Premium
Mandatory Belt Use and Driver Risk Taking
Author(s) -
Lund Adrian K.,
Zador Paul
Publication year - 1984
Publication title -
risk analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1539-6924
pISSN - 0272-4332
DOI - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1984.tb00130.x
Subject(s) - nova scotia , legislation , seat belt , poison control , human factors and ergonomics , compensation (psychology) , control (management) , law , injury prevention , engineering , political science , geography , psychology , environmental health , economics , social psychology , medicine , archaeology , management , automotive engineering
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.