Will Kelli England
Department of Pediatrics and the Center for Pediatric Research, Eastern Virginia Medical School and Children's Hospital of The King's Daughters, Norfolk, VA 23510-1001, USA.
Accid Anal Prev. 2005 Sep;37(5):947-55. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.04.018.
Motivating parents to take certain safety precautions when traveling with their children remains an elusive challenge for advocates, as caregiver naiveté contributes to poor parental participation in safety-seat checks, low booster-seat use, poor adherence to rear-seat positioning, and intermittent safety-belt use. Because of inherent human biases and unfortunate characteristics of vehicle travel, it is argued that most caregivers possess an immunity fallacy, or a reduced perception of risk for motor vehicle injury to their children. Consequently, traditionally designed child passenger safety campaigns, which are primarily informational, fail to have an impact on most parents. Rather, for maximum behavioral success, injury prevention messages must shock and surprise parents into paying attention to something they would normally dismiss as unimportant.
激励父母在带孩子旅行时采取某些安全预防措施，对倡导者来说仍然是一项难以实现的挑战，因为照顾者的天真导致父母在安全座椅检查中的参与度低、增高座椅使用率低、不坚持让孩子坐在后排以及安全带使用不连续。由于人类固有的偏见和车辆旅行的不幸特征，有人认为大多数照顾者存在免疫谬误，即对其子女机动车伤害风险的认知降低。因此，传统设计的儿童乘客安全宣传活动主要是提供信息，对大多数父母没有影响。相反，为了取得最大的行为成效，伤害预防信息必须让父母感到震惊和意外，从而促使他们关注那些他们通常认为不重要而不予理会的事情。
