Show simple item record

An experimental test of risk compensation: Between-subject versus within-subject analyses

dc.contributor.authorStreff, Fredrick M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGeller, E. Scotten_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-04-07T20:14:39Z
dc.date.available2006-04-07T20:14:39Z
dc.date.issued1988-08en_US
dc.identifier.citationStreff, Fredrick M., Geller, E. Scott (1988/08)."An experimental test of risk compensation: Between-subject versus within-subject analyses." Accident Analysis &amp; Prevention 20(4): 277-287. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/27199>en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V5S-468CB5W-2X/2/b3492b1d05ccdf3d0d51b3d61e7ae5bben_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/27199
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=3415759&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractThis study examined parameters under which risk compensation in driving can occur following the use of safety belts. Risk compensation theories hypothesize that if individuals use safety belts, they will drive in a more risky manner than if they do not use safety belts due to an increased perception of safety. Although the existence of risk compensation in driving has been debated in the literature for many years, the current study was the first experimental analysis of this theory that permitted a controlled examination of both between-subject and within-subject effects. This study required subjects to drive a 5-hp. go-kart around an oval track either buckled or unbuckled in the first of two phases of 15 driving trials. After the first phase the safety condition was switched for half the subjects (i.e., the safety belt was removed from subjects using it or was used by subjects who previously did not use it). Dependent measures included latency for each lap, deviations from the prescribed lane, and perceived safety while driving. The amount of time it took for subjects to travel to the go-kart track and their safety belt use during that trip was also measured. Risk compensation theory was not supported in the between-subject analyses of the research data; however, some within-subject comparisons did demonstrate risk compensation. Subjects who switched from not using the safety belt to using it increased driving speed during the second phase significantly more than subjects who used the safety belt during both driving phases. The study suggested that the occurence of risk compensation is dependent upon individuals being able to compare the sensations using a safety belt with those of not using a safety belt. Risk compensation did not manifest itself in between-subject studies because this comparison could not take place. The implications of this study to driving automobiles on multi-user roadways is discussed. Suggestions for research to further expand the knowledge about how and when risk compensation occurs are also provided.en_US
dc.format.extent1141883 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.titleAn experimental test of risk compensation: Between-subject versus within-subject analysesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Healthen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2150, U.S.A.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, U.S.A.en_US
dc.identifier.pmid3415759en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/27199/1/0000202.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-4575(88)90055-3en_US
dc.identifier.sourceAccident Analysis &amp; Preventionen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.