Examining the relative effectiveness of different message framing strategies for child passenger safety: recommendations for increased comprehension and compliance.

BACKGROUND: Age-appropriate child restraints and rear seating dramatically reduce injury in vehicle crashes. Yet parents and caregivers struggle to comply with child passenger safety (CPS) recommendations, and frequently make mistakes when choosing and installing restraints. The purpose of this research was to evaluate various methods of framing CPS recommendations, and to examine the relative effectiveness on parents' knowledge, attitudes, and behavioral intentions related to best practices and proper use of child restraints. Emphasis framing is a persuasion technique that involves placing focus on specific aspects of the content in order to encourage or discourage certain interpretations of the content. METHOD: A 5 (flyer group) X 2 (time) randomized experiment was conducted in which 300 parent participants answered a pre-survey, viewed one of four flyer versions or a no-education control version, and completed a post-survey. Surveys measured CPS knowledge, attitudes, perceptions of efficacy and risk, and behavioral intentions. The four flyers compared in this study all communicated the same CPS recommendations, but several versions were tested which each employed a different emphasis frame: (1) recommendations organized by the natural progression of seat types; (2) recommendations which focused on avoiding premature graduation; (3) recommendations which explained the risk-reduction rationale behind the information given; or (4) recommendations which were organized by age. In a fifth no-education (control) condition, participants viewed marketing materials. RESULTS: Analyses of covariance and pairwise comparisons indicated the risk-reduction rationale flyer outperformed other flyers for many subscales, and significantly differed from no-education control for the most subscales, including restraint selection, back seat knowledge, rear-facing knowledge and attitudes, total efficacy, overall attitudes, and stated intentions. CONCLUSIONS: This research provides insight for increasing caregiver understanding and compliance with CPS information. Recommendations for the field include communicating the rationale behind the information given, using behavior-based directives in headers, avoiding age-based headers, and incorporating back-seat positioning directives throughout.

Use of top tethers with forward-facing child restraints: observations and driver interviews.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the safety benefits, many parents do not use top tethers with forward-facing child restraints. Detailed information was collected about why parents are not using tethers. METHODS: The sample included 479 drivers who had forward-facing child restraints installed in passenger vehicles equipped with tether anchors. The survey was conducted primarily at shopping centers, recreation facilities, child care facilities, car seat check events, and health care facilities in mostly suburban areas surrounding Philadelphia, Washington, DC, Fredericksburg (VA), and Seattle. Drivers were surveyed about their knowledge and use of tethers and experience with child restraints. Tether use was observed to verify whether tethers were being used correctly. RESULTS: Fifty-six percent of forward-facing child restraints were installed with the tether; 39% were installed with the tether used correctly. The tether was used with 71% of LATCH lower anchor installations and 33% of seat belt installations. Drivers who installed child restraints without tethers most often said they did not know about the tether or how to use it. CONCLUSIONS: Although the tether use rate was slightly higher in the current research than in previous studies, many parents and caregivers still use forward-facing child restraints without attaching the tether. Because the main problem is lack of awareness of the tether or how to use it, public education should focus specifically on the safety benefits of tethers and how to use them. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Information about why caregivers fail to use top tethers is potentially useful to child restraint manufacturers, child passenger safety technicians, and others who work with parents to improve motor vehicle safety.

Medical review process and license disposition of drivers referred by law enforcement in Virginia.

INTRODUCTION: Medically at-risk drivers come to the attention of licensing authorities through referrals from a variety of sources, including: physicians, family members, court systems, and law enforcement. A recently sponsored project by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration examined a training intervention for law enforcement to increase their awareness of medical conditions and medications that impair driving and the procedures for reporting these drivers in Virginia. METHOD: A component of this project included an evaluation of the medical review process and licensing outcomes for 100 drivers randomly selected from a pool of over 1,000 drivers referred from law enforcement officers to the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles over a 6-month period in 2007 and 2008 prior to any training program intervention. RESULTS: Key findings from the evaluation of 100 drivers referred for medical review by law enforcement were as follows. Over two-thirds of the drivers came to the attention of the referring officer because they were involved in a crash. The most prevalent indications of a medical condition or functional impairment provided by law enforcement for these referrals were: loss of consciousness, blackout, or seizures (28%); disorientation, confusion, and mental disability (16%); and physical impairments (8%). Eighty-eight percent of the drivers received some type of licensing action (e.g., restriction, suspension, or periodic review). Only 12% of the referred drivers did not require any licensing action. CONCLUSIONS: Law enforcement provides a vital role in the identification and referral of medically impaired drivers to licensing authorities for reexamination. Training programs can inform law enforcement officers of the signs of medical impairment (both on-road behavior, and physical and psychological clues once a driver has been pulled over), and procedures for reporting their observations and concern for safety to licensing authorities. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: Reexamination of drivers with functional and medical impairments and any consequent restrictions and/or periodic reporting requirements can improve the safety and mobility of these drivers, and the motoring public as well.

Observed LATCH use and misuse characteristics of child restraint systems in seven states.

INTRODUCTION: Although the LATCH System (Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children) holds the promise of simplifying the installation of a child restraint system (CRS) to the vehicle's seat, many drivers transporting young children have difficulties using this technology. This paper reports on an observation study of LATCH use and misuse. METHOD: Observations of approximately 1,000 children less than 5 years of age in CRSs, in the back seats of vehicles that were equipped with tether and lower anchors, in seven states. RESULTS: Tethers were used for 51% of the children when the forward-facing CRS had tether straps and the vehicle had tether anchors. Lower anchors were used for 58% of the children when the CRS had lower attachments and the vehicle had lower anchors. The most common tether and lower attachment misuses were loose tether straps (18% of cases) and loose lower attachment installation (30% of the cases), respectively. Vehicle safety belts were used in combination with lower attachments in 20% of all lower anchor installations. CONCLUSION: As more caregivers of young children drive vehicles equipped with LATCH, it will be important to promote the proper installation of CRSs using this technology. LATCH education messages must also emphasize that the lower anchors may not always be the safest choice for CRS attachment -- the safest attachment is the one that results in a tight fit and will be used correctly consistently.

Child restraint system use and misuse in six states.

This project addressed use and misuse of child restraint systems (CRS) in the nation. CRS use and critical misuse observations were collected in the Fall of 2002 for 5527 children less than 36 kg (80 pounds) in 4126 vehicles in six states: Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Results showed that 62.3% of these children were restrained in a CRS; 25.9% were restrained in a safety belt (SB); and 11.8% were unrestrained. By weight class, CRS use was 97.1% for children less than 9 kg (20 pounds); 86.4% for children between 9 and 18 kg (20 and 40 pounds); 41.7% for children between 18 and 27 kg (40 and 60 pounds); and 10.9% for children between 27 and 36 kg (60 and 80 pounds). Overall critical CRS misuse was 72.6%. Most common critical misuses were loose harness straps and loose vehicle SB attachment to the CRS. Other types of CRS misuses were also observed and recorded in the study. Recommendations are provided for field observation techniques, periodic monitoring, and research for education and enforcement strategies.