Highlights Belt use of 81 part-time belt users was recorded for 2 weeks in 2 studies. Part-time users experienced a persistent belt reminder or a belt interlock system. Persistent belt reminders increased belt use of part-time users by 30–34%. Restricting speed or gear selection increased belt use rate by 16–33%. Reminders that increase belt use 34% would save an estimated 1,489 lives annually.

    Abstract Introduction: Vehicle technologies that increase seat belt use can save thousands of lives each year. found that a gearshift interlock was more effective for increasing seat belt use than an intermittent audible reminder, but interlocks may not be more effective than persistent audible reminders lasting at least 90 seconds. Method: Forty-nine part-time belt users with a recent seat belt citation who self-reported not always using a seat belt drove two vehicles for 1 week each. Thirty-three drove a Chevrolet with an intermittent audible reminder followed by either a BMW with a persistent 90-second audible reminder (n = 17) or a Subaru with an incessant audible reminder (n = 16). The other 16 participants experienced the BMW persistent reminder followed by an interlock that limited speed to 15 mph during unbelted driving. These data were combined with data from 32 part-time belt users in who experienced the intermittent reminder for 2 weeks or the intermittent reminder for 1 week and a gearshift interlock the next. Results: Relative to the intermittent reminder, seat belt use was significantly increased an estimated 30% by the BMW persistent reminder, 34% by the Subaru incessant reminder, and 33% by the speed-limiting interlock. Belt use was increased an estimated 16% by the gearshift interlock, but this change was not significant. More participants circumvented the speed-limiting interlock to drive unbelted than the audible reminders. Responses to a poststudy survey indicated that interlocks were less acceptable than reminders. Conclusions: Audible reminders lasting at least 90 seconds and a speed-limiting interlock were more effective for increasing seat belt use than an intermittent audible reminder, but reminders were found more acceptable. Practical applications: Strengthening existing U.S. safety standards to require audible reminders lasting at least 90 seconds for front-row occupants could save up to 1,489 lives annually.


    Access

    Check access

    Check availability in my library

    Order at Subito €


    Export, share and cite



    Title :

    The effects of persistent audible seat belt reminders and a speed-limiting interlock on the seat belt use of drivers who do not always use a seat belt


    Contributors:

    Published in:

    Publication date :

    2019-09-28


    Size :

    12 pages




    Type of media :

    Article (Journal)


    Type of material :

    Electronic Resource


    Language :

    English




    SEAT BELT RETRACTOR AND SEAT BELT

    TAKAO MASATO / TOMBE HIDEYUKI | European Patent Office | 2019

    Free access

    Seat belt retractor and seat belt system including seat belt retractor

    UCHIBORI HAYATO | European Patent Office | 2015

    Free access

    Seat belt retractor and seat belt apparatus employing seat belt retractor

    OSADA KENJI | European Patent Office | 2016

    Free access

    SEAT BELT RETRACTOR AND SEAT BELT APPARATUS EMPLOYING SEAT BELT RETRACTOR

    OSADA KENJI | European Patent Office | 2015

    Free access

    Seat belt retractor and seat belt device

    WATANABE KIYOSHI / ASAKO TADAYUKI | European Patent Office | 2024

    Free access