and the US have different risk cultures. This study examines the actual riskenvironments faced by citizens in the two countries, in the domain of traffic safety, as a possible source of differences in riskperceptions. The study contrasts traffic-accident risks from several points of view (e.g. car drivers, motorcyclists, bicyclists andpedestrians) and risk statistics (e.g. death rates, relative fatality risks, and accident lethality). Results clarify the traffic risks in thetwo countries and confirm their potential for explaining cross-national differences in risk perceptions. © 2000 Elsevier ScienceLtd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Traffic accident risk; Accident lethality; Japan; United States; Risk perception

www.elsevier.com/locate/aap

1. Introduction

Japan and the United States (US) are often describedas having different risk cultures, even though bothcountries have similar levels of industrialization andexpose their citizens to many of the same risks (e.g.Poncelet, 1991). Studies using the ‘psychometricparadigm’ (Fischhoff et al., 1978; Slovic, 1987, 1992)have found both similarities and differences in riskperceptions in the two countries (Kleinhesselink andRosa, 1991; Hinman et al., 1993; Kleinhesselink andRosa, 1994). In these studies, cognitive representationsof risk in the countries had the same two underlyingdimensions often called dread and unknown risk. How-ever, Japanese subjects tended to view specific risks asless novel, less well understood by science, and lesscontrollable, as well as more dreaded and potentiallycatastrophic. Automobile accidents were significantlymore dreaded in Japan than in the US.

Hayakawa et al. (2000) found that Japanese driversdreaded traffic accidents more than did Americans andbought more insurance, relative to the protection of-

fered. Japanese subjects had much higher estimates forthe probabilities of an automobile accident occurring,being serious, and being their personal fault. Indeed,unlike American drivers, Japanese overestimate the riskof accidents and see themselves as more likely to be atfault than not. Generally, Japanese had less unrealisticoptimism than Americans, for both negative and posi-tive potential future life events (Weinstein, 1980; Sven-son et al., 1985; Alloy and Ahrens, 1987; Heine andLehman, 1995). With such beliefs, it is understandablethat the Japanese view automotive risk with greater‘dread.’ In contrast, American subjects tended to esti-mate greater monetary losses for both collision andliability accidents. That focus on economic issues seemsless likely to evoke ‘dread’ than the Japanese focus oninjury and death.

Hayakawa et al. (2000) also found that Japanesedrivers’ reasons for having automobile insurance fo-cused almost exclusively on being able to cover dam-ages or harm done to others and reducing personalworry and stress regarding the consequences of anautomobile accident. In contrast, American subjectsfocused on protecting themselves from lawsuits, cover-ing damage done to their own vehicle, and complyingwith the law. These observations were consistent withthe cross-cultural model of the self proposed by

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-412-2685609; fax: +1-412-2683757.

E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Hayakawa).

0001-4575/00/$ - see front matter © 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.PII: S 0 0 0 1 -4575 (00 )00007 -5

H. Hayakawa et al. / Accident Analysis and Pre6ention 32 (2000) 827–835828

Markus and Kitayama (1991). In interdependent soci-eties like Japan, being ostracized from one’s group forfailing to compensate those whom one hurts is a seriouspenalty. Japanese want to be very sure that they havedone all that they can to prepare for such a situation.This elevated concern for others could contribute toJapanese drivers’ higher dread. In independent soci-eties, like North America, on the other hand, peopleemphasize their uniqueness and independence (Markusand Kitayama, 1991). Such individual would logicallyhave a more utilitarian attitude toward insurance.

Culture, like individual psychology, creates predispo-sitions to perceive and solve problems in particularways. How these predispositions get expressed dependson the actual risk environments confronting people.This study compares traffic-accident statistics in Japanand the US in order to help explain the differences inautomobile risk perceptions in the two countries. Thenext section describes data sources and methods. Thefollowing section reports risks from the perspective ofseveral classes of potential victims. The last sectiondiscusses these differences in terms of risk-mitigationpolicies and risk perceptions.

2. Data and method

Japanese fatality and casualty data were obtainedfrom Institution for Traffic Accident Research andData Analysis (ITARDA), part of the Ministry ofTransportation. ITARDA (1997) summarizes both fa-talities and injuries, based on statistics prepared by theNational Policy Agency and the Ministry of Health andWelfare. For comparability with American data, deathsoccurring within 30 days of the accident were consid-ered traffic fatalities.

Equivalent American data were obtained from theFatal Accident Reporting System (FARS) and GeneralEstimates System (GES) maintained by the NationalHighway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA, 1997,1999a,b). Supplementary, raw data (electronic filessaved as SAS files) were also taken from the NHTSA’sftp site (NHTSA, 1999a,b). Although FARS providesan accurate count of fatalities, there is no equivalentdata base for injuries. GES provides a sample of non-fatal accident injuries based on police reports (Blincoeand Faigin, 1992; Miller et al., 1998). In the US,however, many minor injuries do not appear in policereports, even for accidents reported to the police. Tocorrect for this underreporting, we will use a multiplierof 1.12 for the number of non-fatal injuries (Blincoeand Faigin, 1992; Blincoe, 1996).

Although accident risk can be measured in severalways, the statistics are typically a ratio of number ofdeaths to some measure of exposure, such as distancedriven. The number of deaths is uncontroversial and

easily obtained, but exposure estimates are more com-plicated. We used the number of licensed drivers andregistered motorcycles as measures of exposure for cardrivers and motorcyclists, respectively. Those datacame from FHWA (1994), ITARDA (1997), JAMA(1998), and FHWA (1998). For bicyclists and pedestri-ans, we used population data, assuming that all individ-uals are equally exposed (Fontaine and Gourlet, 1997).Population data were obtained from MCA (1997a) andDOC (1997). In order to assess general traffic deathrates (per population, vehicle, and kilometer driven)and fatal vehicle accidents by type of accident, we tookadditional data from MCA (1997b) and NSC (1997).

Relative risk was calculated as the fatality risk ineach age group relative to the average fatality risk forall licensed drivers, registered motorcycles, or the popu-lation (Evans et al., 1990). As a measure of the severityof accidents, we computed the lethality of accidents asthe ratio of fatalities to casualties, recognizing that italso depends on such factors as the arrival time ofemergency vehicles and the effectiveness of medicaltreatment (Maeda, 1998).

3. Risk comparison

3.1. Major 6ictims in fatal traffic accidents

Fig. 1 shows fatal vehicle accidents by type of acci-dent. It shows that collisions with other vehicles in theUS constitute a higher proportion of fatal accidents,whereas collisions with pedestrians play a larger role inJapan. The percentage of fatal vehicle accidents involv-ing collisions with pedestrians is larger in Japan than inthe US (28.5 vs. 18.2%). The percentages of trafficaccident deaths among non car-users are also larger inJapan than in the US (motorcyclists: 18.6 vs. 6%,bicyclists: 12.3 vs. 2%, pedestrians: 27.7 vs. 14.1%). Thisresults in nearly 60% of Japanese traffic-accident deathsbeing among non-car users, compared 20% in the US(ITARDA, 1997). In Japan, the victim in a fatal motorvehicle accident is most likely someone not in a car;whereas in the US, it is most likely the driver of a car.

Fig. 2 presents the distribution of traffic accidentdeaths for car users and non-car users. In the US, carusers’ deaths are higher than non-car user’s deaths forall age groups. The car-user age group with the mostfatalities is 16–24 years old (21% of all traffic-accidentvictims). The percentage of car-user deaths declineswith age until the oldest age group. In comparison, thepercentages of non car-user deaths are small and dis-tributed equally across age groups.

The situation is very different in Japan. More young(less than 16 years old) and old (more than 54 yearsold) non-car users are killed in traffic accidents than arecar users. Even for other age groups, the percentage of

H. Hayakawa et al. / Accident Analysis and Pre6ention 32 (2000) 827–835 829

Fig. 1. Fatal vehicle accidents by type of accident (1996). Sources: ITARDA (1997), NSC (1997).

deaths among car users is not much greater than amongnon-car users. The group with the greatest number offatalities in Japan is non-car users over 64 years old,nearly 20% of all traffic accident victims.

3.2. Risk for car dri6ers

Table 1A shows car-driver death rates per 10 000licensed drivers and relative risks, by age and gender.Note that ITARDA (1997) uses age groups of 16–19and 20–24, while NHTSA (1997) uses 16–20 and 21–24. The minimum legal driving age for four-wheelvehicles is 18 in Japan and typically 16 in the US asdetermined by State law. As reflected in the overall riskestimates, American car drivers in all age groups andboth genders face much larger risks than Japanese.Younger drivers in both countries face higher risk thanaverage, with Japanese younger male drivers being ex-posed to especially high relative fatality risks. Fig. 3ashows the lethality of these accidents. In both countries,it is greater for older drivers of both genders, perhapsreflecting reduced ability to survive, and for male driv-ers, perhaps reflecting higher speed. In Japan, youngerdrivers also experience slightly higher accident lethality.

3.3. Risk for motorcyclists

Table 1B shows motorcycle death rates per 10 000registered motorcycles and relative risks by age andgender group. Motor-scooters are also included in thiscategory. Because data on the number of motorcyclelicenses by age and gender were unavailable for eithercountry, the number of registered motorcycles was usedas an exposure measure, assuming that each registered

motorcycle typically has only one driver (unlike auto-mobiles, where two adults often share a vehicle).1 Forthe American data, person trips by motorcycle(FHWA, 1994) were assumed to have the same distri-bution across age and gender as registered motorcycles.For Japanese data, the distribution of consumers whobought motorcycles in 1997 (JAMA, 1998) was used, inlieu of publicly unavailable equivalent person-trip data.The minimum legal driving age for motorcycles andmotor-scooters is 16 in Japan. In the US, 16 years oldis also typical, but states do vary.

As seen in Table 1B, average death rates are slightlygreater in Japan than in the US. This holds for bothgenders even though American motorcyclists in olderage groups face higher driving risks than their Japanesecounterparts. Younger motorcyclists face relativelylarge risks, except for Japanese females. Fig. 3b sug-gests that Americans tend to experience higher lethalitythan do Japanese. In that figure, data for the oldestAmerican female group were omitted because theirinjury rate was reported as zero in the GES.

3.4. Risk for bicyclists

Bicycle deaths are shown in Table 1C. Althoughoverall fatality risks are higher in Japan than in the USfor both genders, the relationship is reversed in somemiddle-age male groups. Older Japanese bicyclists, es-pecially males more than 64 years old, have very highfatality rates; whereas US death rates are similar for all

1 Motorcycles are much less popular transportation mode in theUS than Japan, accounting for 0.7 and 20% of personal trips respec-tively (FHWA, 1994; Ozawa, 1990).


Fig. 2. The distribution of traffic accident deaths: car users and non-car users (1996). Sources: ITARDA (1997), NHTSA (1997).

age groups. Actually, in Japan, more than 50% ofbicyclists who died in accidents were more than 64years old in 1996 (ITARDA, 1997). Fig. 3c shows thatbicycle accidents tend to be more lethal for older bicy-clists, except for American females.

3.5. Risk for pedestrians

As seen in Table 1D, risks for younger Japanesepedestrians tend to be smaller than for their Americancounterparts; however, Japanese over 55 years old face

larger pedestrian risks than do Americans. Generallyspeaking, risk increases with age in both countries. Theoldest Japanese face very large risks; Japanese femalesmore than 64 years old have more than four times thecountry’s average risk. Nearly 50% of pedestrians whodied in accidents were more than 54 years old in Japanin 1996 (ITARDA, 1997). In the US, the share ofpedestrian deaths for individuals over 54 years old wasabout 31% (NHTSA, 1997). Fig. 3d shows that pedes-trian accidents are more lethal for older people, males,and Americans.


Table 1Traffic-accident death rates, by age group and gender (1996)a

Age groups

B16 16–20b 21–24c 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 \64 Average

(A) Car-dri6er death rates per 10 000 licensed dri6ersd

3.1 2.1US 1.7Male 1.4 1.3 1.3 2.2 1.8(2.4) (1.6) (1.3) (1.1) (1.1) (1.1) (1.8)2.1 0.65 0.66 0.59Female 0.56 0.60 1.1 0.75(1.7) (0.51) (0.52) (0.46) (0.44) (0.47) (0.84) 1.3

Japan Male 1.4 1.1 0.54 0.45 0.54 0.66 0.87 0.77(3.2) (2.3) (1.2) (1.0) (1.2) (1.5) (1.9)

Female 0.56 0.24 0.11 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.29 0.18(1.2) (0.55) (0.25) (0.25) (0.32) (0.34) (0.64) 0.53

(B) Motorcycle death rates per 10 000 registered motorcyclese

17 8.5 13 3.1 5.4 144 35 6.7US Male(3.1) (1.5) (2.3) (0.60) (1.0) (26) (6.3)

Female 11 0.1 0.7 1.3 53 21 11 0.80(1.9) (0.02) (0.10) (0.20) (9.5) (3.8) (1.9) 5.6

16.8 13.8 5.2Japan 2.5Male 2.4 4.6 16.4 7.5(2.6) (2.1) (0.8) (0.4) (0.4) (0.7) (2.5)2.7 2.2 0.8 1.3Female 3.8 8.1 7.7 3.1(0.4) (0.3) (0.1) (0.2) (0.6) (1.2) (1.2) 6.5

(C) Bicycle death rates per 1 million populations f

6.4 5.7 5.0 4.0 5.3 4.0 4.2 4.0 5.0US Male(2.2) (2.0) (1.8) (1.4) (1.9) (1.4) (1.5) (1.4)

Female 1.6 0.78 0 0.55 0.83 0.85 0.45 0.25 0.80(0.56) (0.28) (0) (0.19) (0.29) (0.30) (0.16) (0.09) 2.9

7.5 11 2.4 2.1Japan 2.6Male 7.0 16 67 14(0.70) (0.97) (0.22) (0.20) (0.24) (0.65) (1.5) (6.2)

Female 2.6 11 2.9 1.2 1.6 4.2 10 22 7.3(0.24) (1.1) (0.27) (0.11) (0.15) (0.39) (0.95) (2.0) 11

(D) Pedestrian death rates per 1 million populationsg

15 23 30US 28Male 31 32 36 52 29(0.73) (1.1) (1.5) (1.4) (1.5) (1.6) (1.8) (2.6)8.3 8.1 10 9.8 12Female 11 12 24 12(0.41) (0.40) (0.51) (0.48) (0.58) (0.53) (0.60) (1.19) 20

Japan Male 9.4 4.7 7.7 8.8 17 27 44 79 26(0.36) (0.18) (0.30) (0.34) (0.67) (1.0) (1.7) (3.0)5.2 4.6Female 3.3 4.5 2.7 8.8 26 110 26(0.20) (0.18) (0.13) (0.17) (0.11) (0.34) (1.0) (4.3) 26

a Numbers with bold font indicate nationwide average death rates. Numbers in parentheses indicate risks relative to nationwide average deathrates.

b Aged 16–19 years for Japanese data.c Aged 20–24 years for Japanese data.d Sources: ITARDA, 1997; NHTSA, 1997; FHWA, 1998.e Sources: ITARDA, 1997; JAMA, 1998; NHTSA 1999a,b; FHWA, 1994.f Sources: ITARDA, 1997; MCA, 1997a; NHTSA, 1997; DOC, 1997.g Sources: ITARDA, 1997; MCA, 1997a; NHTSA, 1997; DOC, 1997.

4. Discussion

4.1. Younger and older traffic users

Table 1 shows that the youngest and oldest motor-cyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians all experience ex-tremely high fatality rates in Japan. The problems ofyounger drivers are well known: they have greaterdifficulty detecting and predicting road conflicts

(ITARDA, 1996), have poorer skills, and are over-confident (Brown, 1982; Glendon et al., 1996). InJapan, accident death rates for 16–24 years old in-creased during the late 1970s and 1980s (MCA,1997b), even though most high school students wereprohibited from having drivers’ licenses by internalschool rules (Koshi, 1988). More recently, death ratesfor these younger drivers have decreased (MCA,1997b).


Fig. 3. Lethality of accident, by age group and gender (1996).* Aged 16�19 and 20�24 years for Japan data. Sources: ITARDA (1997), NHTSA(1997).

Higher death rates for older people in Japan followfrom the fact that their main transportation methods,in Tokyo and other metropolitan areas, are walkingand two-wheel vehicles, including motorcycles, motor-scooters, and bicycles (Ozawa, 1990).2 They walk orride two-wheel vehicles more than any other age group.Sadai and Okada (1990) categorize older traffic usersinto three groups: (A) females in poor health, whose

primary transportation mode is walking; (B) older menand women who usually ride bicycles or walk to shop-ping three or four times per a week; and (C) males ingood health condition, who drive a car to work. Ourdata clarify the risks faced by these three groups.People in Group A face high pedestrian fatality risk(Table 1D), people in Group B face large bicyclist andpedestrian risks (Table 1C and D), and people inGroup C are exposed to car-driver risks (Table 1A).

Among car drivers in both countries, younger andolder drivers experience relatively high risks. However,risks for non-car users are more similar across agegroups in the US than in Japan even though younger

2 In their survey, 60% of the elderly respondents reported walkingor riding two-wheel vehicles as their main transportation method.The remaining 40% were split between train, automobile and bus (15,15, and 10%, respectively) (Ozawa, 1990).


Fig. 3. (Continued)

and older people have well-documented difficulties3 intraffic.

4.2. Risk-mitigation policies in Japan and the US

One possible reason for the differences in risk envi-ronments is the poor separation between cars and othertraffic users in Japan. Approximately 75% of Japan ismountainous, making its population density extremelyhigh. Because most roads in Japan go through heavilypopulated urban areas, isolating pedestrians and bicy-

clists from motor vehicles is very difficult (Koshi, 1988).Despite this increased exposure, Japanese accidentstend to be less lethal (e.g. motorcycle accidents, asshown in Fig. 3b). This is probably because the conges-tion in Japan limits the speed of vehicles, resulting inlower energy accidents.

The driving environment is very different in the UScar users’ death rates are always higher than non-carusers’ for any age group. The car-user age group withthe most fatalities is 16–24 years old. This situationreflects Americans’ greater reliance on motor vehicles4

and their greater separation from other traffic users(Koshi, 1988).3 For example, measurable declines in older people’s sensory capa-

bilities (Soda, 1998), older people’s poor ability to recover fromaccidents (Rothe, 1990; Waller, 1991), younger people’s overconfidentand less-skilled driving technique (Brown, 1982; Glendon et al.,1996).

4 According to a survey conducted by FHWA (1994) in 1990,nearly 90% of personal trips used private motor vehicles.


We believe that these differences have contributed todifferent public-policy approaches to mitigate traffic-ac-cident risks. Because Japanese traffic-accident risks aregreatest for people not in an automobile, the Japanesegovernment has based its risk-mitigation policies moreon law enforcement and education options, rather thanon auto-based engineered solutions like air bags. Theincreased enforcement of traffic laws reduced Japan’sper capita traffic-accident death rate by one half, be-tween 1970 and 19805 (Wilde, 1994; MCA, 1997b).Because the rate of decline decreased in the 1980s(Koshi, 1988), recent Japanese research and interven-tions have added traffic-isolation approaches and safetyeducation to continued strict law enforcement (Seo,1996). In contrast, the US has more stringent vehiclesafety regulation than Japan (Takaoka, 1997), fittingthe situation in which motor-vehicle risks are greaterfor drivers and passengers. Airbags, side-impact doorbeams, and collapsible steering columns are all requiredin the US, but not in Japan. Nonetheless, lethality forthe US drivers is the same as in Japan, suggesting thatactual lethality for car drivers could be higher in the USthan in Japan. Of course, the benefit of law enforce-ment can be also observed in the US. For example,North Carolina decreased the fatality rate by 14% witha state-wide program of seat-belt law enforcement6

(Williams et al., 1996).

4.3. Actual risk and risk perception

We believe that the differences in traffic environ-ments can explain some of the cross-national differenceof automobile risk perceptions. Hayakawa et al. (2000)found that the reasons given by Japanese drivers forhaving automobile insurance focused almost exclusivelyon being able to cover damages and compensate harmdone to others. Japanese subjects also had much higherestimates than American subjects for the probability ofan accident causing injuries to others and of being atfault personally. One contributor to this difference maybe the Japanese drivers’ greater sensitivity to risks topedestrians and bicyclists, who constitute nearly 60% oftraffic-accident victims.

In contrast, American subjects estimated greatermonetary losses from both collision and liability acci-dents (Hayakawa et al., 2000). This might reflect thegreater lethality of US traffic accidents, in addition tothe well-known fear of lawsuits — which many Ameri-cans subjects have reported as their primary reason forbuying automobile insurance (Austin, 1996). They also

reported purchasing insurance to cover damage to theirown vehicles and personal medical costs. This concernis consistent with American car users being the primaryvictims in traffic accidents and having a higher percent-age of single-vehicle accidents.

Research has found that traffic accidents are signifi-cantly more dreaded in Japan than in the US (Kleinhes-selink and Rosa, 1991, 1994; Hinman et al., 1993). Asseen in our analysis, the majority of traffic-accidentdeaths in Japan are not among car users. We hypothe-size that the more one-sided nature of fatal accidents inJapan (with cars killing ‘vulnerable’ motorcyclists, bicy-clists, and pedestrians) is more likely to cause thesefeelings of dread than in the US where drivers killthemselves or equally-protected other drivers.

Thus, it seems plausible that objective differences inrisk environments combine with cultural influences toproduce cross-national differences in risk perceptions.

Acknowledgements

This study was partially supported by Mitsui Marineand Fire Insurance Company and the Department ofEngineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon Uni-versity. The authors wish to express their gratitude tothree anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

References

Alloy, L.B., Ahrens, A.H., 1987. Depression and pessimism for thefuture: biased use of statistically relevant information in predictionsfor self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology52, 366–378.

Austin, L.C., 1996. Consumer Insurance Decisions: Empirical Analysisof Four Real-World Decisions. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Depart-ment of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University.

Blincoe, L.J., 1996. The Economic Cost of Motor Vehicle Crashes,1994, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT-HS-808-425, Washington, DC.

Blincoe, L.J., Faigin, B.M., 1992. The Economic Cost of Motor VehicleCrashes, 1990, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,DOT-HS-807-876, Washington, DC.

Brown, I.D., 1982. Exposure and experience are a confounded nuisancein research on driver and behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention14, 345–352.

US Department of Commerce (DOC), 1997. Statistical Abstract of theUnited States, the 1997 edition, U.S. Department of Commerce,Washington, DC.

Evans, L., Frick, M.C., Schwing, R.C., 1990. Is it safer to fly or drive?Risk Analysis 10, 239–246.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 1994. 1990 NPTS Data-book: Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey, FHWA-PL-94-010A, Washington, DC.

Federal Highway Administration, 1998. Highway Statistics 1997,FHWA-PL-98-020, Washington, DC.

Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., Combs, B., 1978.How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towardstechnological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences 8, 127–152.

5 Automobile-accident death rate per 10 000 population has beenreduced from 2.10 (1970) to 0.97 (1980) in Japan. While in the US,there was a modest decline from 2.58 (1970) to 2.25 (1980).

6 Seat-belt usage rate went up from 64 to 83% in one year.


Fontaine, H., Gourlet, Y., 1997. Fatal pedestrian accidents in France:a typological analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention 29, 303–312.

Glendon, A.I., Dorn, L., Davies, D.R., Matthews, G., Taylor, R.G.,1996. Age and gender differences in perceived accident likelihoodand driver competencies. Risk Analysis 16, 755–762.

Hayakawa, H., Fischbeck, P.S., Fischhoff, B., 2000. Automobile riskperceptions and insurance-purchasing decisions in Japan and theUnited States. Journal of Risk Research 3, 51–67.

Heine, S.J., Lehman, D.R., 1995. Cultural variation in unrealisticoptimism: does the West feel more invulnerable than the East?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68, 595–607.

Hinman, G.W., Rosa, E.A., Kleinhesselink, R.R., Lowinger, T.C.,1993. Perceptions of nuclear and other risks in Japan and the UnitedStates. Risk Analysis 13, 449–455.

Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis (ITARDA),1996. Young generation and accidents [Wakamono ziko], ITARDAInformation No. 8, Institute for Traffic Accident Research andData Analysis, Tokyo (in Japanese).

Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis, 1997. TrafficStatistics: the 1997 edition [Kostutoukei: heisei 9 nendoban],Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis, Tokyo(in Japanese).

Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (JAMA), 1998. Trendin the Motorcycle Market [Nirinsha shijou no doukou], JAMAReport No. 77, Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association,Tokyo (in Japanese).

Kleinhesselink, R.R., Rosa, E.A., 1991. Cognitive representation ofrisk perceptions: a comparison of Japan and the United States.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 22, 11–28.

Kleinhesselink, R.R., Rosa, E.A., 1994. Nuclear trees in a forest ofhazards: a comparison of risk perceptions between American andJapanese university students. In: Lowinger, T.C., Hinman, G.W.(Eds.), Nuclear Power at the Crossroads: Challenges and Prospectsfor the 21st Century. International Research Center for Energy andEconomic Development, Tokyo.

Koshi, M., 1988. Road safety: success and failure in Japan [Kout-suanzen: nihon ni okeru seikou to shippai]. Traffic Engineering 23,45–54 (in Japanese).

Maeda, K., 1998. Traffic accident and vehicle safety technology[Koutsuziko no zittai to sharyou no anzengizyutsu nitsuite]. TrafficEngineering 33, 62–71 (in Japanese).

Management and Coordination Agency (MCA), 1997a. Japan Statis-tical Yearbook: the 1997 edition, Management and CoordinationAgency, Tokyo.

Management and Coordination Agency, 1997b. White Paper on TrafficSafety: the 1996 edition [Kotsuanzen hakusho: heisei 8 nendoban],Printing Office of Ministry of Finance, Tokyo (in Japanese).

Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S., 1991. Culture and the self: implicationsfor cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98,224–253.

Miller, T.R., Lestina, D.C., Spicer, R.S., 1998. Highway crash costs inthe United States by driver age, blood alcohol level, victim age, andrestraint use. Accident Analysis & Prevention 30, 137–150.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 1997.Traffic Safety Facts: the 1996 edition, National Highway TrafficSafety Administration, Washington, DC.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1999a. 1996 FatalAccident Reporting System (FARS) dataset, Available FTP: Host-name: nhtsa.dot.gov, Directory /FARS/1996/SAS/.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1999b. 1996 GeneralEstimates System (GES) Dataset, Available FTP: Hostname:nhtsa.dot.gov, Directory /ges/GES96/SAS/.

National Safety Council (NSC), 1997. Accident Facts: the 1996 edition,National Safety Council, Itasca, IL.

Ozawa, I., 1990. Analysis of traffic users based on person trip survey[Pa-sontoripputyousa kara mita koutsutokusei no henka no bun-seki]. Traffic Engineering 25, 14–21 (in Japanese).

Poncelet, E., 1991. Japan and the United States: a cultural comparison.In: Kingery, W.D. (Ed.), Japanese/American Technological Inno-vation; The Influence of Cultural Differences on Japanese andAmerican Innovation in Advanced Materials. Elsevier SciencePublishing, New York.

Rothe, J.P., 1990. The Safety of Elderly Drivers: Yesterday’s Youngin Today’s Traffic. Transaction Publisher, New Brunswick, NJ.

Sadai, Y., Okada, H., 1990. Older citizen’s cognitive structure on trafficsafety [Koureisha no koutsuanzen ishikikouzou]. Traffic Engineer-ing 25, 27–37 (in Japanese).

Seo, T., 1996. Toward high level traffic safety with harmony amonghuman, road and vehicle: five year plan on traffic safety research[Hito michi kuruma no baransunotoreta takaireberuno koutsu noanzensei wo mezashite: koutsuanzenkenkyu 5 kanenkeikaku].Traffic Engineering 31, 23–29 (in Japanese).

Slovic, P., 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236, 280–285.Slovic, P., 1992. Perception of risk: reflections on the psychometric

paradigm. In: Krimsky, S., Golfing, D. (Eds.), Social Theory ofRisk. Praeger Publishers, Westpoint.

Soda, H., 1998. Aging and driving accident [Karei to untenziko no ichikousatsu]. Non-Life Insurance Research 59, 15-43 (in Japanese).

Svenson, O., Fischhoff, B., MacGregor, D., 1985. Perceived drivingsafety. Accident Analysis & Prevention 17, 119–133.

Takaoka, A., 1997. Collision safety performance and freedom ofinformation [Zidousha no shoutotsuanzenseinou to zyouhouk-oukai]. Safety Engineering 36, 74–83 (in Japanese).

Waller, P.F., 1991. The older driver. Human Factor 33, 499–505.Weinstein, N.D., 1980. Unrealistic optimism about future life events.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39, 806–820.Wilde, G.J.S., 1994. Target Risk. PDE Publications, Toronto.Williams, A.F., Reinfurt, D.W., Wells, J., 1996. Increasing seat belt use

in North Carolina. Journal of Safety Research 27, 33–41.

.

traffic accident statistics and risk perceptions in japan and the united states

Documents