Spencer Oatts, Ben Gibson, Carl White, Yongli Zou, & Chris Dula
Department of Psychology
East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN
Objective

The purpose of the current study was to
assess the frequency of safety belt use
among students at a southeastern
university.

A secondary assessment was conducted
to determine the efficacy of video data
collection and field data collection.
Introduction

A NHTSA study found a 40–50% decrease in risk
of fatal injury with properly used safety belts
(NHTSA, 1984, 1996).

The Tennessee “Click It or Ticket” program was
found to increase safety belt use by 20%.
(Tennessee Department of Transportation, 2001).

Farrell, Cox, & Geller (2007) found that unbuckled
male drivers were significantly more likely to
buckle up when prompted by a female.
Introduction

Research from Rosenblum et al. (2004) has
shown evidence to support the notion that video
coding is a viable alternative to field observation.

We hypothesized that there would be a significant
difference in reported safety belt use between
video coders and field observers.
Participants

Drivers (14 women, 22 men, 2 undetermined, age
range 16-65 years) were observed naturalistically at
an intersection located at a southeastern university.

Thirty-eight vehicles were recorded.

Researchers recorded color of vehicle, type of
vehicle, safety belt use, cell phone use, sex of driver,
race of driver, number of passengers, and age range
of the driver.
Procedure

Two trained field researchers were equipped with a
high definition camera to record video data of the
vehicles at an intersection.

Data of the vehicles were also recorded manually via
field data collection sheets.

The recorded data on the disc in the high definition
camera was later transferred onto a computer.
Procedure

Two trained researchers watched the video and
recorded any observations onto similar video data
collection sheets.

A verbal cue was used to notify the video coders of
the specific targeted vehicle.

Once all four researchers collected their data, the
data collection sheets were compared using a
Pearson’s correlation.
Results
Field Observer 1: Reported 55% of
drivers were wearing a safety belt.
 Field Observer 2: Reported 79% of
drivers were wearing a safety belt.
 Video Observer 1: Reported 88% of
drivers were wearing a safety belt.
 Video Observer 2: Reported 92% of
drivers were wearing a safety belt.

Results
The average rates of safety belt use
reported was 79%.
 Correlation of safety belt use between
Field Observers 1 & 2 r = 0.22
 Correlation of safety belt use between
Video Observers 1 & 2 r = 0.80

Discussion

We can infer that the difference in the report of
safety belt rates for Field Observers are significant
enough to question the methodology involved.

Field Observer 1 controlled the camera, thus
causing less time to record the necessary vehicle
demographics. Control of camera could influence
the data for the Video Observers.
Discussion

In future research for the study, there will be a third
observer who will strictly control only the camera
and not record vehicle data.

While we had higher agreement rates for Video
Observers, we also must question the
methodology involved.

Video Observers had the luxury of rewinding,
zooming in, and pausing the video if needed to
record the correct vehicle demographics.
Discussion

This luxury could also have caused the result of
more compliance between Video Observers.

Subtle cues from body language could have
caused subjectivity between Video Observers.

In future research for this study, we will require
Video Observers to record the vehicle
demographics separately to prevent any kind of
subjectivity between observers.
Discussion

From our results, we cannot infer that one method
of data collection is superior, however, we can
revise our methodology and determine more
reliable methods for collecting the vehicle
demographics.

Once a consistent method is implemented, our
results can be more reliable and our conclusion
can be well supported.
Limitations

All of our data came from the same local region.

Different perceptions of vehicle demographics
could lead to inconsistency between researchers.

Tinted windows and unfavorable weather
conditions limited visibility of the interior for some
vehicles.
Future Implications

The results from this study could be used to help
develop programs to increase safety belt use.

Future research should be conducted in a variety
of locales.

If we can determine which methodology is
superior, we can set a standard data collection
protocol for the driving research field.
References

Farrell, L.V., Cox, M.G., & Geller, S. G. (2007). Prompting safety belt use in
the context of a belt-use law: The flash-for life revisited. Journal of
Safety Research, 38, 407-411.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1984. Final Regulatory
Impact Analysis: Amendment to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standard 208 Passenger Car Front Seat Occupant Protection.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1996a. Presidential Initiative
for Increasing Seat Belt Use Nationwide

Rosenblum, K. L., Zeanah, C., McDonough, S., & Muzik, M. (2004). Videotaped coding of working model of the child interviews: a viable and
useful alternative to verbatim transcripts? Infant Behavior &
Development, 27, 544-549.