David Silcock, Kim Smith and Duncan KnoxRoss Silcock Limited
Kristine BeuretSocial Research Associates
Cost: 198,000
Published: July 1999 (interim report); May 2000 (final report)
Download the full Report (PDF 2431K).
The interim report (FDN25) presents the initial findings of a two-year study of car drivers' attitudes and behaviours with respect to speed. The report is based on a home interview survey and focus group discussions with car drivers in four areas of the country (Tyneside, Leicester, rural Lincolnshire and Watford), and on expert opinion gained from a Delphi survey of road safety professionals and researchers
A final report was published in May 2000 and includes details of the study undertaken between April 1999 and the completion of the research.
Main findings of the Interim Report
- We all speed. Speeding1 is not restricted to "boy racers" and "company car drivers", although these images are pervasive.
- Although speeding is widespread, the majority of survey respondents were content with current limits. A sizeable minority (36 per cent) favours raising the limit on motorways.
- Despite people being content with existing limits, there is confusion about what they are (other than 30 miles/h in town centres and 70 miles/h on motorways). There is widespread belief that intermediate limits (40 and 50) are applied inconsistently and for no obvious reason.
- Road safety professionals use the term "inappropriate speed" (driving too fast for the prevailing conditions). Whilst road safety professionals generally imply that the appropriate speed is less than the prevailing limit, by their actions most drivers demonstrate that their choice of appropriate speed is at, or above the limit.
- Car drivers choose their speed because "it feels right". They justify speeding because:
- it is unintentional;
- I was in a hurry (eg to collect a child from school);
- I was forced to (by someone tailgating me);
- the limit is wrong (for this location; a similar road elsewhere has a higher limit);
- my modern car can stop more quickly than those around when the limit was set;
- the same limit should not apply at all times (eg at night; on an empty road);
- the limit does not apply to me because I am an above average driver;
- it was not a lot over the limit and others abuse the limit more flagrantly.
- Factors which influence a speed "feeling right" to a car driver are:
- self-image as a driver;
- the vehicle;
- the road environment;
- cultural factors;
- presence of passengers;
- perceived risk of detection and prosecution.
- Speeding is not seen as a crime. "Serious speeding" is accepted as dangerous, but "moderate speeding" is not. "My" speeding is always moderate and controlled.
- Modern cars encourage speeding by providing a "car-coon" which insulates the driver from the effects of speed (noise, vibration, wind in the hair).
What can we do?
- Change attitudes and the climate of opinion that speeding is not a crime. Do not offer the excuse that the problem lies with others (eg the "boy racer").
- Develop a long-term speed management strategy.
- Make this strategy part of the integrated transport policy, which has public support.
- Technological developments offer great potential, although they are not widely supported. Car design will continue to insulate drivers from perceptions of speed, therefore mechanisms that can moderate a driver's choice of speed must be developed.
- Review speed limits and their application. Grasp the opportunity offered by devolving decisions about setting limits to local authorities by preparing comprehensive guidelines about when and where intermediate limits (ie between 30 and 60 miles/h) should be used. If this is not done there is a serious risk that current complaints and confusion about inconsistent use of limits will get worse as individual local authorities go their own way.
- Review the policy that no information other than the posted limit appears on a speed limit sign. Drivers should be given indications of why the posted limit is what it is.
- Extend the use of cameras to detect speeders and enforce the law.
- Develop a "yellow card" system to warn for the first offence but to penalise the next.
- Offer diagnostic "driver MoTs" to all, particularly after a crash. There are opportunities to be constructive about the lessons gained from what is often a traumatic experience.
- Promote refresher and/or diagnostic courses to reflect the widespread belief that passing the driving test is not well related to subsequent driving practice. Advanced training needs to build on perceived self-ability and to be presented as an opportunity.
Further research was recommended into:
- unlicensed driving - our interviews suggest that this may be a substantial problem. The AA Foundation sponsored additional research (see below).
- speed hierarchy - setting limits to reflect all activities, not just traffic needs.
- technology and car design - to understand how best to use technological developments to influence and/or control speed and driver behaviour.
In addition the final report included research on:
- road design and natural traffic calming - how drivers respond to a range of features in the road environment.
- reaction to propaganda - to understand how people re-interpret anti-speeding messages.
1 Breaking the law by driving faster than the legal limit
Back to the AA Foundation Research Briefings
