Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking

A study of driver behavior before and after a mandatory seat belt use law in Newfoundland found that the benefits of such legislation are not reduced by riskier driving, as has been suggested by some theorists. On average, belt use in Newfoundland increased from 16% of drivers before the law to 77%...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Risk Analysis
Main Authors: Adrian K. Lund, Paul Zador
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x
id ftrepec:oai:RePEc:wly:riskan:v:4:y:1984:i:1:p:41-53
record_format openpolar
spelling ftrepec:oai:RePEc:wly:riskan:v:4:y:1984:i:1:p:41-53 2023-05-15T17:17:48+02:00 Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking Adrian K. Lund Paul Zador https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x unknown https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x article ftrepec https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x 2020-12-04T13:40:56Z A study of driver behavior before and after a mandatory seat belt use law in Newfoundland found that the benefits of such legislation are not reduced by riskier driving, as has been suggested by some theorists. On average, belt use in Newfoundland increased from 16% of drivers before the law to 77% after the law. At the same time, the quality of driving changed very little when compared to control groups of Nova Scotia drivers, who were not subject to the law and whose belt use rates did not change. In only one situation did Newfoundland drivers differ from the control group in Nova Scotia: after the belt law, drivers in Newfoundland became relatively more cautious (slower) in their speeds on four‐lane expressways. These data confirm the results of earlier less controlled studies that also found no changes in driving behavior following nonvoluntary changes in occupant protection. Since the “risk‐compensation” hypothesis predicts such changes, it seems to have no merit in explaining changes in fatalities and injuries after occupant protection legislation. Article in Journal/Newspaper Newfoundland RePEc (Research Papers in Economics) Risk Analysis 4 1 41 53
institution Open Polar
collection RePEc (Research Papers in Economics)
op_collection_id ftrepec
language unknown
description A study of driver behavior before and after a mandatory seat belt use law in Newfoundland found that the benefits of such legislation are not reduced by riskier driving, as has been suggested by some theorists. On average, belt use in Newfoundland increased from 16% of drivers before the law to 77% after the law. At the same time, the quality of driving changed very little when compared to control groups of Nova Scotia drivers, who were not subject to the law and whose belt use rates did not change. In only one situation did Newfoundland drivers differ from the control group in Nova Scotia: after the belt law, drivers in Newfoundland became relatively more cautious (slower) in their speeds on four‐lane expressways. These data confirm the results of earlier less controlled studies that also found no changes in driving behavior following nonvoluntary changes in occupant protection. Since the “risk‐compensation” hypothesis predicts such changes, it seems to have no merit in explaining changes in fatalities and injuries after occupant protection legislation.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Adrian K. Lund
Paul Zador
spellingShingle Adrian K. Lund
Paul Zador
Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
author_facet Adrian K. Lund
Paul Zador
author_sort Adrian K. Lund
title Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
title_short Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
title_full Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
title_fullStr Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
title_full_unstemmed Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
title_sort mandatory belt use and driver risk taking
url https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x
genre Newfoundland
genre_facet Newfoundland
op_relation https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x
container_title Risk Analysis
container_volume 4
container_issue 1
container_start_page 41
op_container_end_page 53
_version_ 1766085437306175488