Analyzing seat belt usage from accident data
| Published date | 01 March 2015 |
| Author | Mark Alden Morgan |
| Date | 01 March 2015 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461355714566781 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
International Journal of
Police Science & Management
Analyzing seat belt usage from accident
2015, Vol. 17(1) 32–39
ª The Author(s) 2015
data: An evaluation of Click It or Ticket
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
enforcement campaigns in Ohio
DOI: 10.1177/1461355714566781
psm.sagepub.com
Mark Alden Morgan
School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, USA
Abstract
Intensive traffic enforcement has been shown to promote the compliance of roadway motorists and reduce traffic
violations. However, prior research on seat belt enforcement has generally neglected the analysis of belt usage in non-
fatal accidents, usage by backseat passengers, and usage during nighttime hours. In addition, few studies have examined
the effectiveness of blitz campaigns and, to date, none has included usage statistics involving accident victims—
individuals at an increased risk of belt non-use. This study sought to include these factors in evaluating whether Ohio’s
annual Click It or Ticket seat belt enforcement campaign positively impacted belt use in a 60 day, pretest/post-test
experiment over five separate years: 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009. Data were collected from all 88 Ohio
counties based upon official police reports of seat belt usage by occupants in motor vehicle accidents regardless of
crash severity, occupant seating, or time of day. The results indicate that belt usage increased significantly after the
2005 and 2008 campaigns, but no impact was found among the remaining years. In addition, the data suggest that belt
usage may have been maintained at optimal levels according to previous research. These findings are discussed along
with the possible policy implications of transitioning Ohio to a primary seat belt law State to increase compliance.
Keywords
Seat belts, traffic enforcement, traffic law, general deterrence, proactive policing
Submitted 06 Aug 2014, accepted 01 Dec 2014
Introduction
In response, legislatures across the country have passed
laws that require the vast majority of vehicle occupants to
Seat belt usage has been shown to save lives by reducing
fasten their seat belts while driving or face a fine. The Click
the likelihood of fatal injuries in motor vehicle accidents
It or Ticket campaign, which began nationwide mobiliza-
by up to ‘45% in passenger cars and 60% in light trucks’
tion in 2003, represents the largest seat belt enforcement
(Kahane, 2000: 70). However, despite this information,
‘blitz’ program in the USA. Devised as an annual month-
compliance is lacking as millions of people do not wear
long operation conducted primarily throughout May, Click
their seat belts in the USA (Brittle and Cosgrove, 2006).
It or Ticket has utilized television, radio, print, Internet,
Research by the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin-
billboard, and even video game advertisement prior to and
istration (NHTSA, 2009b) has concluded that although seat
during the actual seat belt enforcement campaign in order
belt use is on the rise, as of 2008, roughly 17% of the pop-
ulation still do not wear a seat belt. Moreover, the NHTSA
(2009a) estimates that if seat belt usage had been main-
tained at 100% compliance nationwide in 2008 a total of
Corresponding author:
4152 fatalities would have been prevented and for the years
Mark Alden Morgan, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati,
1975 to 2008, a grand total of 359,845 lives could have
ML 210389, 2840 Bearcat Way, CRC, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA.
been saved.
Email: morganmk@ucmail.uc.edu
Morgan
33
to ‘[convey] a unified national enforcement presence’
Seat belt enforcement campaigns operate under the
(Tison and Williams, 2010: 3).
assumption that non-seat belt wearing behavior in motorists
This nationwide media promotion is then fulfilled inde-
can be deterred (Tison and Williams, 2010). In accordance
pendently by each participating State during a coordinated
with deterrence theory, this effect may be specific to an
two-week period in late May and early June. As the media
individual who receives a seat belt citation or it can also act
campaign continues, police officers at the State and local
as a general deterrent amongst the entire population based
levels heavily enforce their State’s seat belt laws. Analysis
upon the perception of enforcement and the risk of being
has found that the distribution of seat belt tickets issued in
caught. However, as Zaal (1994) reported, because the
May is two to three times higher than for any other month
actual number of motorists cited for seat belt violations is
of the year as a result of this enforcement (Tison and
low, even during a blitz, it can be inferred that proactive
Williams, 2010). The cost of Click It or Ticket varies by year
enforcement campaigns, like Click It or Ticket, primarily
and by State; as a result, precise data on exact expenditures
exercise general deterrence through a combination of wide-
are not available. However, combined State and federal
spread publicity and increased enforcement. Moreover, in
funding generally ranges from $25m to $30m annually on
order to increase seat belt usage above moderate levels
paid media alone; in 2006 and 2007 this equated to ‘approx-
(40% to 60%) it requires more than sheer legislation (i.e.,
imately 9 cents per capita’ (Solomon et al., 2009: 10).
seat belt laws) and public awareness; continued enforce-
This study evaluates the effectiveness of the Click It or
ment activity is necessary to raise and maintain usage rates
Ticket enforcement campaign in Ohio by analyzing seat
at 80% or higher.
belt usage data from official vehicle accident reports aggre-
For instance, Nichols and Ledingham (2008) found that
gated at the county level for the years 2005, 2006, 2007,
the type of enforcement activity utilized contributes to the
2008, and 2009. The analyzed data for the pretest and
rate of seat belt use increase at the local level. Generally,
post-test periods were collected 60 days before and after
sustained and departmentally prioritized seat belt enforce-
the two-week Click It or Ticket mobilization in each
ment programs (e.g., a year-round commitment) resulted
respective year. By examining the percentage of belt usage
in larger increases in seat belt usage when compared with
at the county level for all occupants in all types of motor
one-time blitz operations similar to Click It or Ticket. In
vehicle accidents, this study hopes to provide an addition
addition, the decay or decrease in seat belt usage after con-
to the literature, which has commonly overlooked non-
tinual enforcement programs was shown to be less pro-
fatal crashes, backseat occupants, and usage during night-
nounced than in blitz operations. However, as Yann,
time hours. In summation, this study attempts to determine
Campbell, Hoare, Wheeler Research and Clarke (1993)
if Click It or Ticket positively impacts seat belt usage
note, detecting vehicle occupants that are not wearing seat
among occupants involved in traffic accidents in the State
belts is one of the most difficult jobs for law enforcement
of Ohio.
officers. Any number of factors including vehicle speed,
direction, traffic density, weather, and even clothing can
make seat belt observation impractical for regular enforce-
Literature review
ment. Added to this is the problem of primary or secondary
All States, except New Hampshire, have established either
law enforcement, which affects officer discretion. In an
a primary or secondary seat belt law for vehicle occupants
evaluation of 2003’s Click It or Ticket mobilization,
(Hedlund et al., 2008). Primary law States allow police
research found that the citation rate was 70% higher in pri-
officers to pull over a vehicle and issue a traffic citation
mary States than in secondary States (Nichols and Leding-
if they observe an occupant not wearing a seat belt. By con-
ham, 2008). Because of...
To continue reading
Request your trial