RISK COMMUNICATION ISSUES SPECIFIC TO SAFETY BELTS

In addition to having a general discussion about best practices in risk communication, panelists also identified several things about automobiles and the experience of driving that make communication about safety belts unique. For example, panelists talked about how driving creates a sense of freedom and control. This poses a challenge because the demand characteristics of safety belts potentially threaten that sense of control. Additionally, panelists discussed how driving is familiar and therefore seen as safe (this notion is reinforced as people take trips and nothing happens), and this encourages the behavior of situational belt use (e.g., that belts are needed some times but not others). A final uniqueness is that belt wearing is strongly associated with scripts and start-up routines in cars; i.e., belt wearing may differ depending on whether the user is in a familiar or an unfamiliar environment, and, moreover, the belt wearing behaviors in each environment may be governed by different factors. Thus, belt use is a unique risk behavior, and this creates opportunities and challenges for NHTSA.

Pleasure, control, and freedom
Panelists discussed at length the feelings created by driving, and how the abstract idea of driving promotes a sense of pleasure, control, and freedom. Cars are associated with “that incredible illusion of freedom” that automakers use to sell cars, even though the reality of driving is much more “mundane.” This perception is important because belt use may pose a challenge to this idealized vision. Panelists’ comments on this topic included:

• “Driving is one of those big ones [pleasures] … people feel like … they are in control, you know, all these really positive things … driving is this positive, in-control thing.”
  
  
• “One of the greatest pleasures in my life was to be able to drive a car at the age of nine.”
  
  
• “Our cars are one of the few domains … where we can actually be alone and support the notion that we are in entire control of ourselves moving through space.”
  
  
• “Driving is one of the few activities we do most commonly which puts us where? In the driver’s seat, right? It gives us optimum control, locomotion, or automation.”
  
  
• “People think when they are in a car that they can judge what is a risky situation and what isn’t.”

The meaning of a safety belt
These notions of pleasure, control, and freedom are in some ways diametrically opposed to the use of belts. As one panelist said: “The enemy of seatbelt use is the idea of feelings of control and personal freedom … I want to do what I want to do. You are infringing on my freedom; don’t tell me what to do.” In name, function, and design safety belts reinforce restrictions on freedom and control. Panelists commented:

• “The demand characteristics of seatbelts are super clear to everybody. And the idea that they should be doing it is also super clear, so the resistance is built in.”
  
  
• “Seatbelts are seen as restrictive. We are told they are restrictive.”
  
  
• “They talk about passive restraint. And it is like, if you want a word that will tick people off, we are going to restrain you.”
  
  
• “It seems to me that the paradox is [that] we are trying to get people to use safety belts, or passive restraints, in a situation which technologically guarantees them maximum power, which is driving … we want that freedom.”

In addition to these concerns about belts being a threat to control, panelists also talked about the fact that belt use is strongly tied to social convention. People may wear or not wear belts simply because of social norms. Peer pressure is a concern, especially for teens: “Do they look like a dweeb when they buckle up and no one else is buckling up? … I think that is a fairly significant cost to a 13-year-old.” Finally, not wearing a belt may even be an act of rebellion. Thus, panelists emphasized that one important factor to consider when promoting belt wearing is the meaning of a belt: this meaning is a barrier that will have to be overcome for some audience segments.

Driving is familiar and promotes a feeling of safety
Driving is familiar, comfortable, and usually safe, which makes promoting the use of belts problematic. Panelists discussed how driving (unlike other potential risks) has not been “made into an anxious thing.” As one panelist said, “You drive every day. You know that the risk is low. Look how many times you have driven and nothing has happened.” Another added, “People learn from their experiences. And one of the things we experience in a car over and over and over again is nothing bad happening.” This means that driving is a situation where it is critically important that people understand the concept of cumulative risk, because “if you look at the actual risk of one trip in a car it is very low.”

Panelists also noted that since “the car people are selling cars,” automobile marketing focuses on positive benefits of driving such as “absolute untrammeled freedom,” further contributing to this notion that automobiles are safe. In addition, auto safety features may lull people into thinking they are safe even without wearing their safety belts: “We have made cars so safe, we have made the streets so safe … that a lot of people say, ‘Oh, well, I am not going to get hurt anyway because of air bags, because my car is so huge and so strong and will protect me.’” NHTSA may inadvertently reinforce this notion that certain driving situations are safe (e.g., short trips to the grocery store) because its enforcement campaigns typically show high-speed highway driving. As one panelist commented, “Take ‘Click It or Ticket’ … everything is on a highway, people on long trips … not in the village on people’s way to go get pizza.”

Automobile behaviors are tied to scripts and to start-up routines
Another feature of belt use that panelists thought was noteworthy is the degree to which belt use is tied to “start-up” driving behaviors or scripts. In other words, putting on a belt is something that many people do without even thinking about it. As one panelist said, “At least for me, seatbelt use in my own car is absolutely automatized.” However, panelists said that disruptions to this starting routine (e.g., kids fighting, being in a different vehicle, or being in a hurry) could completely change the nature of this behavior: “If I am distracted, if someone else is talking to me, I am much less likely to do it [wear a belt].” In a situation such as this where belt use (or non-use) is not automatic, panelists thought other factors would govern belt behavior (e.g., whether the other people in the car are wearing belts, or the ease with which the belt can be located and fastened). Panelists also assumed the existence of a cohort effect relative to belt wearing, as belt use is more common among younger generations: “I was raised before there were seatbelts … [but] my grandkids are always buckled in. It is just part of the norm.” A panelist raised with this norm reaffirmed this notion: “As a kid … we were not allowed to go anywhere if we did not have our seatbelts on … so now, as an adult, that is a habit for me.” However, one panelist cautioned that because belt use is routine and expected, not wearing a belt can then become a rebellious behavior (e.g., for teens).

Situational belt use creates unique patterns of behavior
The final thing that panelists identified as unique is that belt usage requires a repeated, yet frequent, risk decision: “Every time you are in a car, you make a seatbelt decision.” Additionally, “the large number of people who do it sometimes and not others … makes it unique.” Finally, belt use itself also exhibits unusual patterns; e.g., people don’t put their belts on until they leave their neighborhood, or take them off when they turn onto their street. As one panelist observed, “The fact that people do this, to me, makes it a unique behavior, and that may be good, because it leaves some ways to understand it better. But [it is] bad in the sense that it has these uniquenesses [which make belt use harder to understand].”