Blincoe Kate M, Jones Andrew P, Sauerzapf Violet, Haynes Robin
School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk NR1 1LT, UK.
Accid Anal Prev. 2006 Mar;38(2):371-8. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.10.008. Epub 2005 Nov 23.
There is evidence that excessive speed leads to an increased frequency and severity of road traffic accidents, but it is not clear how speeds may be reduced. To increase understanding of why drivers exceed the speed limits, the views of a sample of road users who had been prosecuted for exceeding the speed limit in the rural county of Norfolk England were sought. Respondents were categorised into a four group driver typology comprising conformers (those who report they never exceed limits) deterred drivers (those put off speeding by the presence of cameras), manipulators (those who slow only at camera locations) and defiers (those who exceed limits regardless of cameras), and the consistency of opinions was compared between the groups. Speeding was perceived as widespread and normal, and many drivers resented camera enforcement. Indeed, some respondents considered that cameras in themselves caused dangerous driving. For many drivers, the prosecution experience resulted in distress, anger and anti-camera sentiments, predominantly because they expressed the belief that they were more skilled than other drivers. It was also apparent that many respondents displayed a lack of awareness of the link between speed and collisions. Conformers were the least likely to state that the prosecution had deterred them from further speeding behaviour, possibly because they perceived themselves as already law-abiding. The deterred drivers were most likely to express intentions to avoid further speeding and their speeding incident was found to be most likely to be accidental. Manipulators and defiers tended to report that they had deliberately chosen to infringe the speed limits. Manipulators often acknowledged that their style of driving was dangerous; however, they failed to link this to their own behaviour. It was evident that many defiers and manipulators did not perceive speeding as a serious traffic law violation. Possible implications for road safety initiatives are discussed and recommendations are given for specifically targeting different driver types.
有证据表明,超速会导致道路交通事故的频率和严重程度增加,但尚不清楚如何降低车速。为了更好地理解驾驶员超速的原因,我们收集了英格兰诺福克郡农村地区因超速被起诉的道路使用者样本的意见。受访者被分为四类驾驶员类型:遵守者(那些表示自己从不超速的人)、受威慑的驾驶员(那些因有摄像头而不再超速的人)、操纵者(那些只在有摄像头的地方减速的人)和违抗者(那些无视摄像头而超速的人),并比较了不同组之间意见的一致性。超速被视为普遍且正常的现象,许多驾驶员对摄像头执法表示不满。事实上,一些受访者认为摄像头本身会导致危险驾驶。对许多驾驶员来说,被起诉的经历导致了痛苦、愤怒和反摄像头情绪,主要是因为他们表示相信自己比其他驾驶员更有技能。同样明显的是,许多受访者对速度与碰撞之间的联系缺乏认识。遵守者最不可能表示被起诉使他们不再进一步超速,可能是因为他们认为自己本来就守法。受威慑的驾驶员最有可能表示打算避免进一步超速,而且他们的超速事件被发现最有可能是意外情况。操纵者和违抗者往往报告说他们故意选择违反速度限制。操纵者经常承认他们的驾驶方式很危险;然而,他们没有将这与自己的行为联系起来。很明显,许多违抗者和操纵者并不认为超速是严重违反交通法规的行为。文中讨论了对道路安全倡议可能产生的影响,并针对不同类型的驾驶员给出了具体建议。