AP-R507-16 Public Demand For Safer Speeds

Research Report
AP-R507-16
Public Demand for Safer Speeds:

Identification of Interventions for Trial
Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Prepared by
Publisher
Judy Fleiter, Ioni Lewis, Sherrie-Anne Kaye, David Soole, Andry

Rakotonirainy, and Ashim Debnath
Austroads Ltd.
Level 9, 287 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Phone: +61 2 8265 3300
austroads@austroads.com.au
www.austroads.com.au
Project Manager
Nerida Leal
Abstract
About Austroads
Speeding is a major contributor to road injuries and fatalities and

remains prevalent. Changing community perceptions about speeding
is an important priority.
Austroads is the peak organisation of Australasian road

transport and traffic agencies.
Austroads commissioned research to identify a range of potential

interventions for future trial and evaluation aimed at creating,
increasing, and/or sustaining public demand for safer speeds. This
project had three phases: a literature review; consultations with key
stakeholders regarding intervention options (including feasibility, and
likely benefits and costs of identified interventions); and providing
research results, including recommendations for future phases of the
program of work.
The literature review led to the development of a draft Campaign
Strategy targeting nine aims across three themes underpinning this
research: 1) creating, 2) increasing, and 3) sustaining public demand
for safer speeds on the road. Twenty-one stakeholders commented
on the suitability and feasibility of, and likely barriers to,
countermeasures within the draft Campaign Strategy and its
applicability to the Australian and New Zealand context. There was
overwhelming positive support for the proposed Campaign Strategy
by the majority of respondents; many, noting that it addressed key
misperceptions and complemented many existing approaches. A
small number of respondents expressed some concerns with various
aspects. Stakeholder feedback was incorporated into the final
proposed Campaign Strategy to enhance its potential effectiveness.
Wide diversity across jurisdictions makes the recommendation of
individual interventions for specific areas problematic. Individual
jurisdictions should consider a range of costs and benefits of the
proposed Campaign Strategy to determine the likely feasibility from
their unique perspective. Issues to be addressed when considering
implementation of the proposed Campaign Strategy include speed
limit setting policies, resourcing, messaging and advertising
strategies, and political will associated with promoting safer speeds.
Austroads purpose is to support our member organisations to

deliver an improved Australasian road transport network. To
succeed in this task, we undertake leading-edge road and
transport research which underpins our input to policy
development and published guidance on the design,
construction and management of the road network and its
associated infrastructure.
Austroads provides a collective approach that delivers value
for money, encourages shared knowledge and drives
consistency for road users.
Austroads is governed by a Board consisting of senior
executive representatives from each of its eleven member
organisations:
Roads and Maritime Services New South Wales
Department of State Growth Tasmania
Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and

Regional Development
Australian Local Government Association
Roads Corporation Victoria

Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland
Main Roads Western Australia
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
South Australia
Department of Transport Northern Territory
Territory and Municipal Services Directorate, Australian
Capital Territory
New Zealand Transport Agency.
Keywords
Road safety, speeding, safer speeds, road safety messages,
campaign strategy evaluation, advertising countermeasures,
behaviour change, social change, public attitudes.
ISBN 978-1-925294-97-2
Austroads Project No. SS1962
Austroads Publication No. AP-R507-16
Publication date February 2016
Austroads 2016
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under
the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any
process without the prior written permission of Austroads.
Pages 153
This report has been prepared for Austroads as part of its work to promote improved Australian and New Zealand transport outcomes by
providing expert technical input on road and road transport issues.
Individual road agencies will determine their response to this report following consideration of their legislative or administrative
arrangements, available funding, as well as local circumstances and priorities.
Austroads believes this publication to be correct at the time of printing and does not accept responsibility for any consequences arising from
the use of information herein. Readers should rely on their own skill and judgement to apply information to particular issues.
Summary
Background
Changing community perceptions about speeding is an important priority. The need for improved compliance
with speed limits was identified in Australias National Road Safety Strategy 2011-2020 (NRSS), as was the
need to engage more effectively with the community on the role of speed in road safety. Similarly, New
Zealands national strategy, Safer Journeys, recognises the need to implement a communications strategy
that will alter community dialogue on speeding, including increasing understanding and acceptance of safer
speeds by road system designers and users.
In recognition of these needs, Austroads commissioned research (Project No. SS1962) to identify a range of
potential interventions for trial and evaluation aimed at creating, increasing, and/or sustaining demand for
safer speeds. The research was conducted by the Centre for Accident Research and Road SafetyQueensland (CARRS-Q). Trial and evaluation of interventions arising from the research may occur in future
Austroads projects.
This project comprised three phrases:
1.
2.
3.
A literature review to identify evidence-based options for interventions with potential to create, increase,
and/or sustain demand for safer speeds in the community and to consider the feasibility, costs and
benefits of identified interventions;
Consultations with key stakeholders regarding intervention options, including the feasibility and likely
costs of identified interventions; and
Preparation of a report describing the research results, including recommendations for future phases of
the program of work.
Literature Review and Proposed Campaign Strategy

The review contains the areas: 1) Overview of speeding as it relates to road safety (Section 2); 2) Creating
demand for behavioural and social change lessons from previous successes including case studies of
smoking, drink driving and seat belt use (Section 3); 3) Interventions previously used for creating, increasing
and/or sustaining demand for safer speeds (Section 4); 4) Considerations for potential countermeasures
(Section 5). The review led to the development of a proposed Campaign Strategy targeting nine aims
(Table 6.2) across the three themes underpinning this research: 1) creating, 2) increasing, and 3) sustaining
public demand for safer speeds on the road. The aims are:
Create demand for safer speeds
1.
2.
3.
To enhance community understanding of risk associated with speeding.

To enhance community understanding that increased speeds result in increased crash severity, based
on uncontested laws of physics.
To increase awareness of purpose and benefits of speed enforcement.
Increase demand for safer speeds

4.
5.
6.
To challenge the prevailing descriptive norm that everyone speeds.

To challenge the injunctive/moral norm that speeding is acceptable and approved of by others (i.e., that
speeding is no big deal).
To challenge the perception that speeding saves a large amount of time, and/or that it is possible to
make up a large amount of lost time by speeding.
Austroads 2016 | page i
Sustain demand for safer speeds

7.
8.
9.
To challenge the perception that complying with speed limits is hard/impossible and to promote
individual responsibility for and ability to choose and control ones speed.
To continue to build a positive culture surrounding road safety more broadly, and speeding more
specifically.
To challenge language associated with speeding in order to alter public perception of its importance.
Stakeholder Consultations
A small international expert advisory group (n = 3) reviewed the draft literature review and draft Campaign
Strategy and provided written feedback that was incorporated into the draft documents before they were
used for stakeholder consultations. Twenty-one stakeholders provided comment, via an online survey, on the
suitability and feasibility of, and likely barriers to, the countermeasures within the draft Campaign Strategy
and its applicability to the Australian/New Zealand context. Stakeholders consisted of road user advocacy
groups, jurisdictional transport authorities, and researchers in the road safety and advertising/ behaviour
change fields. Eight themes were identified from stakeholder feedback: (i) support for the Campaign
Strategy, (ii) suggestions to broaden the Campaign Strategy, (iii) Campaign Strategy (or parts) lacking
support, (iv) political will being crucial to success of the Campaign Strategy, (v) feasibility of the Campaign
Strategy, (vi) barriers to the Campaign Strategy, (vii) other considerations, and (viii) additional ideas. There
was overwhelmingly positive support for the proposed Campaign Strategy by the majority of respondents,
noting that is addressed key misperceptions and was complementary to many existing approaches. A small
number of respondents expressed some concerns; one respondent thought that the Campaign Strategy was
too theoretical and two respondents thought that the Campaign Strategy could backfire if implemented
poorly.
Success of the Campaign Strategy was noted by many as dependent on long term political support and
sustained resourcing. A number of barriers were identified including that drivers may be unaware of the true
picture of how much speeding is occurring and that enforcement of low level speeding may be viewed solely
as revenue raising by some. The need for ongoing evaluation of the Campaign Strategy and for it to
complement what is already in place, rather than replace it, was highlighted. Additional ideas to increase the
effectiveness of the Campaign Strategy included: increasing education of the negative effects of speeding,
increasing initiatives which incentivise good driving behaviour, and implementing strategies to assist local
community action which address speeding. Stakeholder feedback was incorporated to produce the final
version of the proposed Campaign Strategy that appears in Table 6.2.
There is great diversity across New Zealand and Australian jurisdictions in regard to many issues associated
with trailing and evaluating the components of the proposed Campaign Strategy. There is need for individual
jurisdictions to consider a range of costs and benefits associated with the proposed Campaign Strategy and
its individual parts in order to determine the likely feasibility from their unique perspective. Table 6.1 provides
information that will assist in considering such issues when deciding which potential interventions to trial in
individual jurisdictions. The ideas contained within the proposed Campaign Strategy (Table 6.2) provide a
systematic framework to address key barriers to public demand for safer speeds.
Austroads 2016 | page ii
Contents
1.
2.
3.
Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Safe Speeds as part of a Safe System ....................................................................................... 2
1.2
Project scope............................................................................................................................... 2
1.3
Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 3
1.4
Structure of the review ................................................................................................................ 3
Overview of speeding as it relates to road safety............................................................................ 5

2.1
Relationship between vehicle speed and crash risk and severity............................................... 5
2.2
Prevalence of speeding ............................................................................................................... 6
2.3
Factors influencing speeding behaviour ..................................................................................... 7
2.4
2.3.1 Personal factors ............................................................................................................. 7

2.3.2 Legal factors ................................................................................................................... 7
2.3.3 Situational factors ........................................................................................................... 7
2.3.4 Social factors .................................................................................................................. 8
2.3.5 Implementation intentions and pledges to counter speeding ....................................... 10
Community beliefs and attitudes towards speeding.................................................................. 12
2.5
2.4.1 Roadwork zones ........................................................................................................... 13

2.4.2 School zones ................................................................................................................ 14
2.4.3 Community attitudes towards speed management initiatives more broadly ................ 16
Perceptions of safer speeds .................................................................................................... 18
2.6
The role of theory in behaviour change .................................................................................... 20
Creating demand for behavioural and social change lessons from previous successes...... 22
3.1
Case study 1: smoking behaviour ............................................................................................. 23
3.2
3.1.1 Evidence-based research............................................................................................. 23

3.1.2 Legislation tobacco legislation and taxation .............................................................. 23
3.1.3 Public education, advertising and mass media campaigns ......................................... 24
Case study 2: drink driving ........................................................................................................ 28
3.3

3.2.2 Legislation .................................................................................................................... 29
Case study 3: seat belt use ....................................................................................................... 34
3.4

3.3.2 Legislation .................................................................................................................... 34
Speeding ................................................................................................................................... 37
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
4.
Evidence-based research............................................................................................. 37
Legislation .................................................................................................................... 37
Public education, advertisement, and mass media campaigns ................................... 39
Interventions previously used for creating, increasing or sustaining demand for

safer speeds....................................................................................................................................... 45
4.1
Public education strategies ....................................................................................................... 45
4.2
4.1.1 Mass media and advertising campaigns ...................................................................... 45

Community-based behaviour change initiatives ....................................................................... 54
4.2.1
Speed limit reduction initiatives .................................................................................... 54
Austroads 2016 | page iii
4.3
4.2.2 Holistic approaches (active transportation and eco driving) ........................................ 56

4.2.3 Incentive/rewards schemes .......................................................................................... 58
4.2.4 Gamification and mobile phone applications................................................................ 59
4.2.5 Community-based programs targeted at specific groups ............................................ 60
Intelligent transportation systems.............................................................................................. 61
4.4
4.3.1 Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) ................................................................................ 61

4.3.2 Dynamic vehicle-activated signs .................................................................................. 63
Enforcement .............................................................................................................................. 64
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.4.3
4.4.4
5.
6.
Effectiveness of police speed enforcement.................................................................. 64

Innovative approaches to speed enforcement ............................................................. 64
Enforcement tolerances ............................................................................................... 65
Accompanying communication strategies .................................................................... 66
Considerations for potential countermeasures ............................................................................. 68

5.1
Road safety advertising ............................................................................................................. 68
5.2
Community-based behaviour change initiatives ....................................................................... 69
5.3
Intelligent transportation systems.............................................................................................. 69
5.4
5.3.1 Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) ................................................................................ 69

5.3.2 Dynamic vehicle-activated signs .................................................................................. 70
5.3.3 Enforcement-related issues.......................................................................................... 70
Changing the conversation about speeding to help change public perception about speeding70
5.5
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 71
Stakeholder consultations ............................................................................................................... 74

6.1
Method ...................................................................................................................................... 74
6.2
6.1.1 Participants ................................................................................................................... 74

6.1.2 Online questionnaire .................................................................................................... 74
Results ...................................................................................................................................... 75
6.3
6.2.1 Support for the Campaign Strategy .............................................................................. 75

6.2.2 Broadening the Campaign Strategy ............................................................................. 76
6.2.3 Campaign Strategy (or parts) lacking support.............................................................. 77
6.2.4 Political will is crucial to success .................................................................................. 78
6.2.5 Feasibility of the Campaign Strategy ........................................................................... 78
6.2.6 Barriers to the Campaign Strategy ............................................................................... 79
6.2.7 Other considerations .................................................................................................... 79
6.2.8 Additional ideas ............................................................................................................ 80
Conclusions and recommendations .......................................................................................... 81
6.3.1
6.3.2
Considerations for individual jurisdictions .................................................................... 82

Implementation considerations .................................................................................... 83
References ................................................................................................................................................... 97
Appendix A Databases and key search terms ...................................................................................... 123
Appendix B Smoking an historical overview of legislation and campaigns .................................. 125
Appendix C Drink driving an historical overview of legislation and campaigns ........................... 129
Appendix D Seat belts an historical overview of legislation and campaigns ................................ 138
Appendix E Speeding an historical overview of legislation and campaigns ................................. 139
Appendix F Overview of example mass media and social marketing campaigns ........................... 143
Appendix G List of respondent organisations ..................................................................................... 147
Appendix H Road safety expert stakeholder questionnaire ............................................................... 148
Appendix I Advertising/ behaviour change expert stakeholder questionnaire ............................... 151
Austroads 2016 | page iv
Tables
Table 3.1 Factors contributing to low prevalence of drink driving ............................................................... 28
Table 3.2 Factors contributing to compliance for drink driving compared to speeding ............................... 42
Table 5.1 Rationale for categorisation of nine aims according to the need to create, increase, or
sustain demand for Safer Speeds ............................................................................................... 72
Table 6.1 Issues to consider when addressing each aim ............................................................................ 84
Table 6.2 Proposed Campaign Strategy containing nine aims and potential countermeasures to
address each aim ........................................................................................................................ 86
Figures
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 5.1
Timeline of anti-smoking campaigns. ........................................................................................ 27

Relative risk assessment .......................................................................................................... 29
Timeline of TAC drink driving campaigns. ................................................................................ 33
Timeline of TAC seat belt campaigns ....................................................................................... 36
Timeline of TAC anti-speeding campaigns ............................................................................... 44
Summary of Proposed Campaign Strategy .............................................................................. 73
Austroads 2016 | page v
1. Introduction
The road trauma burden represents a significant public health problem worldwide. Each year, almost 1.25
million people are killed and up to 50 million are seriously injured on roads throughout the world (World
Health Organization, 2013). The WHO Global Status Report on Road Safety (2013) highlighted that traffic
crashes constitute a leading cause of death and morbidity in many countries and are a particularly pertinent
issue in developing countries. During the 12 months leading to December, 2014 in Australia, a total of 1,153
people were killed in traffic crashes at a rate of 4.9 fatalities per 100,000 population (Bureau of Infrastructure
Transport and Regional Economics, 2015), while in New Zealand in 2014, a total of 268 people were killed in
traffic crashes at a rate of 6.5 fatalities per 100,000 population (Ministry of Transport, 2015). Road trauma is
also associated with substantial economic and social costs, estimated at approximately $27 billion per year
in Australia (Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, 2014).
It is noteworthy that the numbers of fatalities, fatal crashes, and deaths per 100,000 people are declining in
Australia. However, fatalities among cyclists and motorcyclists have not fallen at the same rate as vehicle
occupants, and older road user fatalities have not declined at the same rate as young road user fatalities
(Lydon et al., 2015). While these figures do not control for exposure, they suggest that vulnerable road users
are continuing to sustain injuries at a different rate to vehicle occupants. Although various factors may
contribute to the injury and death of such road users, it is likely that vehicle speed is a major factor at play
here due to the frailty of the human body and individuals inability to survive trauma inflicted at increasing
levels of speed. Analysis of available hospital data for the decade to 2011 provides some evidence that
serious injury levels have generally not declined in concert with the downward trend in fatalities; and this can
largely be attributed to increases in non-fatal road trauma among motorcyclists and cyclists.
Numerous high-risk behaviours have been shown to be associated with increased risk of traffic crash
involvement and severity of crash outcomes (Petridou & Moustaki, 2000). These behaviours include
speeding, driving while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, driving while fatigued, inattention, and
failing to wear a restraint. Data collected in various Australian jurisdictions has reported speed as a
contributing factor in as many as 40% of fatal crashes and up to 20% of all crashes (Department of Transport
and Main Roads, 2014; Transport for NSW, 2013). Similarly, in New Zealand speeding was the primary
contributor in 83 deaths (32.7% of the total road toll) and 1,863 injuries in 2013 (Ministry of Transport, 2014).
Given the identification of speeding as a leading cause of road-related death and injury, this behaviour is the
focus of the current report. Throughout this report, the word speeding is used to refer to both exceeding the
posted speed limit, by any amount, and travelling too fast for the prevailing weather and road conditions.
Extensive research has quantified the impact of speed on road trauma. However, speeding remains a major
contributing factor to road injuries and fatalities in Australia and New Zealand, despite extensive
improvements over recent decades in the areas of public education, engineering, intelligent transportation
systems (ITS) and enforcement. Speed management strategies have historically focussed on a wide range
of countermeasures including engineering (e.g., road infrastructure improvements, default speed limits),
police enforcement (e.g., speed cameras), and public education campaigns, the majority of which have
typically focussed on depicting severe injuries and deaths from speed-related crashes (i.e., fear-based
appeals).
The need to change community perceptions about speeding is an important priority, with the need for
improved compliance with speed limits being identified in Australias National Road Safety Strategy 20112020 (NRSS) (Australian Transport Council, 2011), as was the need to engage more effectively with the
community on the role of speed in road safety. Similarly, New Zealands national strategy, Safer Journeys,
recognises the need to implement a communications strategy that will alter community dialogue on
speeding, including increasing understanding and acceptance of safer speeds by road system designers and
users (National Road Safety Committee, 2013).
Austroads 2016 | page 1
Alternative ways of creating public demand for safer speeds has been identified as an important next step in
road safety research. This issue was identified at a workshop in February 2013 that was hosted by the
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and the Australasian College of Road Safety
(ACRS). The workshop aimed to develop a national road safety research strategy and research priorities in
line with the National Road Safety Strategy and the United Nations Decade of Action for Road Safety (20112020). Finding new ways to garner community support for safer speeds and to communicate messages
about the dangers of speed have, therefore, been identified as key priorities.
1.1 Safe Speeds as part of a Safe System

Safe Speeds is one of the four key cornerstones of the NRSS (Australian Transport Council, 2011),
together with Safe Roads, Safe Vehicles, and Safe People. Here, Safe Speeds refers to the situation
were speed limits complement the road environment to manage crash impact forces to within human
tolerance; and all road users complying with posted speed limits (p. 41). In essence, these four cornerstones
of the NRSS are based on the guiding principles of the Safe System approach to road safety (OECD
Transport Research Centre - International Transport Forum, 2008). The Safe System recognises that people
will make mistakes, that there are physical limits to the force that the human body can withstand, and that a
forgiving road transport system would ensure that when a mistake is made and a collision occurs, the forces
generated in that collision are managed so that people are not exposed to impact forces beyond human
physical tolerance. Therefore, in the ideal situation, a truly safe system can be considered as one where
serious human injury or death does not occur when vehicles collide. The current systems in Australia and
New Zealand are far from robust enough to ensure this outcome (Johnston, Muir, & Howard, 2014; Turner,
Bosher, & Collier, 2014). Furthermore, it is recognised that Australia has some of the highest speed limits in
the world; that there is need to balance safety and mobility concerns (Fildes, Langford, Andrea, & Scully,
2005; Johnston et al., 2014), and that, therefore, much more work is needed to enhance compliance with
current speed limits and to encourage travel speeds that provide the safest possible outcome for all road
users within the current system.
1.2 Project scope

In light of the above-mentioned background to the issue of speeding and the recognised priority of garnering
community support for safer speeds, Austroads commissioned this research to identify potential strategies to
assist in creating, increasing and/or sustaining public demand for safer speeds on the road. This literature
review reviewed the following aspects:
previous examples of how public demand for a change in unsafe attitudes and behaviours/practices has
been created or improved across other relevant health-related behavioural contexts;
evidence from the road safety field and other health behaviour fields regarding best practice in achieving
social and behaviour change;
the need to adequately explain the purpose of, and need for, current speeding-related countermeasures
with a view to building a climate of broad community support for them, which could also assist in creating
demand for new, innovative strategies;
the diverse Australasian perspectives in regard to facilitators (e.g., community support for speed
cameras, use of technologies such as intelligent speed adaptation [ISA] and readiness of infrastructure
and community to support such technologies) and barriers (e.g., limited understanding of the role of
speed in crashes, low levels of perceived legitimacy/credibility of speed limits, need for enforcement, and
enforcement technology) to enhancing public demand for safer speeds; and
issues relating to the feasibility of and likely barriers to potential interventions so that this information
could be used in the next phase of the research (stakeholder consultation phase). Examples of these
factors may include the changing nature of: communication strategies and mediums (e.g., increase in
digital and online communication); in-vehicle technologies; and the ways in which jurisdictions set speed
limits (e.g., the recent move to higher or unrestricted speeds in the Northern Territory and the
Netherlands).
As stated above, this research project aimed to identify potential interventions that could be used to create,
increase and/or sustain demand for safer speeds on the road. To identify such interventions, a broad range
of literature was considered which incorporated evidence from social psychological research including
persuasion and health behaviour change, as well as advertising and marketing, and ITS (e.g., in-vehicle
infrastructure). It is acknowledged from the outset that some of the interventions suggested will be based
more generally on evidence-based principles from these different literatures, as opposed to evidence drawn
specifically from road safety research., Thus, empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of such
interventions may not yet be fully known. It is acknowledged that although not within scope of the current
project, any subsequent extensions of this project will involve the testing/trialling of interventions that are
deemed likely to be effective and feasible within the Australasian context, which will provide evidence to
inform future decisions. The stakeholder consultation phase of the current project sought feedback from a
wide range of people and organisations on the feasibility, costs, benefits, barriers, and facilitators of
implementation of the potential interventions contained in the proposed Campaign Strategy. This information
was used to develop information for individual jurisdictions to consider before implementation.
Of note, speed enforcement strategies were considered out of scope for the current project. However, public
education, marketing, and communication strategies used to accompany speed enforcement strategies were
considered within scope. In addition, community acceptance levels of enforcement strategies were also
considered within scope to the extent that such strategies may influence and motivate attitudes, beliefs and
behaviours. Engineering countermeasures were considered outside the scope of this project.
Given the extensive literature available on many of these areas, and in consultation with the Austroads
Project Manager, the literature review and associated outcomes have been scoped so as to focus primarily
on enhancing community support for safer speeds and on bringing about long term attitudinal and ultimately
behaviour change in regard to travel speeds. It is important to note that a systematic review of the literature
for each of the broad topic areas was not conducted. Rather, we conducted a targeted review, paying
particular attention to behaviour/attitudinal/normative change strategies.
1.3 Methodology
To prepare the literature review, a number of strategies were adopted to source relevant information. First,
relevant research was identified through a series of iterative searches with key search teams entered into a
range of relevant road safety and public health online databases (i.e., ScienceDirect, Scopus, Psychinfo).
Second, the reference lists of all retrieved studies were searched for additional relevant studies. Third,
extensive internet searches using Google and Google scholar were also conducted. Finally, representatives
from various organisations were contacted to assist with the identification of important grey literature.
A full list of the search terms used as well as the databases which were searched can be found in Appendix A.
1.4 Structure of the review

The first section of the review, Section 1: Introduction has provided a brief background of the project in
terms of problem, aims and scope of the project and literature review, as well as research methods for
undertaking the review of the literature.
The next section, Section 2: Overview of Speeding as it relates to Road Safety is intended to set the
scene in summarising why speeding represents the perennial challenge to road safety. It provides insight
into why garnering community support for safer speeds is likely to be crucial to bring about social and
behaviour change. In particular, evidence relating to five key aspects is reviewed in Section 2, commencing
first with a summary of the role that speeding plays in road crashes. Discussion focusses here on how some
ground has already been made regarding public appreciation of the link between increased speed and
increased crash severity, while in contrast, the link between travel speed and crash risk remains the more
contentious of the two issues. Next, the prevalence of speeding is discussed with reference to the evidence
derived from numerous observational, self-report, and speed survey studies regarding the type and extent of
speeding. The third issue relates to the extent to which a myriad of factors influence speeding and how these
factors may vary across road user groups. This discussion highlights the complexities associated with
identifying and challenging the most relevant motivation/s. The fourth issue relates to the existing attitudes
towards speeding and speed enforcement. Of particular note are the contradictory and paradoxical beliefs
which exist in relation to individuals attitudes towards speeding and ones speeding behaviour as well as
ones views regarding the most appropriate implementation of speed management measures. Reference is
made to the Speed Paradox as well as the phenomena of JIMBY Just In My Back Yard and YIMBY
Yes In My Back Yard. The fifth issue relates to public perceptions of safer speeds and the substantial
heterogeneity in the beliefs and perceptions of what constitutes safe speeds and speeds one would be
prepared to travel at and still feel in control and safe on the road.
Next, in Section 3: Creating Demand for Behavioural and Social Change Lessons from Previous
Successes, case studies are provided regarding three health and/or road safety related behaviours for
which evidence exists of social and behavioural change having been achieved. The case studies feature the
behaviours of smoking, drink-driving, and seat belt use in the Australian context. These three behaviours
were chosen to review and highlight the types of strategies and initiatives (e.g., public education campaigns)
together with other notable occurrences (e.g., legislative changes), which were used/continue to be used to
promote social and behavioural change. Arguably, much insight can be gained from investigating the
strategies and initiatives used over time from successful social and behaviour change endeavours,
particularly in regards to potential elements which may be drawn upon in helping to create public demand for
safer speeds. Timelines have been prepared for each of these three behaviours which extend back over
previous decades. These timelines feature the types of public education and mass media campaigns that
were implemented together with the prevailing community attitudes towards each behaviour.
The subsequent section, Section 4: Interventions Previously used for Creating, Increasing and/or Sustaining
Demand for Safer Speeds, provides an overview of empirical and other research associated with
interventions for creating, increasing and/or sustaining demand for safer speeds, including communication
strategies (e.g., public education and mass media), community-based behavioural change programs (e.g.,
speed limit reductions, active transportation, eco-driving, incentives/rewards, and gamification and mobile
phone applications), ITS (e.g., Intelligent Speed Adaptation, dynamic vehicle-activated signs), and
enforcement approaches (e.g., enforcement tolerances and associated enforcement-related signposting
public education strategies).
Section 5: Considerations for Potential Countermeasures presents a draft of the potential countermeasures
devised from the evidence presented in the literature review, together with identification of the factors which
will likely influence the feasibility (i.e., barriers and facilitators) of their implementation in an Australasian
context.
Finally, Section 6: Stakeholder Consultations outlines the method used to undertake stakeholder
consultations with individuals and organisations in New Zealand and Australia about the draft Campaign
Strategy. Stakeholder feedback is presented in this section and was used to finalise the proposed Campaign
Strategy that appears in Table 6.2. The information contained in Table 6.2 represents the culmination of the
research project. This section also highlights the diversity across New Zealand and Australian jurisdictions in
regard to many issues associated with trailing and evaluating the components of the proposed Campaign
Strategy. There is need for individual jurisdictions to consider a range of costs and benefits associated with
the proposed Campaign Strategy and its individual parts in order to determine the likely feasibility from their
unique perspective.
2. Overview of speeding as it relates to road

safety
This section provides an overview of the reasons why speeding represents the perennial challenge to road
safety. An appreciation of these challenges can provide avenues for future interventions to assist in creating
public demand for safer speeds. The following five aspects are discussed:
Relationship between vehicle speed and crash risk and severity

Prevalence of speeding
Factors influencing speeding
Attitudes towards speeding and speed enforcement
Community perceptions of safer speeds
2.1 Relationship between vehicle speed and crash risk and severity
There is extensive and consistent research highlighting the positive and exponential relationship between
vehicle speed and risk of crash involvement, as well as the increased severity of crashes (Aarts & van
Schagen, 2006; Kloeden, McLean, & Glonek, 2002; Nilsson, 2004). Simply put, the risk of crash involvement
increases with faster travel speeds due to the subsequent increases in the distance travelled when reacting
to hazards and the distance required for braking, while crash severity is influenced by greater impact speed
(Kloeden, McLean, Moore, & Ponte, 1997). Importantly, increased vehicle speeds are associated with
reductions in vehicle control and stability, and increased speed variability can cause other road users to
make errors in judgement leading to conflict situations (Global Road Safety Partnership, 2008).
Attempts to establish and quantify the link between speed and crash risk have been undertaken in South
Australia using case-control, crash reconstruction studies. Kloeden and colleagues (1997, 2002) identified
that, compared to a vehicle travelling at the speed limit in a 60km/h zone, a vehicle travelling at 65km/h was
estimated to be at almost twice the risk of being involved in a crash. Moreover, the relationship was cited as
being exponential with relative risk ratios doubling for every additional 5km/h over the speed limit travelled.
This research has found that the nature of the relationship between vehicle speeds and crash risk is more
pronounced on urban than on rural roads.
Speed is generally determined to be a contributing factor if police determine that a crash involves one or
more vehicles exceeding the posted speed limit or travelling too fast for the prevailing weather and road
conditions (Robinson & Singh, 2006). However, quantifying the precise role of speed in traffic crashes
presents methodological hurdles (e.g., poor reliability and under-reporting) and is not an easy or clear cut
task (Johnston et al., 2014).
There is a substantial body of international research and experience which has provided evidence of the link
between reduced speeds and reduced crashes, and increased speeds and increased crashes. Elvik,
Christensen, and Amundsen (2004) conducted a meta-analysis of 98 studies to examine the relationship
between speed and crash risk. The findings revealed that increasing speeds were generally associated with
a higher proportion of crashes. Further, crashing at higher speeds increased the severity of injuries
sustained in the crash. In turn, the pattern of results revealed that reduced speeds were linked to reduced
crash risk. Of the 460 estimates of effects obtained from the 98 studies, 338 (73.5%) reported results in the
same direction (i.e., increased speed and increased crash risk; decreased speed and decreased crash risk).
Therefore, on balance, the available evidence indicates that the faster one travels, the greater the risk of
crash involvement.
However, despite this empirical evidence, the general public do not appear to have yet been fully convinced
of the relationship between speeding and crash risk, whereas the link between speeding and severity of the
outcome from a crash seems to be better understood (Petroulis, 2014). Thus, future interventions may
benefit from identifying innovative and effective ways to clearly and definitively demonstrate the relationship
between crash risk and speeding, as well as continuing to highlight the link between speed and crash
severity.
2.2 Prevalence of speeding

Travelling at speeds above the posted limit remains commonplace and has been cited as the most
commonly engaged in, and most difficult to curb, traffic violation (Johnston et al., 2014). Numerous studies
have sought to explore the prevalence of drivers exceeding the speed limit on Australian roads using
observational, self-report, and speed survey studies. Overall, the findings indicate that speeding is prevalent,
that low level speeding (i.e., speeds of less than 10km/h above the posted limit) is most common, and that
excessive speeding (i.e., speeds of more than 20km/h above posted limits) is limited (Gavin et al., 2010; Job,
Sakashita, Mooren, & Grzebieta, 2012; Kloeden, 2012).
Among some of these studies is a series of observational studies by Glendon and colleagues (Glendon,
2007; Glendon & Sutton, 2005). Glendon (2007) reported that up to 44.6% of drivers from three Australian
states (Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria) exceeded the posted speed limit across a variety of
speed zones. Similarly, observational studies in New South Wales (Ellison & Greaves, 2010) and Western
Australia (Radalj & Sultana, 2009) both reported up to 41% of drivers exceeding the speed limit. Additionally,
speed surveys conducted by the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads on a variety of
urban/rural roads and on roads with different speed limits (60, 80, and 100km/h zones) indicated that,
averaged across all surveyed zones, 33% of vehicles were recorded exceeding the speed limit, and that
60km/h rural roads had the highest recorded non-compliance rates (48% of all vehicles measured) (Kloeden,
2012). Interestingly, each of these studies noted that, of those drivers who were speeding, the majority were
exceeding the speed limit within 10km/h over the posted limit, perhaps suggesting the impact of perceived
enforcement tolerances on speed choice (Job et al., 2012). The influence of perceptions about tolerance
levels have been highlighted in previous research (Fildes et al., 2005; Fleiter & Watson, 2006; Silcock,
Smith, Knox, & Beuret, 2000) and is a topic discussed further in Section 2.5, since it may represent a target
for future intervention.
Increased enforcement and education have had an effect on speeding behaviour in Western Australia. For
instance, data from a 2014 survey found that speed compliance rate was 66.6% in metropolitan areas (an
increase of 13.6% since 2000) and 69.9% in rural areas (an increase of 9.6% since 2000; Radalj & Sultana,
2015a,b). This information demonstrates that there has been an overall improvement in the speed
compliance rates in both metropolitan and rural areas in that jurisdiction.
Similar findings have emerged from New Zealand. Speed surveys conducted in 2012 (on roads of 60km/h
and 100km/h speed limits) found that over half (53%) of the surveyed traffic was exceeding the speed limit
(7% exceeding by more than 10km/h) on 60km/h roads, while only one quarter (25%) of vehicles were
travelling faster than the limit on 100km/h roads (with only 4% exceeding the limit by greater than 10km/h)
(Graham, 2013). Overall, this body of work demonstrates that speeding remains a relatively pervasive
behaviour on Australian and New Zealand roads that is engaged in at least some of the time by many, and
that low level speeding is most common.
Importantly however, this same evidence may also be interpreted as reflecting the fact that, overall, most
drivers in these studies were not engaging in excessive speeding and further, the majority of drivers (i.e.,
more than 50% of vehicles observed/surveyed) were not exceeding the posted speed limit. Using the
recorded vehicle speed survey data from Queensland as an example, it can be seen that across every
category of road examined (i.e., rural and urban 50, 60, 80 and 100km/h roads), more than 50% of all
vehicles were travelling at or below the speed limit during the November 2011 measurement period, with the
lowest proportion of compliance (i.e., 52.1% of all vehicles) reported on rural 60km/h roads and the highest
proportion of compliance (i.e., 78.6% of all vehicles) reported on urban 100km/h roads (Kloeden, 2012).
2.3 Factors influencing speeding behaviour

Considerable research has explored the broad range of factors influencing speed choices (see Harrison,
Fitzgerald, Pronk, & Fildes, 1998; Williams, Kyrychenko, & Retting, 2006). These factors are noted to the
extent that they highlight challenges with respect to identifying the most appropriate factor (motivation) to
identify and challenge. Although a comprehensive review of the many factors which influence speeding is
beyond the scope of this review, a number of key factors are briefly discussed below in relation to the four
main groups of factors: namely, personal, legal, situational, and social factors.
2.3.1 Personal factors

The key personal factors that have been found to be associated with speeding behaviour include age and
gender, with speeding more prevalent among males and younger drivers (Harrison et al., 1998; Williams et
al., 2006). In addition, speeding has been reported as being more prevalent among individuals with crash
and infringement histories (Watson, Watson, Siskind, Fleiter, & Soole, 2015), a greater propensity for
sensation-seeking and risk taking behaviours (Stradling et al., 2003) and more positive attitudes toward
speeding behaviour (De Pelsmacker & Janssens, 2007; Ipsos Social Research Institute, 2013). Of relevance
is the consideration that young males also tend to score higher on these latter measures. Since this
demographic group also represents a high risk road user group, they should be a particular target group for
future interventions (see Section 5).
2.3.2 Legal factors

The key legal factors that have been found to influence driving speeds are related to concepts from
deterrence theory and include perceptions of risk of detection and punishment, as well as the perceived
certainty, swiftness and severity of punishment, and the perceived ability to avoid punishment (Cedersund &
Forward, 2007; Stafford & Warr, 1993). Specifically, it is argued that speeding behaviour is more likely when
individuals perceive the risk of detection and punishment to be low and that experiences of punishment
avoidance (i.e., speeding and not getting detected or penalised) are a strong reinforcing factor which leads to
continued speeding behaviour (Fleiter, Watson, & Lennon, 2013).
2.3.3 Situational factors

Key situational factors associated with a greater propensity to speed include time pressures (Stradling et al.,
2003), perceptions that posted speed limits are too low (Fildes et al., 2005), opportunities to speed (Richard
et al., 2012, 2013), and when driving for work-related purposes (Glendon, 2007). Previous research has
demonstrated that one of the major factors reported by motorists as contributing to non-compliance with
speed limits is feelings of time pressure and/or running late (Fleiter et al., 2007; Forward, 2006; Garrard,
2008b; McKenna, 2005; Stradling, 2007). However, evidence has shown that speeding has little or no impact
on journey time (Regan et al., 2007; Young, Newstead, Fridman, & Truong, 2014). Regan et al. (2007), for
example, fitted cars with several in-vehicle devices, one of which was designed to measure vehicle speed
(i.e., an Intelligent Speed Adaptation [ISA] system). The ISA system was set to provide an auditory warning
when participants exceeded the posted speed limit by 2km/h. Despite mean speeds reducing for vehicles
which had the ISA system installed, compared to the control condition (those vehicles without the in-vehicle
device), there was no difference in journey time. Further, Young et al. (2014) examined the effects of speed
reduction on truck drivers using the Princess Highway between Melbourne and Geelong (43.5km in length)
in Victoria, Australia. The findings revealed that drivers who reduced their maximum speed from 100km/h to
95km/h had an increased journey time of one minute, on average. Drivers who reduced their maximum
speed from 100km/h to 90km/h arrived at their destination approximately 1.7 minutes later than those driving
at a maximum speed of 100km/h. In addition, an evaluation of the 50km/h default urban speed limit across
Australia (from 60km/h) reported negligible changes to trip time in the order of 8 to 27 second increases per
trip (Haworth et al., 2001). Moreover, those authors estimated that somewhere between 2,900 and 7,380
casualty crashes would be prevented nationally each year if the Australian population were to accept these
small journey time impacts.
Dutschke and Woolley (2009) examined the effects of a speed limit reduction (110 km/h to 100km/h) in
South Australia in 2003 via a Markov simulation model of travel time. Despite the public misperception that
such a reduction in the speed limit would increase travel time by 10%, the findings from the modelling
revealed that travel time could be expected to increase between 4% and 10%, which was estimated to
equate to an increase in travel time of between 2.2 and 5.5 minutes over a 100km trip. In addition, Garrard
(2008b) states that on short driving trips approximately 9 seconds/km is saved when drivers exceed the
posted speed limits. However, the benefits of saving a small amount of time do not outweigh the potential
negative consequences (e.g., injuries and death) of speeding behaviour (Garrard, 2008b). Collectively, the
research findings reported above highlight that speeding has little or no impact on journey time but is likely to
have major impacts on reducing road trauma. As has been noted by others (e.g., Garrard, 2008b), however,
convincing the motoring public of these findings remains challenging, especially since, intuitively, one may
believe that travelling at a higher speed will always equate to arriving at the destination in a shorter time.
This issue represents a potential avenue for future interventions, as discussed further in Section 5.
Another factor that can influence driving speed is the level of impairment brought about by the use of alcohol
and/or drugs. Alcohol and drugs can impair a number of driving skills, including reaction time, attention, and
psychomotor skills (Penning, Veldstra, Daamen, Olivier, & Verster, 2010). Further, alcohol and drugs have
been reported to increase reckless driving behaviours, such as speeding (Fillmore, Blackburn, & Harrison,
2008; Petridou & Moustaki, 2000) with speeding-related crashes found to be associated with higher levels of
blood alcohol concentrations and greater proportions of drivers testing positive for drugs (Romano & Voas,
2011).
2.3.4 Social factors

Finally, key social factors found to be associated with increased speeding behaviour include having a greater
number of significant others (e.g., family, peers) who hold favourable attitudes toward speeding or engage in
the behaviour more frequently (Fleiter, Watson, Lennon, & Lewis, 2006) as well as the influence of
passengers in a vehicle. The evidence regarding the role of passengers is somewhat mixed with family
members and siblings likely to serve a protective function for some drivers (Walker, Bryant, Barnes,
Johnson, & Murdoch, 2009), whereas same age peers may increase risk. Importantly, the potential for other
people to model un/safe driving behaviours, including speeding, is an area worthy of consideration when
attempting to change community attitudes, particularly in light of the extensive input parents have in
providing instruction and supervision to learner drivers via graduated driver licensing programs in Australia
and New Zealand (Bates, Watson, & King, 2009; Beck, Shattuck, Raleigh, & Hartos, 2003; Begg &
Stephenson, 2003).
Another key social factor is the impact of normative influences. In relation to speeding, normative influences
generally fall into two categories: 1) descriptive norms (i.e., perceptions regarding the extent to which others
engage in a behaviour/perceptions of how the majority of people behave [Elliott, 2008]); and 2) injunctive or
moral norms (i.e., perceptions regarding how the majority of people feel about a behaviour, in terms of
morals and beliefs (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Eliiott, 2001a). Descriptive norms have been examined from a
number of perspectives. Ward, Otto, Swinford & Borkowski (2015), for instance, identified misperceptions
between actual and perceived speeding norms. Of the 3,204 survey respondents recruited from Minnesota
households, 85% reported driving 10mph over the speed limit less than 50% of the time. However, 71% of
respondents reported that most people did drive 10mph over the speed limit more than 50% of the time.
Further, Ryeng (2012) conducted interviews in four Norway regions to assess police enforcement, speeding
penalties, and speed choices. The findings revealed that respondents perceptions of average speeds in
three of the four regions were 3.3km/h to 5.4km/h higher than actual speeds. This evidence is important
given that it challenges the dominant descriptive norm that everybody speeds. Descriptive norms are
perceptions about how the majority of people behave) (Elliott, 2008). As noted in Section 2.2, speed surveys
indicate that, in most instances, the majority of drivers are in fact not speeding (even though a significant
minority are exceeding posted speed limits, albeit not excessively).
How such information is communicated to the driving public and how drivers perceive the normative
behaviour of other motorists may have an important influence on their own behaviour, such that the
prevailing descriptive norm may lead drivers to inaccurately overestimate the proportion of people who are
actually speeding (Fleiter, Lewis, & Watson, 2013; Johnston et al., 2014). Arguably, challenging the
normative perception that everyone speeds may be achieved if accurate information about the prevalence
of speeding, and, perhaps more importantly, speed limit compliance, was more widely and appropriately
disseminated. The outcome of manipulating information displayed to drivers in order to influence speeding
through altering normative perceptions is discussed in Section 4.3.2 and altering perceptions regarding the
prevailing descriptive norm is then further discussed as a potential countermeasure in Section 5
Moral or injunctive norms relate to an individuals personal beliefs about what is considered appropriate
behaviour (i.e., morally correct) and have been defined as values that an individual perceives to be important
(Elliott, 2001). Moral norms guide behaviour and if broken, individuals are likely to feel guilt or remorse over
their actions (Elliott, 2003). In a driving context, for instance, moral norms have been reported to guide
intentions to comply with the speed limit (e.g., Elliott & Thomas, 2010). For example, Elliott and Thomas
(2010) reported that moral norms accounted for additional variance in speeding intentions beyond that
accounted for by the Theory of Planned Behaviour constructs (i.e., attitudes, subjective/ descriptive norms,
self-efficacy, and perceived controllability). Despite this finding, however, moral norms were not found to be
an independent predictor in actual speeding behaviour, assessed six months later. Additionally, Godin,
Conner and Sheehan (2005) examined whether there was a difference in intentions to perform five healthrelated behaviours (including driving 10mph or more above speed limit on a motorway) between people
whose intentions aligned with moral norms or with their attitude towards the behaviours. Overall, findings
indicated that people whose intentions were more aligned with their own moral norm (e.g., It would be quite
wrong for me to exceed the speed limit by 10mph or more) were more likely perform behaviours (i.e., to
refrain from speeding by 10mph or more in a simulator) compared with those people whose intentions were
more aligned with their attitudes. The authors also reported that further analysis revealed that this
moderation effect was only seen for participants who perceived the behaviour in moral terms (i.e., perceived
there to be some moral obligation to comply with speed limits). They concluded, therefore, that if the general
population has a large proportion of people whose intentions are morally aligned, then countermeasures
should aim to increase the strength of the moral norm. However, if there is a large proportion of motorists
whose intentions are not morally aligned or the target behaviour is not underpinned by a moral norm, then
countermeasures could focus on moral considerations in the formation of intentions (e.g., by highlighting the
needs of others in certain situations). In relation to speeding, this might mean that for those motorists who
perceive that there is no moral obligation to comply with speeding laws, attempting to raise their awareness
of how the needs of other road users are influenced by their speeding may assist (e.g., others feel
threatened on the road by those who speed; others feel uncomfortable as a passenger of a speeding driver)
(Burgess & Webley, 2002; Eliiott, 2001a). It is acknowledged, however, that those who continue to blatantly
disregard posted speed limits (persistent repeat speeders) are likely to require different interventions than
ones that aim to change the moral norms of broader society.
It has been argued that moral norms differ depending on the type of risky driving behaviour (Burgess &
Webley, 2002; Elliott, 2003). However, despite speeding behaviour increasing both the risk and severity of
road crashes (Kloeden, McLean, & Glonek, 2002), some drivers who speed report not feeling any guilt or
remorse over their actions and instead, may report feeling annoyed for getting caught/fined, with some
reporting a complete disregard for posted speed limits and the belief that such limits are not applicable to
them personally (Fleiter, Lennon & Watson, 2007). However, for other types of risky driving behaviours, such
as drink driving, moral norms are more likely to exist given that drink driving is more socially unacceptable
compared to speeding (see Section 3.2) and is perceived to result in greater harm to others. Therefore,
altering community perceptions about the moral issues associated with non-compliance of speed limits (as
has been successfully done with drink driving), is an area still in need of attention. One avenue for achieving
this outcome could be to continue to raise awareness about the negative consequences to others from
speeding, in order to establish and promote the moral justification for speeding laws (Burgess & Webley,
2002; Elliott, 2001a).
2.3.5 Implementation intentions and pledges to counter speeding

Implementation intentions represent a way to assist people to change their behaviour based on the concept
of predetermining a plan to implement when a particular situation arises in order to attain a certain goal (goal
intention). In relation to speeding, an example of a goal intention may be I intend to comply with all posted
speed limits. Beyond this goal, it is argued that a volitional phase is also needed in order for people to be
able to translate this goal into action. This is where implementation intentions are used. Gollwitzer and
Sheeran (2006) conducted a meta-analysis on 94 studies which assessed implementation intentions across
a number of behaviours including alcohol use and exercise. While the review reported a positive effect of
implementation intentions on goal achievement (d = .65), the findings also revealed that strong intentions do
not necessary lead to goal attainment.
Some researchers have attempted to encourage drivers to identify the factors that are likely to influence
them to speed, with a view to countering the influence of such factors via the use of implementation
intentions (e.g., Brewster, Elliott, & Kelly, 2015). Brewster et al. (2015, p. 230) describe implementation
intentions as if-then statements whereby individuals identify a particular situation and note that if that
situation was to occur then their response to that situation would be of a particular type/nature. The
example they give about developing implementation intentions to prevent speeding is of a specific if
situation: if other vehicles are overtaking me; and an associated then response then, I will drive in a
lower gear to help me drive slower (p. 230). Essentially, the idea is to help individuals have strategies in
place for dealing with a specific situation where they know that they are likely to speed. The findings
revealed that, for inadvertent speeders, drivers who were required to complete a volitional help sheet (i.e.,
link four common environmental speeding situations to goal-directed responses that were designed to
discourage speeding behaviour) were less likely to speed in the month following the initial questionnaire,
compared to drivers who were in the control condition and did not complete the volitional help sheet. The
authors concluded that implementation intentions can reduce habitual speeding behaviour and consequently
result in drivers acting in line with their initial intentions to comply with the posted speed limit.
Similar findings were also reported by Elliott and Armitage (2006) in a study where 300 participants were
randomly allocated to an experimental condition (i.e., identify implementation intentions for not speeding) or
a control condition (i.e., no implementation intentions) in the UK. Results revealed that at the one-month
follow up, drivers in the experimental condition reported significant increases in self-reported speed limit
compliance - this was not found among those in the control condition. Furthermore, when the content of
implementation plans was analysed, it was determined that those containing more behavioural strategies
were associated with increased frequency of reporting speed limit compliance. In addition, the authors
concluded that effects of implementation intentions on behaviour increased with the strength of the stated
goal intentions. Participants who identified a higher number of implementation intentions were more likely to
report complying with the 30mph speed limit at the one-month follow-up. Overall, this work indicates there is
promise in asking motorists to develop strategies to assist them to comply with speed limits, particularly
when strategies have a strong behavioural focus, and further, that this is more likely to be successful for
those who are motivated to comply (i.e., those who have the goal intention of compliance), since the findings
showed sensitivity of implementation intentions according to goal intentions (Elliott & Armitage, 2006).
A related concept, and one that could readily be linked to an if-then statement of a person committed to
attempting to comply with the posted speed limit (e.g., inadvertent speeders who do not intentionally exceed
posted speed limits), is the concept of a public pledge. Pledges have been used as a form of behaviour
modification in health promotion and to reduce risk taking behaviours. For example, Strett, Kalsher, and
Geller et al. (1993) examined the effectiveness of pledges on improving the use of protective safety
equipment (e.g., safety googles) in an electronic components firm. The findings revealed that while 93% of
the 51 employees reported the use of protective safety equipment after signing a pledge in the form of a
promise card, an increase of 8% from baseline levels, the use of protective equipment returned to baseline
1-2 months after pledging. Thus, while pledges may be effective in the short-term, other strategies may need
to be implemented to encourage long-term behaviour change. Further, an annotated bibliography of the
research conducted by Soole and Lewis (2010) has noted that pledges may be most effective when
combined with other strategies such as, education and incentives.
Pledges have also been used in a road safety context, such as seat belt use (Geller, Kalsher, Rudd, &
Lehman, 1989; Nimmer & Geller, 1988), bicycle helmet use (Ludwig, Buchholz, & Clarke, 2005), and speed
compliance (e.g., Delhomme, Grenier, Kreel, 2008a; Delhomme, Kreel, & Ragot, 2008b; Elliott & Armitage,
2006). Geller et al. (1989) distributed 28,000 pledge cards to university students and staff over two years.
Students and staff were provided with opportunities to receive incentives by completing the pledge card and
entering it into a competition at a chance of receiving an incentive. Of the 3,117 cards returned, the findings
revealed that those who made the pledge to increase seat belt use were significantly more likely to wear
their seat belt after making the pledge. Similarly, Nimmer and Geller (1988) introduced a pledge-incentive
program where hospital workers were encouraged to sign a safe driving pledge card to display on the
dashboard of their vehicle. Employees received $5 each week that the card was shown across the six
month intervention period. The findings revealed that safety belt use increased from 29% to 75% across the
intervention period. However, four months after the invention period, safety belt use decreased to 45%.
These findings indicate that ongoing pledges may be needed in order to sustain behaviour change.
In a speeding context, Delhomme et al. (2008b) recruited 624 driving offenders to examine the effectiveness
that a public commitment had on speeding behaviour. Participants were assigned to one of three groups, the
experimental group which involved making a public commitment to comply with the speed limit each time that
they drove a vehicle over the next six months, the comparison group, and the control group. Of the 271
participants allocated to the experimental group, 53% committed to comply with the speed limit for each
driving trip over the following six months. Findings revealed that the committed group were more likely to
comply with the speed limit (49%) 5.5 months after marking the pledge compared to the control group (20%),
comparison group (29%), and non-committed group (9%). In a follow-up study, Delhomme et al. (2008a)
reported that the use of an action sheet where drivers had to report the actions that they had planned to
implement to keep their safe driving commitments were more likely to comply with the speed limit at the 5.5
month follow-up (53%), compared to those drivers who undertook the pledge but did not complete an action
sheet (41%).
Pledges have also been used in a more public manner by transport authorities in Australia in order to reduce
risky driving behaviour. As part of their Dont Rush campaign which was aired in 2010, the NSW Centre for
Road Safety encouraged drivers to view Professor Brian Owler taking the slow-down pledge and to take this
pledge themselves via the online Facebook site
(http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/campaigns/dont_rush/dontrush.html). More recently, as part of their
Fatality Free Friday campaign, the Australian Road Safety Foundation aimed to have 1,400 drivers take the
road safety pledge for each day in May, 2013. This figure was selected to acknowledge the approximate
annual number of road deaths in the preceding year. Currently, 50,000 drivers have taken this online pledge
to adopt safer driving strategies and to educate their loved ones on the significance of the Fatality Free
Friday campaign (http://www.fatalityfreefriday.com/). Further, in 2014, as part of its Join the Drive To Save
Lives campaign, the Department of Transport and Main Roads introduced an initiative which encouraged
Queensland citizens to publicly pledge their support for an anti-speeding campaign. Via the Join the Drive
website, members of the public could add their name to a tagline that indicated that they did not support
speeding (i.e., name has no time for speeding). Digital billboards distributed along the roadside in
Queensland displayed these personalised messages as a mechanism to demonstrate individual,
personalised support for the campaign. Participants also received a digital image of their personalised
billboard and were encouraged to share this with others (e.g., via social media)
(http://jointhedrive.qld.gov.au/). To date, however, there is no known evaluation of the effectiveness of these
pledges, although evidence from social psychological research suggests that public commitment can be a
successful strategy in altering behaviour.
Although not exhaustive, this brief review has highlighted the four broad categories of potential influences on
speeding (i.e., personal, social, legal, and situational factors) as well as some examples of each. Identifying
the most relevant motivation to target for particular individuals (or groups of individuals, such as young males
or repeat speeders) is an important consideration for countermeasure development (see Section 4.1). Also
implied from the discussion above is the fact that there is considerable research evidence already available
regarding the factors related to speeding. However, what is needed now is to identify innovative and novel
ways of disseminating such evidence. For instance, in light of evidence indicating minimal time savings on a
journey by exceeding posted speed limits, compelling arguments need to be found to persuade the driving
public of this evidence, thereby working to dispel myths about the benefits of speeding (e.g., time saving)
and assisting in creating public demand for safer speeds.
2.4 Community beliefs and attitudes towards speeding

Evidence suggests that there is a general social acceptance of speeding and, as such, drivers continue to
speed (Burgess & Webley, 2002; Elliott, 2008; Fleiter, Lewis, et al., 2013; Johnston et al., 2014). For
instance, national attitudinal road safety data from a sample of 1,500 drivers showed that, despite the
majority of respondents (89%) agreeing that a crash at 70km/h would be more severe compared with a crash
occurring at 60km/h, 65% of respondents reported that they sometimes or occasionally exceeded the posted
speed limit by 10km/h (Petroulias, 2014). A number of factors may, at least in part, explain this acceptance
of speeding behaviour. First, there are some drivers who do not perceive speeding to constitute a real
offence, particularly when considering exceeding speed limits by only small amounts or when comparing
speeding with other high risk behaviours such as drink driving (Elliott, 2001a; Fleiter & Watson, 2006; Fuller
et al., 2008). Furthermore, as noted previously, the risks associated with speeding (i.e., the relationship
between crash risk and speeding) may not be fully or well appreciated, given the transient nature of the
behaviour and unrealistic perceptions of control over behavioural consequences (Burgess & Webley, 2002;
Forward, 2006; Horswill & McKenna, 1999).
Perhaps not surprisingly then, a paradoxical relationship exists between attitudes towards speeding and
speeding behaviour. For example, research conducted with Queensland drivers revealed that the majority of
people reported speed preferences in excess of the speed limit, despite these same drivers also reporting a
clear understanding of the risks associated with speeding: a phenomenon referred to as the speed paradox
(Fleiter & Watson, 2006). Similarly, various surveys have found that although the majority of motorists
acknowledge the risks associated with increased vehicle speeds, many still suggest speeding is acceptable
if one is driving safely or is a skilful driver (Forward, 2006; Hatfield & Job, 2006; Job et al., 2012;
Petroulias, 2014). In some respects, the tendency to place certain caveats on instances when speeding is
acceptable may be indicative of an attempt to reduce the disconnect between ones reported attitude
towards speeding (i.e., speeding is dangerous) and ones tendency to still speed some of the time. To think
negatively about speeding yet, at the same time, still speed, would likely cause a state of cognitive
dissonance. Therefore, in order to reduce the dissonance, one may be motivated to think differently about
an issue or behaviour (in this case, speeding) in order to align their cognitions and behaviour. Cognitive
dissonance has been found not only in relation to speeding, but in relation to a broad range of health
behaviours (Freijy & Kothe, 2013).
Cognitive dissonance is defined as a state of psychological discomfort that occurs when there is conflict
between ones attitudes and beliefs and actual behaviour (Festinger, 1957). According to cognitive
dissonance, when ones attitudes do not align with their behaviour, this misalignment creates a state of
dissonance. This experience of dissonance is an aversive state and the manner in which one removes such
dissonance is to either alter what they think about a particular behaviour, or alter what they actually do.
Interesting strategies have been suggested such as the induced hypocrisy paradigm which represents a
novel means of raising individuals awareness of their being in a state of dissonance (Stone, Aronson, Crain,
Winslow, & Fried, 1994). The idea is that by drawing ones awareness to the fact that there is such
misalignment which does not make sense, individuals should be motivated to change. In the case of
speeding, the paradoxical relationship between beliefs (e.g., I believe that it is not okay to speed) and
behaviour (e.g., I regularly exceed the posted speed limit) suggests that cognitive dissonance may be at play
for many individuals and, therefore, that innovative strategies such as the induced hypocrisy paradigm may
be of value. The induced hypocrisy paradigm refers to presenting people with examples of personal actions
that directly conflict with their attitudes (e.g., non-use of condoms, despite expressing the attitude that
condom use is appropriate and necessary) (Stone et al., 1994). This suggestion for a potential initiative,
although not yet trialled in the context of speeding attitudes and behaviour, is discussed further as a potential
countermeasure in Section 5.
Thus far, the discussion regarding community attitudes towards speeding has tended to focus on speeding in
more general contexts. There are, however, two specific examples of road sections; namely, work zones and
school zones; which operate with reduced speed limits and where there appears to be differing public
perceptions regarding the extent to which compliance is socially accepted and expected. Reduced speed
limits in these two examples reflects the desire to protect the vulnerable road users within these zones who
either: 1) are directly exposed to traffic and are unable to pay full attention to passing traffic because of their
involvement in road works (i.e., road workers) or 2) have less understanding about hazards on road than
adults (i.e., school children).
2.4.1 Roadwork zones

Speeding is a prominent risk factor in roadwork zone crashes (Brewer, Pesti, & Schneider, 2006). Roadside
traffic controllers and reduced speed limit signage are two measures used to control speeds within roadwork
zones. Roadside traffic controllers may be considered as an intervention in that they can encourage
motorists to comply with reduced speed limits within these zones. Potentially, traffic controllers may have
some influence on motorists attitudes towards safer speeds in some way by being an external figure that is
able to scrutinise driving speeds. Previous research has reported, however, that ignoring signage and
instructions from traffic controllers are two of the most common types of incidents that occur at roadwork
zones (Debnath, Blackman, & Haworth, 2013) and thus, alternative countermeasures are required in order to
encourage safer driving behaviour in and around these zones.
Public education campaigns are one strategy used to educate drivers about the importance of complying
with the speed limits through roadwork zones (Debnath, Blackman, & Haworth, 2012). These education
campaigns have been introduced in a range of countries including, America, British Columbia, Australia, and
New Zealand. In America, for instance, a range of roadwork campaigns were introduced to reduce the
number of fatalities occurring through these zones (e.g., Slow for the cone zone and Turning point:
Roadway work zone safety for new drivers). In 2000, the California Department of Transportation introduced
the Slow for the cone zone campaign to target drivers aged between 25 and 49 years. The campaign has
been reported as contributing to a 25% reduction in traffic crashes that occurred in roadwork zones
(California Department of Transportation, 2003). To target the teenage population (i.e., individuals aged
between 14 to 18 years), the Turning point: Roadway work zone safety for new drivers campaign was
introduced in 2005 throughout America to complement existing driving education causes. The campaign was
designed to educate new drivers on the importance of complying with speed limits through roadwork zones
and included additional learning material that new drivers could access (e.g., interactive CD-ROM, website,
and various promotional materials such as, stickers). 1
In Queensland, the Department of Transport and Main Roads introduced a public education campaign in
2005 to raise awareness of safety issues in roadwork zones as well as to encourage drivers to slow down
and allow more time when driving through these areas (Doyle & Addison, 2006). The key message of the
campaign was, Slow down. Safety around roadwork. Its a two-way street, and was designed to target all
Queensland motorists. The campaign involved two approaches i) Informative; notifying drivers of the road
work that would be undertaken in Queensland over the next five years to improve road conditions and, ii)
Empathy; via including road workers in the advertisement to highlight that real people work on road sites
(Doyle & Addison, 2006).
Evaluation of the Department of Transport and Main Roads campaign revealed that a large proportion of
individuals surveyed reported that the campaign had: i) encouraged motorists to slow down through
roadwork zones (97%); ii) encouraged consideration of the consequences of speeding through roadwork
zones (93%); and iii) made individuals think about complying with the speed limit in roadwork zones (91%).
Further, 84% of respondents reported that the campaign resulted in reducing their own travel speed through
roadwork zones (Department of Transport and Main Roads, 2009). 2 It is important to note, however, that
although survey data revealed strong public support for this campaign, it is difficult to evaluate the true
effectiveness of this campaign (and others), particularly because it is difficult to separate the effects of such
campaigns from the effects of other concurrently operating speed control measures (e.g., roadwork signage)
present in roadwork zones (Debnath et al., 2012).
1
2
See: https://www.workzonesafety.org/turning_point for detailed information on this campaign.

No details on the sample demographics were provided.
More recently, VicRoads introduced the Respect our road workers public education campaign which was
designed to inform Victorians of the road work that would be taking place over the summer period of
2014/15. The campaign features a couple in their 30s who are required to stop at a roadwork zone. The
sound of a cricket match can be heard on the car radio and the male driver states, every bloody time...
when he is required to stop by a road worker. Aerial footage is then shown of the roadwork zone and the
camera continues to zoom out until the entire state of Victoria is shown. The male voiceover then reminds
drivers to take care around roadwork zones and refers the audience to the Vic Traffic app which contains a
list of the roadwork zones to inform drivers of roadwork locations. The advertisement ends with the slogan,
Your safety is our workplace. In addition to the television advertisement, a 30 second radio advertisement
was used to remind drivers to slow down around worksites. This advertisement was aired 217 times on six
radio stations over the 2014/15 summer period and reached approximately 728,000 listeners. The campaign
was supported by other media strategies including the VicRoads Facebook page and Twitter feed, which
linked customers to the Respect our road workers page and corresponding YouTube clip. There have been
over 9,000 views to the campaign page and 1,200 views of the YouTube clip. Whilst it is not possible to
isolate the road safety effects of the campaign, fewer Victorian Workcover claims were filed under the "Road
and Bridge Construction" area in the 2014/15 financial year compared with the previous year.
Despite the aforementioned evidence suggesting that some interventions have been associated with positive
outcomes, including raised awareness among the general public of the need to slow down in roadwork
zones, such beliefs are not reflected in data regarding actual behaviour of motorists on these parts of the
road network. Such data reveals that speeding remains a common safety hazard in roadwork zones. An
Australian study of speeds at three highway roadwork zones reported that almost all drivers (77-98%) were
driving over the posted speed limits when approaching a roadwork zone, and, of those drivers, 54% were
speeding by at least 5km/h, with 17% of those drivers speeding by at least 20km/h. For the areas inside
roadwork zones, where road workers and machinery are usually located, a high proportion of drivers (6689%) were reported driving over the posted limits (Debnath, Blackman, & Haworth, 2014). These findings
suggest that speeding is frequently occurring in work zones and that there are very high speeds being
reported as motorists approach the zones (i.e., 20km/h or more over the posted limit). Such evidence
suggests that work zones represent a specific context for which innovative and novel approaches are
needed to create public demand for safer speeds.
2.4.2 School zones

Recognition of the potential for harm caused by collisions between vehicles and a prominent vulnerable road
user group, children, has led to a reduced speed limit of 40km/h in school zones throughout New Zealand
and Australia, with the exception of South Australia, where 25km/h speed limits operate (Archer,
Fotheringham, Symmons, & Corben, 2008). The lower speed limit in South Australian school zones is
noteworthy in that it could be used to raise public awareness of the fact that in some parts of the country
(namely South Australia), lower speed zones are already in place, are viewed as acceptable in that there are
not community calls for an increase, and, potentially, could be used convey the idea that there appears to be
a disconnect in the value placed upon childrens safety in different parts of the country. This aspect is
discussed further in Section 5 (Countermeasures).
In Australia, reduced speed limits for school zones were first introduced in NSW in 1992, with all schools in
this state adopting the lowered school speed limit by 2003 (Auditor-General New South Wales, 2010).
Reduced school speed zones were first trialled in New Zealand in 2000 (Osmers, 2001) and were introduced
throughout the country on completion of that two-year trial. Standard operating procedures of school zone
speed limits differ in each jurisdiction. In Queensland, for instance, a 40km/h speed limit applies between the
hours of 7.00 to 9.00am and 2.00 to 4.00pm, Monday to Friday. 3 This time corresponds with the start and
finish time of both primary and secondary schools. However, in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), the
lowered school zone speed limit operates weekdays from 8.00am to 4.00pm. In NSW, for instance, the
introduction of the reduced speed limits through school zones has been associated with a reduction of child
pedestrian trauma, particularly for those children aged between 5 to 16 years of age (Graham & Sparkes,
2011). Further, additional research has reported that signage which notifies motorists of the presence of
children results in reduced travel speeds (e.g., a reduction of 12.2km/h compared to baseline; Cruzado &
Donnell, 2010). Collectively, this research may suggest that motorists are willing to comply with reduced
speed limits, particularly within school zones.
Various countermeasures including school zone signs (some of which include flashing lights), road markings,
and public education campaigns have been introduced to encourage drivers to comply with the lowered
speed limits. In Queensland, for instance, the Department of Transport and Main Roads has run a series of
advertising campaigns designed to educate drivers about the negative impact that speeding through school
zones could have on children (i.e., physical threats of injuries/death to children as a result of a driver
speeding). Two campaigns introduced in 2004 (i.e., Gameboy and 6 x 6) open with images of a young
school child who is distracted by playing a Gameboy and reciting timetables, respectively (see: Department
of Transport and Main Roads, 2014c). In both advertisements, the children cross the road in front of a driver
who is looking over her shoulder. The advertisements end with the screeching of tyres and the car swerving
to miss the children. A more recent campaign, New rules around school, was launched in 2012 to inform
drivers about changes to school zone times and new signage. The campaign also provided a link to the TMR
website where viewers could access further information on these changes.
However, despite reduced speeds in school zones and interventions being implemented, evidence suggests
that some drivers still continue to exceed the 40km/h speed limit (Ellison, Greaves, & Daniels, 2013). For
example, Ellison et al. (2013) measured the speeding behaviour of drivers
(N = 119) in Sydney, Australia school zones using GPS devices. The findings revealed that all drivers
exceeded the 40km/h school zone speed limit by 10km/h at least once over a period of five weeks.
Standard operating times for most Queensland schools.
Recent data from the Department of Transport and Main Roads (2014b) annual survey of Queensland
motorists road safety attitudes and behaviours (RSPAT) revealed that a high proportion (88%) of drivers
reported always slowing down when they saw either a flashing or the standard, non-flashing school zone
sign. Further, the findings revealed that 64% of respondents supported the installation of flashing school
zones across both primary and secondary schools. Such findings suggest that the majority of respondents
reported complying with, and being in support of these signs (thus indicative of them having a positive
attitude to the value of reduced limits in school zones). The positive findings notwithstanding there was,
however, a small percentage of respondents who self-reported always or sometimes speeding through
school areas with flashing school zone signs (6%) and school areas with the non-flashing signs (9%).
Further, 4% of respondents reported sometimes or always speeding through operational school zones when
children were present. Overall, the information from the RSPAT survey indicates that the majority of drivers
reported compliance with the school zone reduced speed limits and supported the need for reduced speed
limits in these areas. Evidence suggests that some drivers continue to exceed the speed limit in these areas,
even when children are present. Infringement data supports this statement and highlights a trend of
increasing infringements in school zone areas. For example, in 2014, 25,090 traffic infringements were
issued to motorists caught speeding in school zones throughout Queensland (Queensland Police Service,
2015) compared to 15,976 infringement notices issued to drivers in 2010 (Department of Transport and Main
Roads, 2011). Thus, over the past five years, traffic infringement notices issued to motorists in school zones
have increased by 36% 4. In the ACT, 827 infringement notices were issued in 2014, a reduction of 17% from
2013 (Westcott, 2014). More recent ACT-based statistics from February 2015, however, have revealed that
261 motorists have been issued with an infringement notice for speeding in school zones from the 1st to the
28th of February, 2015 (Australian Federal Police, 2015). These data indicate an increasing number of
infringements being issued for speeding in school zones despite a prevailing attitude in support of
compliance.
On balance, the findings suggest that there is considerable public support of, and compliance with, reduced
speed limits in school zones. However, the evidence suggests that there is more public support of reduced
speeds in school zones than in roadwork zones. Although evidence indicates that some motorists continue
to speed through school zones, in roadwork zones, the data suggest there are high rates of non-compliance
and travel speeds well above the posted limit. It appears that school zones may represent a specific example
of the speed paradox (see Section 2.4), whereby there is disparity or dissonance between community
attitudes towards the importance of compliance and some individuals actual speeding behaviour.
Consequently, innovative and novel ways of raising motorists awareness of this disparity between
community attitudes and actual behaviour may be necessary and of value in future interventions for
promoting safer speeds in school zones. In relation to work zones, it appears there is need to garner greater
support for the importance of reduced speed zones around road works, since change is still needed in both
community attitudes and actual behaviour in this area.
2.4.3 Community attitudes towards speed management initiatives more broadly

Another interesting paradoxical phenomenon that is apparent from examining community reactions to speed
management initiatives is the concept of agreeing with the use of speed control initiatives where one lives,
and/or where ones children go to school (i.e., in my community to protect me and those important to me),
but at the same time, disagreeing with speed control in other areas (e.g., reduced speed limits on roads used
for commuting, even if these roads are where other peoples children attend school or where other people
live). This phenomenon has been described in a range of ways, including as an example of the JIMBY effect
- Just In My Back Yard (Tapp, 2015), and as YIMBY Yes In My Back Yard (Fleiter, 2013), where
agreement with speed management measures are viewed as acceptable within ones own community, but
generally not supported elsewhere. These phrases are variations of the more well-known phrase, NIMBY
Not In My Back Yard, and are of relevance to the current project in that they represent contradictory beliefs
about where speed management measures, and therefore, speeding, may be deemed appropriate by the
community. A contemporary Australian example of the YIMBY effect is the Peninsula Safer Speeds project
conducted on the Mornington Peninsula in Victoria (Pyta & Pratt, 2013). This initiative received widespread
community support for reduced speed limits. Further information about this project is contained in section
4.2.1.
It is recognised that this increase may reflect increased enforcement in these areas.
The issue of wanting to protect those most important (e.g., own children, own family members, and perhaps
even fellow local residents) represents a key facilitator for speed management initiatives (see the previous
section discussing school zones). Interestingly and unexpectedly however, recent Australian research
demonstrated contradictory findings. Surveys conducted in Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and
Tasmania found that urban residents were more likely to oppose speed limit reductions on urban roads and
rural residents were more likely to oppose them on rural roads (Langford, 2011). Interestingly, Langford also
sought to determine whether those people who were opposed to reduced speeds would reconsider their
stance if knowledge presented to them about the risks of speeding were true. Only one quarter of those
surveyed indicated a preparedness to reconsider their level of support for reduced speeds; a figure that
highlights the difficulties associated with convincing people about the need for safer speeds.
The findings reported above represent significant challenges when attempting to create public demand for
safer speeds. However, despite the findings described by Langford (2011), on balance, the public seems to
be most favourable towards safer speeds in areas where they live and where their children move.
Determining how to extend this sentiment to areas beyond ones closest environment, such that support for
speed management on all roads is generated, remains crucial to increasing demand for safer speeds. A
strategy that may prove useful in this regard is to highlight (somehow) that others are similar to self, and
therefore, that other people also have the desire to keep their children safe.
As has been demonstrated on many occasions, community support for speed cameras is often, though not
always, less than favourable, despite the fact that they have been shown to effectively enhance speed limit
compliance and reduce crashes, and represent a measure that is aimed at protecting the community from
harm (Wilson et al. 2010). Commonly, media attention given to speed cameras is negative, often focussing
on the issue of government revenue-raising rather than safety (Auditor-General New South Wales, 2011;
Victorian Auditor-General's Office, 2011). However, there are documented occasions where communities
have strongly advocated to obtain a speed camera, and then subsequently to retain it when threatened with
its removal. A recent Australian example comes from the town of Clunes (in New South Wales) ("Villagers
win battle to keep speed camera after Minister intervenes," 2011). After a state-wide audit of speed cameras
by the New South Wales government, the speed camera located in Clunes was deemed as in need of
decommissioning. As a result, local residents actively campaigned to retain their speed camera because
they believed it served an important role in reducing the speed of traffic entering their community, and,
earlier, had voiced their desire for a second camera to be installed. This type of positive response to speed
management, while arguably rare, is something that has not yet been harnessed by those seeking to
transform community attitudes towards speeding and warrants consideration in future countermeasure
development. If one community sees the value in retaining speed cameras to improve their safety, this value
is likely to be evident elsewhere and could be harnessed to provide support to create more demand for safer
speeds.
The information presented previously illustrates instances of where residents have actively voiced support of
speed management initiatives (e.g., reduced speed limits, speed cameras) in their immediate community
which can be seen as consistent with the premise of creating demand for safer speeds. Such instances are
encouraging to the extent that they indicate in some locations at least, that strong support for safer speeds
already exists. However, a major challenge that needs to be faced is to overcome the JIMBY/YIMBY effect,
where people are supportive of speed management measures and therefore, of safer speeds, but only in
areas where they and their loved ones reside. Extending the reach of support for safer speeds across the
whole road network, beyond just residential areas, remains challenging. Creating support for safer speeds in
urban locations is consistent with the support for speed management initiatives in residential areas described
above. However, creating the same type of support for safer speeds in the rural/open high-speed road
environment (e.g., roads with posted speed limits of 80km/h and greater) is likely to be more difficult, since
these roads are generally in non-residential locations and are, therefore, less likely to be associated with the
JIMBY/YIMBY effect.
An additional issue linked to community attitudes towards speeding relates to the changing nature of the
population and is an area that has not yet been exploited in road safety campaigns. Historically, speed
management via reduced speed limits for vulnerable road users has focussed on locations where children
congregate (e.g., reduced speeds in school zones) and areas of high pedestrian activity (e.g., shopping
areas, shared road spaces), and roadwork zones, as discussed above. Importantly however, the populations
of Australia and New Zealand, similar to other industrialised nations, are ageing (Anderson & Hussey, 2000;
Swan, 2010). The impact that this trend may have on community and social norms associated with speeding
has received minimal attention in the literature to date. Safe speeds will become increasingly important as
the proportion of older road users, including more vulnerable road users (e.g., pedestrians), increases. Older
drivers typically have less favourable attitudes toward speeding than younger road users, and engage in the
behaviour less than their younger counterparts (Williams et al., 2006). Moreover, older people are more frail
and, therefore, more likely to suffer greater harm if involved in traffic crashes. The implications of an ageing
population on road safety are likely to be great, since their participation in the road network will increase as
their representation in the population increases. In relation to the current project, older road users represent
an important group to be considered with regard to the need for all road users to interact safely on the road
network. For instance, older and younger pedestrians are more susceptible to severe injuries. Data from
Victoria indicates that older adults have a greater chance of being killed compared to other pedestrian
groups, while adolescents and children represent the largest proportion of bicycle fatalities in Australia
(Garrard, 2008b). Thus, it is critical that strategies are implemented to protect these vulnerable road users
(e.g., younger and older population groups).
2.5 Perceptions of safer speeds

Given the continuing prevalence of speeding on our roads and the general social acceptance of this risky
behaviour, particularly low-level speeding (Mooren, Grzebieta, & Job, 2013), improvements are needed
regarding the promotion of safer travelling speeds. Research has demonstrated that there is substantial
heterogeneity in the beliefs and perceptions of what speeding is, as well as what type of driving represents
concepts such as safe, controllable, fun, and eco-friendly speeds by various road user groups (Ahie,
Charlton, & Starkey, 2015; Elvik, 2010a; Fleiter, Lennon, & Watson, 2007; Ipsos-Eureka Social Research
Institute, 2010; Lewis et al., 2012). There is, therefore, a need to consider the concept of safer speeds and
what this construct might mean to different groups of road users (e.g., motorcyclists, car drivers, truck
drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, younger/older drivers) and in different contexts (e.g., rural vs. urban roads,
roadwork zones, school zones, areas with high pedestrian activity). It is likely that the perception of safer
speeds means lowering speed limits to some, increasing speed limits to others, and maintaining current
standards to others still.
National driver survey research has shown that the majority of drivers (79%) perceive that current speed
limits are set at a safe and reasonable level (Petroulias, 2014). In addition, a number of studies have
investigated driver attitudes toward lowered speed limits. In Australia, drivers have reported greater levels of
acceptance associated with reduced speed limits on particular rural and open roads, while perceiving speed
limits on urban roads as being too low (Lahausse, van Nes, Fildes, & Keall, 2010). Conversely, research
conducted in New Zealand and the Netherlands has found greater acceptance of lowering speeds on urban
residential streets, but less support for reducing speed limits on rural and urban open roads or suburban
arterial roads (Coesel & Rietfeld, 1998; Turner et al., 2014) 5. As discussed in the previous section, research
has also shown that drivers have varying perceptions regarding reduced speed limits, in particular those
associated with roadwork zones.
The disparity in findings regarding rural roads is likely to be a function of the study methodologies. Specifically, Lahausse and
colleagues (2010) showed participants in their study pictures of rural roads which included undivided roads and roads with gravel
surfaces. Prior research has suggested that perceived driver comfort in relation to road features (such as surface, width and delineation)
is a strong influence of perceived safe travel speeds (Weller, Schlag, Friedel, & Rammin, 2008). Thus, the focus on rural roads that
were undivided and poorly surfaced may not accurately reflect driver perceptions of appropriate speed limits on other types of rural
roads, such as sealed highways.
Specifically, a recent study revealed that up to 97% of drivers disobeyed reduced speed limits in roadwork
zones depending on perceptions regarding worker activity and speed control measures within the particular
road section (Debnath et al., 2014). Another study (Blackman et al., 2014) revealed that drivers tend to
choose significantly lower speeds (approximately 12km/h lower in a 60km/h roadwork zone) when they
perceived workers are present in the roadwork site than when there is no apparent activity.
In Queensland, a recent speed limit review was conducted which invited the community to provide input into
which speed limits they believed should be increased or decreased. This review resulted in a number of
speed limits being increased and others decreased across Queensland (Department of Transport and Main
Roads, 2014). Similar reviews have also been conducted in other Australian jurisdictions (e.g., New South
Wales; see NSW Centre for Road Safety, 2015). According to the Transport Minister for Queensland and a
representative from the peak motoring body in the state, the Royal Automobile Club of Queensland (RACQ),
the speed limit changes increased the consistency of speed limits and improved safety, with speed limit
increases serving to better align with motorists expectations (Knight & Mackay, 2014). This process of
inviting community members to nominate roads where they believed speed limits should be reviewed is an
avenue for providing opportunities for community consultation and involvement.
A recent example from Victoria highlights the power of the voice of the community when it comes to
opposing the lowering of speed limits. Following the #Keep70 community campaign conducted by local
newspapers and the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV), the Victorian government recently (early
2015) cancelled plans to remove all 70km/h and 90km/h speed zones throughout the state. VicRoads had
initially planned to gradually change the 70km/h speed limits to 60km/h and the 90km/h speed limits to
80km/h or 100km/h, depending on the road condition (VicRoads, 2013). The reasoning behind this change
was to simplify (harmonise) speed zones around Victoria. The subsequent level of public disagreement (via
the#Keep70 campaign on social media) may indicate a lack of public understanding about why authorities
were trying to harmonise speed limits. Similarly, in Tasmania, Australia, the Road Safety Advisory Council
(RSAC) proposed to reduce speed limits on sealed rural roads, from 100km/h to 90km/h while on gravel
roads the reduction was to be from 100km/h to 80km/h. The Kingborough Safer Speed (KiSS; launched in
2007) and the Tasman Safer Speed trial (TaSS launched in 2008) were designed to implement these
changes on Tasmanian rural roads. However, although these reductions in speed limits were designed to
improve driver safety, this initiative was abandoned in 2013 due to lack of community support. Of note, the
decision not to proceed with these changes (i.e., to not reduce speed limits) may represent an emerging
trend in Australia.
In the Northern Territory, a report released by the Government on the 12 month 6 Open Speeds Trial on the
Stuart Highway highlighted that amendments to the Traffic Regulations were required to better facilitate the
safe conduct of the open speeds trial (Department of Transport, Northern Territory Government (2015);
http://www.transport.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/49192/Open-Speed-Trial-Review-SummaryReport-August-2015.pdf). Examples of amendments included; that the driver must regard the condition of the
road, their degree of visibility, and the weather conditions when driving. Face-to-face surveys of 434 drivers
revealed that 85% had previously driven the stretch of road, averaging 134km/h (when a 130km/h limit was
applied). Since the implementation of the trail, the drivers had reported that their average speed had
increased to 138km/h.
In addition, the NT Government undertook an audit of roads and identified sections where speed limits
needed to be changed to address specific safety issues. For example, speed limits near the majority of road
houses on the Stuart, Barclay and Victoria Highways have been reduced from mainly 130km/h to 80-100
km/h. The Open Speeds Trial was supported by a communications campaign that emphasised a derestricted
speed zone was about driving to the conditions, including taking into account the drivers own capabilities,
the condition of the road, prevailing weather conditions and the standard of the vehicle being driven. Of
relevance here, research has highlighted that drivers are typically notoriously bad at choosing appropriate
speeds due to numerous perceptual biases (Elvik, 2010a).
Commencing 1st February, 2014.
Of relevance to these recent Australian examples, particularly to the Northern Territory, is data released in
March 2015 by the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) as part of their Road Safety Performance
Index (PIN) Programme (Adminaite, Allsop, & Jost, 2015). This report recommended removing unrestricted
speed limits on motorways in Germany. Germanys autobahns - motorways with unrestricted speed limits are often cited as examples of safe roads by those who do not support reducing speed limits and/or support
increasing them (see Mooren, Grzebieta & Job, 2013, for a discussion on this topic). Data from Germany
reveal that a higher proportion of crashes and fatalities occur on motorway sections without speed limits
compared to motorway sections with speed limits. In 2013, fatalities on motorways without speed limits
increased by 11% compared to the previous year, despite a 7% reduction in the overall annual road toll.
Further, motorway sections without speed limits had 30% higher fatalities per kilometre of motorway,
compared to those sections with speed limits. The ETSC report recommends the introduction of a speed limit
on all motorways in Germany. Such information is likely to be useful when attempting to create demand for
safer speeds, since Germany is regularly cited as the standard setter in safe motorway travel (Mooren et al.,
2013). Data showing the contrary (i.e., increased crashes on motorways with unrestricted speed limits) is
likely to assist in altering the debate in this area.
In addition, a number of projects conducted in the United States have investigated the concept of rational
speed limits (Freedman, De Leonardis, Polson, Levi, & Burkhardt, 2007; Son, Fontaine, & Park, 2009) and
aimed to address the issue of how to restore credibility to posted speed limits. Specifically, the projects
involved formal engineering reviews based primarily on 85th percentile speeds of free-flowing traffic, but also
considered geometric features, road access, pedestrian activity, and crash history. The concept of a rational
speed limit in regard to speed limit setting in this context was based on previous research that indicated that
the traditional 85th percentile was acceptable from a safety perspective, as well as on the assumption that the
majority of drivers select a safe travelling speed when given the opportunity to do so. The reviews resulted in
incremental speed limit increases on selected roads within the study area. Overall, findings indicated that,
while average vehicle speeds increased, compliance with the revised speed limits improved substantially,
with changes most pronounced on roads that experienced greater speed limit increases. However, findings
relating to changes in crashes were mixed (Freedman et al., 2007; Son et al., 2009). The concept of the
credibility of speed limits is also noted as having potential impact on motorists perceptions of safe driving
speeds (Goldenbeld & van Schagen, 2007; Turner et al., 2014). This issue is discussed further in Section
4.2.1.
In summary, in this section, five key aspects (i.e., (i) relationship between vehicle speed and crash risk and
severity; (ii) prevalence of speeding; (iii) factors influencing speeding; (iv) attitudes towards speeding and
speed enforcement; and (iv) community perceptions of safer speeds) have been identified and discussed.
Each of these areas help provide insight into why speeding represents the perennial challenge to road
safety. Through identifying such aspects, important insights for potential countermeasures have been
highlighted.
In the next section, Section 3, three case studies are presented as examples of where social and behaviour
change has been achieved in both health-related as well as road safety related behaviours in the Australian
context. The behaviours discussed are smoking, drink driving, and seat belt use. These case studies can
offer important lessons learned that may be drawn upon and represent avenues of value when developing
countermeasures aimed at creating greater public demand for safer speeds.
2.6 The role of theory in behaviour change

Numerous theories and models have been developed in an attempt to explain social and behavioural
change. It is beyond the scope of the current research to comprehensively review all such models and
theoretical approaches; several thorough reviews have already been undertaken in this area (see Styles,
Imberger, & Cairney, 2009, Section 7; Fylan, Hempel, Grunfeld, Conner, & Lawton, 2006, Section 1).
Therefore, this section seeks to highlight several key theoretical perspectives that have been drawn upon
when developing the proposed countermeasures as part of the current project.
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991), the Health Belief Model (HBM; Rosenstock, 1974),
and Stages of Change (Transtheoretical) model (Prochaska, 1979; Prochaska, DiClemente, & Norcross,
1992) are three theoretical perspectives that have been used to explain behaviour change. The TPB
postulates that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control predict intentions which in
turn, predict behaviour (see Section 3 for further information on the TPB). The HBM proposes that behaviour
is predicted by four factors, namely; perceived susceptibility to a health threat, perceived severity/
seriousness of a health threat, benefits and barriers associated with a health threat, and cues to action.
According to the HBM, for instance, if an individual perceives: i) that they may be potentially vulnerable to
crashing as a result of speeding, ii) that they perceive a crash to be serious, and iii) that they can identify
benefits (and few barriers) gained from not speeding, they may be more inclined to comply with the speed
limit. It is important to note, however, that the HBM further postulates that self-efficacy (i.e., belief in ones
ability to change behaviour) is essential in maintaining behaviour.
The Stages of Change model proposes that an individual must advance through a series of stages in order
to change behaviour. The five stages consist of pre-contemplation (no intention of changing behaviour),
contemplation (consider changing behaviour), preparation (preparing to change behaviour), action (change
behaviour), and maintenance (maintain new behaviour). Compared to the TPB and the HBM, which have
been widely used in road safety research (e.g., Fylan et al., 2006; Horvath, Lewis, & Watson, 2012), the
Stages of Change model is more typically applied in research which examines addictions, particularly
smoking behaviour/ cessation (e.g., Riemsma et al., 2003).
Social psychological models including, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) and
the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM; Witte, 1992) have also been used to in an attempt to
understand the persuasiveness of road safety campaigns (e.g., Lewis et al., 2008a; 2013a). The ELM
proposes information is processed via two pathways: the central pathway and the peripheral pathway. The
central pathway is used when there is greater processing of a message (a high degree of elaboration; an
individual focuses upon the central arguments of the message), while the peripheral pathway is used where
there is less processing of a message (a low degree of elaboration; an individual focuses upon information
such as source characteristics; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). The EPPM, in turn, was designed to explain both
message acceptance and message rejection of threat-based appeals. The EPPM postulates that two
appraisals occur on presentation of a threatening message; (i) an individual identifies the perceived level of
threat. If a message is perceived as threatening then (ii) an individual evaluates their perceived efficacy (i.e.,
self-efficacy and response efficacy). If an individual perceives the threat to be high and efficacy low, then
defensive motivation occurs and behaviour will be controlled through maladaptive processes. In turn, if both
threat and efficacy are high, then protection motivation occurs and changes are implemented to comply with
the recommendations of the message (Witte, 1992). Alternatively, the individual may choose to reject the
message. The EPPM was initially designed to explain processing of threat-based appeals, however, more
recent research has reported that this model may be applied to other emotion-based health communication
messages (Lewis et al., 2013a).
3. Creating demand for behavioural and social

change lessons from previous successes
Creating demand for behavioural and social change is an inherently difficult task. It should be noted that
behaviour and social change can be considered as two distinct, yet related processes. Behaviour change
refers to encouraging individuals to alter their behaviour (e.g., in terms of road safety, this may refer to
adopting safer driving practices). Various theoretical frameworks (e.g., Theory of Planned behaviour [TPB];
Ajzen, 1991) have been used in order to understand behaviour change. According to the TPB, attitudes,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control predict intentions which in turn, predicts behaviour. The
TPB has been applied to develop and evaluate health communication messages (see: Slater, 1999 and
Section 4.1.1 for further information on the TPB and how this theory has been applied to guide message
development). Social change, however, refers to behaviours which change at population level. Drink-driving
is one example of a social change that has occurred in road safety. Once considered an acceptable
behaviour, drink-driving is now viewed as an unacceptable behaviour by the general population (see Section
3.2).
In the first instance, the relationship between attitudes and behaviour is complex (Lonero & Clinton, 1998)
and, at times, it is difficult to determine the order in which behavioural and attitudinal change occurs.
Theoretical evidence supports both perspectives in terms of changes in behaviour prompting changes in
attitudes (i.e., cognitive dissonance) (Festinger, 1957) and vice versa (e.g., the Theory of Planned
Behaviour) (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Thus, although attitudinal change is most often sought in order to bring
about subsequent behavioural change, it is also possible to achieve attitudinal change as a function of
continued imposed behavioural change, such that compliance occurs in a more reactionary manner (i.e.,
reactionary compliance). From the perspective of the use of public education and advertising campaigns to
raise awareness of the need for and to influence behaviour change, two approaches to education/awareness
raising can be considered in an effort to create demand for social and behaviour change: 1) reinforcing, and
2) transformative approaches.
A reinforcing approach is one where messages are used to reinforce the purpose of an activity, such as
speed enforcement (e.g., influencing perceptions of the likelihood of detection), in order to educate about
enforcement practices to convince motorists that they should comply with speed limits. A transformative
approach, however, is one that attempts to modify community-wide values, attitudes, and perceptions in
order to change cultural beliefs about offending behaviour and to increase moral attachment to the law
(Ward, Linkenbach, Keller, & Otto, 2010; Watson & Soole, 2013). In practice, therefore, public education can
play an important role in encouraging changes in the beliefs, values, and norms within a society by raising
awareness of issues and imparting knowledge, thereby, assist in creating and/or increasing demand for safer
speeds. It can also indirectly encourage change by reinforcing enforcement activities which may have
changed behaviour in the first instance. However, the temporal order of change (i.e., whether behaviour or
attitudes change first) is not always clear. In regard to drink driving in Australia, it has been argued that
behaviour change occurred first as a result of enforcement (i.e., random breath testing) and that attitudinal
change followed (Job, Prabhakar, & Lee, 1997).
The difficulties associated with creating demand for behavioural and social change are perhaps particularly
pertinent in the instance of changing driving behaviours among adults. This difficulty is likely to be due, at
least in part, to the fact that attitudes toward road user behaviours develop during childhood and
adolescence, and thus are engrained and more resistant to change by the time an individual learns to drive
(Waylen & McKenna, 2002). That said, in recent decades, Australia has witnessed considerable positive
changes in the attitudes and behaviours regarding a number of risky behaviours, including smoking, drink
driving, and seat belt use (Fleiter, Lewis, & Watson, 2013;
McLean, 2012). These three behaviours are presented below as case studies in order to document the
process of change so as to provide examples of successes that may be relevant when seeking to change
acceptance of, and demand for, safer speeds. Recognising that no single initiative is, by itself, a likely
panacea to the problem, the following case studies summarise some key drivers of social and behaviour
change in relation to (i) evidence-based research, (ii) legislation, and (iii) public education and mass media
advertising campaigns.
3.1 Case study 1: smoking behaviour

In Australia, six decades ago, smoking was viewed as a socially acceptable, even glamorous, activity.
However, since the 1950s, developments in medical research, changes to tobacco legislation, and the
introduction of anti-smoking advertising countermeasures have altered the views of Australians about this
high risk behaviour. Tobacco sales in Australia have decreased from $5.135 billion in the quarter leading up
to September, 1959 to $3.405 billion in the quarter leading up to March, 2014 (Department of Health, 2015).
Further, 13% of the Australian population were smokers in 2014 compared to 37% in 1977 (Australian
Bureau of Statistices, 2000; Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2014). This evidence suggests that
efforts to reduce this behaviour and raise social disapproval have been largely successful. Appendix B
outlines information on countermeasures to promote the anti-smoking message together with a summary of
key legislative changes which have occurred to regulate the Australian tobacco industry.
3.1.1 Evidence-based research

In the early to-mid 1950s, research was emerging which suggested that tobacco use significantly increased
the risk of lung cancer (Wynder, 1988). Specifically, studies which were published in the British Medical
Journal by Richard Doll and Bradford Hill and the Journal of the American Medical Association by E. Cuyler
Hammond and Daniel Horn concluded that tobacco increased ones risk of lung cancer (Doll & Hill, 1952;
Hammond & Horn, 1988). By the late 1950s/early 1960s tobacco use was associated with additional forms of
cancer including mouth, oesophageal, and bladder cancer (C. White, 1990; Wynder, 1988). Despite these
research findings, medical professionals initially had mixed beliefs as to whether smoking was linked to
cancer (C. White, 1990). Given that the negative effects of smoking behaviour can take years or even
decades to develop, it is not surprising then, that original smoking research was met with criticism. However,
with lung cancer incidence rates peaking in the 1970s, it became widely recognised that smoking was a
major contributor to lung cancer.
In the 1970s, research started to examine the effect that passive smoking (second hand smoke) had on the
health of non-smokers (McLean, 2012). Early research concluded that there was little, if any, evidence that
passive smoking led to major diseases similar to those witnessed in active smokers (Lee, Chamberlain, &
Alderson, 1986). Today, however, it is recognised that passive smoking increases the risk of acute strokes
(Bonita, Duncan, Truelsen, Jackson, & Beaglehole, 1999), heart disease (Glantz & Parmley, 1991), and lung
cancer (Taylor, Najafi, & Dobson, 2007). Most people now acknowledge that smoking leads to negative
health effects for both active and non-smokers alike and, as such, attitudes towards smoking and towards
those who smoke have changed considerably over the years, characterised as growing disapproval.
3.1.2 Legislation tobacco legislation and taxation

Commonwealth, State, and Territory legislation is used to regulate tobacco use in Australia. In 1973, black
and white health warning labels on cigarette packets were introduced and since then, legislation has
continued to be implemented to ban tobacco advertising (notably in sport and on television) and increase
smoke free zones (Department of Health, 2015). Restricting smoking areas and banning the advertising of
tobacco products may have also contributed to the decline in smoking behaviour. Public support for tougher
legislation in Australia has also received considerable support, even amongst smokers (Young et al., 2007).
In addition to tightening legislation, taxation has also contributed to the decline in smoking (Schollo &
Borland, 2004). Since 1901, excise tax has been applied to all tobacco products sold in Australia. However,
it was not until the 1990s that taxes on tobacco increased sharply. In 1999 a new excise tax was introduced
whereby the cost of all tobacco products was increased (Schollo & Borland, 2004) and was followed by the
introduction of the goods and services tax (GST) in 2000. Tax increases continued in the 2000s and on the
1st of December, 2013, the Australian Government introduced a further tax increase whereby tobacco
products are set to increase 13% each year until 2017 (Department of Health, 2015). As such, it could be
argued that tax increases have played a role in reducing tobacco use in Australia.
3.1.3 Public education, advertising and mass media campaigns

Against the backdrop of growing research evidence of the adverse health effects of smoking and legislative
change, advertising countermeasures were also promoting the anti-smoking message. Evidence supports
the role of anti-smoking messages in changing attitudes and as contributing to reductions in the prevalence
of smoking (Durkin, Brennan, & Wakefield, 2012). Anti-smoking messages were implemented in Australia in
the 1980s with the aim of educating individuals and raising awareness of the adverse health effects
associated with smoking. Similar to the road safety advertising context and the advertising of other health
issues more broadly, where fear-based messages have represented a long-standing approach, anti-smoking
messages also have often focused on physical threat appeals (e.g. depicting smoking-related images and
warnings intending to elicit fear which, in turn, aim to motivate change as one attempted to reduce the
aversive feeling of fear).
From 1997-2000 the Australian National Tobacco Campaign ran a series of television advertisements 7 that
illustrated the adverse health effects of smoking (Wakefield, Freeman, & Donovan, 2003). The campaign
included a series of high threat advertisements depicting graphic images of diseased arteries, lungs as well
as tumours. The advertisements were designed to target 18-40 year olds although research has since
reported that the advertisements presented as part of this campaign were also perceived by adolescents to
be relevant to them (White, Tan, Wakefield, & Hill, 2003). Research which examined the effectiveness of this
campaign by comparing pre-advertisement baseline data to post-advertisement follow-up data found that
approximately 50% of individuals who remembered the advertisements reported that they were more likely to
quit smoking (M. Wakefield et al., 2003). In addition, the findings indicated that the advertisements were
effective at educating viewers on the dangers associated with smoking. For instance, 80% of participants
surveyed in 2000 reported that smoking could lead to fatty deposits in arteries compared to only 54% of
individuals who were surveyed prior to the campaign in May 1997. Overall, evidence has suggested that the
National Tobacco campaign contributed to reductions in smoking prevalence (Hurley & Matthews, 2008).
Today, among the general public, there is wide-spread awareness of the negative physical consequences of
smoking on ones health (e.g., increased cancer risk; Queensland Government, 2014b). Part of this
awareness may be attributable to the role that public education and advertising campaigns have played. The
early campaign approaches, as noted previously, relied heavily upon strong physical threats (of ill health,
death) associated with smoking. Although representing a component of contemporary campaigning,
reflecting the importance placed on marketing segmentation principles, contemporary messages highlight
the use of different types of threats and the intention to target specific, high-risk population groups. For
example, in Queensland, Australia, two 2014 State-Government anti-smoking campaigns, All by myself and
If you smoke, your future is not pretty, incorporated social and psychological threats which focused on the
social isolation associated with smoking and the premature ageing process, respectively (Queensland
Government, 2014b). All by myself was designed to target people aged 25-44 years. This campaign was
advertised through several mediums including, television, radio, digital, and outdoor advertising. The
advertisements focused on the social isolation one may feel when they need to go outside/be away from
others, including their family/loved ones, when smoking. Between the 16th of May to the 22nd of June 2014,
caller feedback collected by Quitline revealed that 81% of callers reported that the advertisement made them
think about quitting with 43% of callers reporting that this advertisement influenced their decision to contact
Quitline (Department of the Premier and Cabinet, 2014). Also evident in this campaign was the importance
placed on providing strategies, for instance, the tagline noted, If youre thinking about quitting, you dont
have to do it alone. Call 13 QUIT (Queensland Government, 2014b).
Secondary media consisted of print advertising, radio, outdoor, and a campaign website.
The If you smoke, your future is not pretty campaign was designed to target young females aged 18-24
years. In conjunction with television, outdoor advertising, and digital mediums, pop-up make-under booths
were introduced in Queensland shopping malls in order to show young women what they would look like in
the future if they continued to smoke (Queensland Government, 2014b). The campaign focused on the
esteem-related motivations of young females to want to maintain their appearance and to demonstrate that
smoking would adversely impact on their skin and overall look. A second phase of this campaign was
introduced which encouraged young females to share an image of their made-under look (i.e., how they
would look after some years of smoking) via social media. There is also evidence of more positive
approaches in regards to promoting the health benefits of ceasing smoking, such as increasing ones life
span.
Overall, extending the research evidence-base and advancing medical research, together with having
credible experts from the medical profession attest to these findings, stricter tobacco legislative measures,
increases in tobacco taxes, and public education and mass media advertising campaigns have all played a
role in helping to create social and behaviour change in relation to smoking. The prevalence of daily smoking
has significantly declined over the past 15 years (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2014), with this
trend expected to continue in future years.
There are several lessons that can be taken from examining the trajectory of smoking in the Australian
context from it once being considered a completely socially acceptable behaviour to its current status of
being shunned and legislated out of many areas of society (e.g., smoke-free work places, public buildings
and many public spaces):
Initially, people did not believe the science. Evidence continued to grow; however, it was apparent that
more than just knowledge or evidence was required to convince the public of the health risks. This
information had to be delivered in a way that was credible, relevant, understandable to, and which would
reach, the general public.
Smoking was once portrayed as a desirable and glamourous activity in films and television shows.
However, tobacco use in films has steadily declined over the years (with the exception of R-rated movies;
e.g., Mekemson et al., 2004). It could be argued that speeding is still portrayed as a desirable activity in
films (e.g., the Fast and Furious franchise, one on the most successful movie franchises of all time) and
thus, may indirectly influence driver behaviour.
Scientists and reputable scientific organisations published findings (linear dose response) which helped to
disseminate the evidence and provide credibility.
Evidence continues to grow about the harms of smoking and has moved beyond focus on the individual
level of risk to the risks smoking poses to others (e.g., family members [including unborn children],
broader society). There is a growing evidence base of the impacts of first, second and third hand smoking
(e.g. passive smoking). This additional evidence has contributed to a shifting focus from only risk to self
to the risk to others.
A range of legislative changes have occurred which have functioned to alter, for instance, how tobacco
can be advertised and sold (e.g., advertising bans in sport on television, plain packaging on cigarette
packets). Legislative changes have continued and represent evidence of consistent, regulated support for
anti-smoking (e.g., illegal to smoke in public places, in vehicles with children).
In the public education and advertising context, physical threats of ill health/death featuring strong graphic
images of diseased body organs functioned to evoke strong fear and represented an initial focus of antismoking campaigns (particularly focussed on the health risks to an individual).
Although fear-based threat approaches remain, there has been a growing recognition and use of
messaging which incorporates other types of threats and which targets specific, high risk target
audiences. For example, contemporary campaigns incorporate social threats (relating to threatened
social disapproval/isolation for engaging in smoking; e.g., All By Myself) and psychological threats (e.g.,
threats to self-perception as evidenced by If You Smoke Your Futures Not Pretty campaign).
Recognition of the notion that one size does not fit all in public education and advertising campaigns
and that more power comes from recognising the relevant threats and motivations likely to influence and
underpin particular individuals (or groups of individuals) attitudes and behaviours. For instance,
recognition of the high prevalence of smoking among young females was specifically targeted by a
psychological threat-based campaign where young girls were exposed to the detrimental effects of
smoking on their appearance/attractiveness (If You Smoke Your Futures Not Pretty). In addition,
positive approaches focusing on what one may gain from not smoking represent an alternative to the
threat-based approach.
Recognition that increasing fear did not equate to more persuasion on its own and that the fearpersuasion relationship is more complex. In particular, evidence supported the crucial role of the provision
of strategies to help people quit. Strategies offered tangible, concrete things that people could do to
reduce/cease smoking.
Figure 3.1 reflects a range of initiatives including scientific, evidence-based calls for change, legislative
changes, and public education campaigns which have been used to help bring about successful social and
behaviour change with regard to smoking. Although it is beyond the scope of this review to provide an
exhaustive description of all relevant changes and initiatives over recent decades, the intent of Figure 3.1 is
to provide, via a timeline, an overview of some of the key occurrences and initiatives over recent decades so
as to help identify key drivers and contributors to social and behaviour change.

1980s early-1990s
Quit. For Life Campaigns
First mass media campaigns introduced in Australia
(e.g., Sponge, NSW Department of Health).
Famous personalities (i.e., Daryl Somers and Pat
Cash) promote Quit smoking in Victoria.
1997-2000
National Tobacco Campaign
Slogan: Every cigarette is doing you damage
Six health advertisements were introduced which focused on:
artery, lung, tumour, brain, eye, and tar.
1973
First health warnings on cigarette packets are
introduced in Australia.
Warning: Smoking is a health hazard
Cigarette advertising starts to be phased out.
2009-2013
National Tobacco Campaign
Slogan: Stop before the suffering starts
TV ads examples: Breathless, Symptoms
Languages: Multi-cultural
2013-2015
Advertisement examples:
QLD, Aust.: If you smoke, your
futures not pretty. Shows what your
appearance will look like in 20 years
if you continue smoking.
Nobody Smokes here anymore
Vic, Aust.: Triggers. Animated
positive campaign which highlights
the triggers of smoking (i.e., stress,
coffee, 30 spot, and Saturday
night).
NZ: Crayons. Negative impact
smoking has on children
2006-2007
National Tobacco Youth Campaign
Primary audience: 12-24 years
Secondary audience: smoker parents
Languages: English, Arabic, Chinese
(Mandarin & Cantonese), Korean,
Vietnamese.
1995
Black and white health
warnings are introduced on
cigarette packets.
2006
Graphic warnings are
introduced on cigarette
packets.
1970
1975
1980
1988 National Campaign Against Drug Abuse Social Issues Survey (N =

2,257)
77% of respondents had tried tobacco/cigarettes
- 34% used tobacco/ cigarettes that day
- 9% used tobacco/ cigarettes past 7 days
- 19% used tobacco/ cigarettes past 12 months
23% of respondents had never tried tobacco/cigarettes
1985
1990
1995
2000
2001 National Drug Strategy Household Survey data (N = 26,744)
2005
2010
2015
2013 National Drug Strategy Household Survey data (N = 23, 855)
20% of respondents smoked daily

2% of respondents smoked weekly
26% of respondents were ex-smokers
51% of respondents had never smoked
Daily smoking rates greatest in the 20-29 year age group
13% of respondents smoked daily

1% of respondents smoked occasionally weekly
24% of respondents were ex-smokers
60% of respondents had never smoked
Daily smoking rates greatest for people in their late 20s or in their 40s
41% of respondents perceived tobacco as the drug that causes the most
deaths
32% of respondents perceived tobacco as the drug that causes the most
deaths
Negative/physical threat-based, particular focus on strong fear and graphic

images. In 1997 campaign, the introduction of Quit help line was highlighted.
Campaigns
Negative/ threat-based, however other types of threats incorporated. Highlights negative benefits that smoking has on those
around you. Positive approaches in regards to the health benefits of quitting smoking (e.g., increase lifespan).
National Drug Strategy data

Campaign styles
Figure 3.1 Timeline of anti-smoking campaigns.
Social and Psychological threats (e.g., target young girl, focus on appearance).
Introduction of some positive approaches (benefits of NOT smoking).
3.2 Case study 2: drink driving

In Australia in the 1960s and 70s, drink driving was prevalent, socially acceptable and represented the norm
for how people got home after consuming alcohol. However, the building of an evidence base, changing
legislation and enforcement approaches, and public education and advertising have helped create social and
behaviour change such that drink driving is no longer seen as acceptable to the general community and
prevalence rates have decreased. Together, these initiatives have contributed to a reduction in alcoholrelated road fatalities. In addition, these activities have created an atmosphere of widespread social
disapproval of drink driving and a perception of the behaviour as criminal (Elliott, 1992; see Table 3.1).
Indeed, Elliott (1992) provides a summary of a range of key considerations and changes with regards to
factors contributing to the social and behavioural change which has occurred for drink driving in Australia.
Table 3.1
Factors contributing to low prevalence of drink driving
Contributing factors
Achieved for
drink driving?
i)
Moral attachment to the law as fair, proper, necessary
ii)
Social proof most people like me obey this - high approval of law
iii)
Non-compliers (a dominant minority) are in need of punishment and forced behaviour

modification
iv)
Current legal levels/ standards are accurate and appropriate to environmental settings
v)
Enforcement has road safety as primary aim not revenue collecting
vi)
Belief that non-compliance is as socially undesirable and indefensible as rape or assault
vii)
High perceived probability of detection
viii) Very strong desire to avoid punishment because it is severe and certain
ix)
Non-compliance even at low levels is unsafe/ dangerous
x)
Enforcement is highly visible and aims at deterrence rather than detection
xi)
Circumscribed limits which are rigidly enforced (i.e., no tolerance limits)
xii)
Focus is on all who exceed circumscribed limits
xiii) Proven relationship between transgression of the law and road crashes
Source: Elliott, 1992

Evidence grew regarding the link between levels of increasing intoxication and subsequent impairment.
Further, blood alcohol concentration (BAC) curves were developed which readily depicted this relationship.
Today, it is largely well acknowledged and accepted by the general public that alcohol significantly impairs a
drivers cognitive and motor ability. Even at low BAC levels (e.g., .02g/100ml to .05g/100ml), previous
research has reported that alcohol consumption can have detrimental effects on driving performance
(Chamberlain & Solomon, 2002). For instance, alcohol has been reported to negatively affect visual
functions, vigilance, psychomotor skills, and reaction times, all of which are important when operating a
vehicle (see: Chamberlain & Solomon, 2002). Further, evidence has consistently shown that increasing BAC
levels are associated with higher crash risk (e.g., Compton et al., 2002; see Figure 3.2). As such, many
countries worldwide have established legal BAC limits.
Figure 3.2 Relative risk assessment

180
Relative Crash Risk (BAC 00=1.0)
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0.24
.25+
0.23
0.22
0.2
0.21
0.19
0.18
0.17
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.13
0.12
0.11
0.1
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
BAC Level
Souce: Compton et al. (2002)
3.2.2 Legislation
Within Australian legislation, BAC levels were first reduced to .05g/100ml in Victoria, Australia (1966). Other
Australian jurisdictions adopted this lower BAC limit during the 1980s and early-1990s, primarily reducing
from a .08g/100ml level. BAC levels have since been reduced to zero for all novice (i.e., learner and
provisional licence holders) and professional drivers. New Zealand, however, has had a BAC limit
of .08g/100ml for all drivers since 1979 and only recently lowered the BAC limit to .05g/100ml in 2014 for
drivers over 20 years of age. For drivers under 20 years of age, a BAC limit of .03g/100ml was introduced in
1993 and this limit was reduced to zero in 2011.
Random Breath Testing (RBT) was first introduced in Victoria, Australia in 1976. Police first assessed BAC
levels via car-based tests, prior to the introduction of highly visible booze bus RBT stations in 1989. With the
exception of Western Australia and Queensland, RBT was introduced in all other Australian jurisdictions
between 1980 and 1983. Western Australia and Queensland, however, introduced the Random Stopping
Program in 1980 and 1986, respectively, with both states introducing RBT in 1988 (see Homel, 1990). In
New Zealand, Random Breath Stopping was first introduced in 1984, followed by Compulsory Breath Testing
(CBT) in 1993 (Delaney, Diamantopoulou, & Cameron, 2006).
Interlocks have also been introduced to reduce individuals driving under the influence. Interlocks are
connected to the ignition of a vehicle and require the driver to provide a breath sample before the ignition will
start. If the interlock detects alcohol, the ignition will fail to start. In Australia, interlocks were first introduced
in Victoria in 2002, followed by New South Wales in 2003 (see Filtness, Sheehan, Fleiter, Armstrong, &
Freeman, 2015 for a detailed overview of the various interlock and treatment programs in Australia). In New
Zealand, interlocks were introduced in 2011 (Waters, 2014). Interlocks place a physical barrier on drinking
and driving and thus, can be used to reduce driving under the influence.
As well as legislation and enforcement practices in regards to drink driving, it is important to note other
relevant alcohol-related legislation which has been introduced throughout Australia. For instance, alcohol
advertising is regulated by the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) Code of Ethics and
Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code (ABAC). These codes are designed to restrict the promotional alcohol
content shown in the media and the times at which alcohol can be advertised on television. With the
exception of live sporting events presented on television on weekends and public holidays, alcohol
advertisements can only be shown during mature classification (MA), mature accompanied classification (MA
15+), and restricted adult classifications (R18+) between the hours of 8.30pm and 5.00am. Similar to
Australia, two codes regulate the advertising of alcohol in New Zealand: the Advertising Standards of
Authority (ASA) Code of Ethics and the Code for Advertising and Promotion of Alcohol (CAPA). In New
Zealand, alcohol advertising is prohibited on television between the hours of 6.00am and 8.30pm.
In regards to the community views of legislation and, in particular, RBT, evidence suggests that attitudes
towards drink driving have changed considerably since the 1980s (Sweedler et al., 2004). In Australia, for
instance, it has been argued that the introduction of Random Breath Testing (RBT) in the late 1970s to mid1980s was instrumental in reducing alcohol-related crashes and also increasing social disapproval towards
drink driving (Prabhakar, Lee, & Job, 1993). The introduction of RBT was accompanied by a series of mass
media campaigns that were designed to publicise RBT operations (i.e., to increase the perceived risk of
apprehension if drink driving) as well as further educating drivers about the risks associated with drinking
and driving. Since the introduction of RBT, alcohol-related road crashes have significantly decreased. In
South Australia, for example, approximately 44% of road deaths in 1981 involved alcohol compared to 25%
in 2013 (Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, 2014). Prior to the introduction of RBT,
however, initial support for this enforcement strategy was mixed. For instance, in New South Wales, public
support for the introduction of RBT was at 64% (Homel, Carseldine, & Kearns, 1988). This figure increased
to 83% one year after the introduction of RBT (Homel et al., 1988) and today, recent national driver survey
data has shown exceptionally high rates of support (96%) for RBT, a trend that has remained consistent for a
number of years in Australia (Petroulias, 2014). Appendix C provides an overview of the legislative and
advertising-related countermeasures which have been implemented to bring about social and behaviour
change in relation to drink driving.
Internationally, activist groups, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), have also contributed to
changing attitudes towards drink driving (Fell & Voas, 2006). MADD was formed in the United States of
America in 1980 by the mother of a daughter who died as the result of a drink driver (Brown & Russell,
1995). Since 1980, MADD has actively been involved in promoting drink driving related legislation and
played a significant role in the introduction of the minimum legal drinking age law, which prohibits the sale of
alcohol to young adults under the age of 21 in the United States (Fell & Voas, 2006). Further, MADD played
an important role in establishing the .08 BAC limit. While it is difficult to determine the effect that MADD has
had on increasing social disapproval towards drink driving, this activist group is perceived by Americans to
be effective at reducing drink driving and increasing awareness of the risks associated with this dangerous
behaviour (Fell & Voas, 2006). The existence of such groups reflects the extent to which drink driving is
largely disapproved of in contemporary society.

Figure 3.3 summarises, via a timeline, the types of anti-drink driving campaigns which have featured in
recent decades with a particular focus on the campaigns developed and implemented by the Transport
Accident Commission (TAC) of Victoria; although, notable campaigns from other jurisdictions are
documented where relevant. The TAC has been recognised internationally for its innovative approaches. As
Figure 3.3 shows, there was an early and heavy reliance on negative, fear-based threats to physical wellbeing (i.e., if you drink and drive, you will likely crash and injure or kill self and/or others). There has also
been a long-standing and on-going reliance on messages which highlight the deterrent principles associated
with enforcement in regards to Random Breath Testing (RBT) being likely and the consequences severe.
Figure 3.3 also shows threat-based approaches extending beyond physical threats of death and injury (from
road trauma) to other types of threats including the social threat of social disapproval and embarrassment
one would likely experience as a result of having been caught drink driving as well as financial threats
associated with financial hardship as a consequence of being fined for drink driving. Figure 3.3 also shows
that more recent campaigns have adopted positive approaches, including the use of humour as well as
promoting more pro-social behaviours as strategies to help keep oneself and important others safe (e.g.,
encouraging mates not to drink and drive). For instance, in 2011, the New Zealand Transport Agency
launched a humorous anti-drinking advertisement entitled, Legend (Ghost Chips). The advertisement was
designed to encourage young male drivers (aged between 15 to 24 years) to speak up and discourage their
friends from driving after drinking, suggesting that speaking up to a friend is legendary. More recently, the
Motor Accident Commission of South Australia launched the Keep the Bromance Alive and Grow up
campaigns. The Keep the Bromance Alive campaign also represents a more positive, humorous approach
that targets rural, male drivers with a focus on high risk behaviours, one of which was drink driving (the
others are seat belt use and speeding). The advertisement encourages mates to look out for each other and
to speak up if a mate is not complying with the road rules. The Grow up campaign, however, used children
to influence adults not to drink and drive. In the advertisement, children are heard re-quoting common
excuses for drinking then driving (e.g., Ive only had a few champagnes). The advertisement was designed
to trigger self-reflection and question the consequences associated with drink driving.
In addition to the advertising examples provided above, several agencies have targeted high risk and high
profile social groups through sponsorship. For example, TAC targeted high risk drivers through sponsorship
of Richmond Football club. However, TAC revoked of sponsorship of Richmond Football club in 2005
following repeated drink-driving and speeding incidents involving football players. This ended the 16 year
relationship between TAC and Richmond Football club. Similarly, in 2008, TAC revoked sponsorship of the
Collingwood Football club following a drink driving incident with another football player.
Overall, sustained and intensive initiatives relating to building an evidence base (regarding aspects such as
the impact of increasing BAC on cognitive and perceptual abilities), implementation of appropriate legal
sanctions, and extensive and varied public education and advertising countermeasures have contributed to
reducing the prevalence and social acceptance of drink driving. Together, these initiatives have all played an
integral part in the observed changes in drink driving over time (Elder et al., 2004; Tay, 2005a).
There are several lessons that can be taken from examining the trajectory of drink driving from once being
socially acceptable and prevalent to being widely socially condemned and less prevalent among the general
community today.
Growing evidence championed by the medical profession from the 1950s began to highlight the
contribution of alcohol to road trauma which led to the well-known, highly regarded Grand Rapids Study in
Michigan US.
The effect of influential people encouraging behaviour change. For instance, John Birrell (surgeon for the
Victoria Police, 1960s-1970s) confronting politicians to attend alcohol crash scenes.
Research also sought to quantify the level of impairment associated with varying levels of alcohol
intoxication.
Legislation introduced to limit the amount of alcohol present while driving (introduction of BAC limit) and
more recently to limit novice and professional drivers to zero BAC.
Random breath testing introduced and implemented with sustained and intensive resourcing.
Legislation altered to restrict, and in some cases, ban alcohol advertising.

Physical threat of injury/death to evoke strong fear was heavily relied upon initially with threats of potential
injury or death to self and others from driving after drinking. Similarly, a long-standing reliance upon
campaigns highlighting the deterrent principles of enforcement initiatives (e.g., the likelihood and severity
of consequences associated with RBT). The latter reflected consideration of other adverse outcomes
associated with drink driving beyond just physical injury and death being caused by a road crash.
Although fear-based physical threat approaches have long-been used and remain as a component of
campaign strategies, messaging has also incorporated other types of threats. For example, social threats
(social disapproval from important others due to having lost ones licence due to drink driving; e.g.,
Netball, 2004); psychological threats (e.g., threats to self-perception as a good/safe individual and driver
through promoting concepts such as you are an idiot if you drink and drive; Bloody Idiot campaign), and
financial threats (e.g., informing about monetary and legal costs associated with being fined and
sanctioned; e.g., Booze Busted).
Use of alternative emotional approaches, including humour, to deliver the anti-drink driving message. At
their core, such advertising messages still incorporate an element of threat. However, there has been
greater recognition of the need for different types of threats beyond just fear (i.e., physical threat only),
towards broadening the spectrum of emotional appeals to include positive emotions such as humour. This
growing recognition of different threats and emotions reflects the importance of market segmentation and
the fact that one size does not fit all with advertising campaigns. For instance, in the case of young males
as a high risk road user group, a growing evidence base supports the efficacy of using humour to deliver
the anti-drink driving message and to promote positive, pro-social behaviours such as looking out for
ones mates.
Provision of strategies to avoid drink driving and being involved in a crash has been particularly well
highlighted within anti-drink driving education and advertising campaigns. For example, the general
community could be considered largely aware of numerous and varied strategies to prevent drink driving
and adverse outcomes resulting from the behaviour including strategies such as, planning ahead, using a
designated driver, using standard drinks to remain within legal BAC level, making alternative transport
arrangements, and staying with friends instead of driving home after drinking.

2002 to 2010:
RBT enforcement:
Slogans: Only a little bit worried, You will get caught, its just a matter of
when
Social and financial consequences of drink driving convictions (e.g., focus on
disappointing family)
2004 to present: Advertisements target the dangers of low level drinking
December 1989 to November 1992:

First major road safety advertisements
Publicity supporting RBT
Slogan: If you drink, then drive, youre a bloody idiot
September 1993 to December 2001:

Strong fear, physical-threat based advertisements.
1st January 1987

TAC established
1987
1990
1993
1996
Lead up to Christmas 2012:

Booze Busted: Infomercial advertisement which
highlighted the penalties for drink driving
(humorous).
2011 to 2014:
RBT enforcement Bloody idiot campaign
Slogan: ANOTHER bloody idiot, Only a little bit over? You bloody idiot
1999
2002
2005
2008
2011
2014
2001: National Survey 14
Agreement with RBT: 94% of respondents (88% in National Survey 1, 1986).
Agreement with RBT: 96% of respondents (agreed strongly or agreed somewhat).
Drink driving:
Drink driving:
Agreement with RBT: 96% of respondents (agreed strongly or agreed somewhat).

Drink driving:
61% dont drink and drive
77% modify drinking behaviour when driving
Introduced 2011:
Reduce BAC to .02: 39% approved (agreed strongly or agreed somewhat; 43%
in 2011).
39% disapproved (disagree strongly or somewhat; 38% in
2011)

Negative/threat-based, particular focus on strong fear (physical threat) and

enforcement (deterrence principles likely, severe).

Negative/ threat-based, however campaigns start to focus on other negative emotions (e.g., shame and
embarrassment, instead of purely fear). Enforcement and instructive advertisements also continue.
Campaigns
Growing use of humorous messaging although retaining a

focus on threats (e.g., social threats of social disapproval).
National Survey data

Campaign styles
Figure 3.3 Timeline of TAC drink driving campaigns.
3.3 Case study 3: seat belt use

Seat belt use rates have significantly increased due to consistent and combined efforts with regards to
building an evidence base, legislative changes and enforcement, as well as public education and advertising
campaigns. Seat belt use among the general motoring population reflects an extremely high compliance rate
(96-97%, Petroulias, 2014); one that appears unparalleled among road user behaviours. There is evidence
of social change surrounding the acceptance and habituation of seat belt use, beyond mere safety
considerations, as summarised by MacLean (2012, p.53): seat belt use has become autonomous
behaviour without any conscious safety consideration. It is a social norm.

Evidence began to emerge from the United States in the mid-1950s about the risks of death and serious
injury associated with being thrown from a vehicle. Throughout the 1960s, evidence grew of the role of seat
belt use in reducing serious injury and death (see McLean, 2012 for a summary). In Australia, voice was
given to the cause of reducing death and injury from non-restraint use by organisations such as the Royal
Australasian College of Surgeons.
3.3.2 Legislation
Legislation for the compulsory wearing of seat belts was preceded by introduction of legislation in South
Australia (1963) that required all new cars to be fitted with mounting points for belts (McLean, 2012). In the
late 1960s all new vehicles manufactured in Australia required the installation of seat belts (Milne, 1985).
Seat belt wearing was first made compulsory in Victoria, Australia in 1970 (Milne, 1985); the first jurisdiction
in the world to introduce such law. By the end of 1972, seat belt use was mandatory for the rest of the
Australian states and territories and New Zealand (McDermott & Hough, 1979). Their introduction, however,
was not without resistance. The reader is referred to McLean (2012) for a summary of circumstances
surrounding various pieces of legislation in Australia and United States. It is noteworthy that in the South
Australian parliament, for example, the view was expressed that legislation for the compulsory wearing of
seat belts was completely wrong and not the type of legislation to be introduced to the freedom-loving
people of South Australia (p. 53). This sentiment about freedom-loving people appears similar to that
expressed by those who argue that they should have the right to determine how fast they can drive and
therefore, have little or no regard for posted speed limits.
Prior to the introduction of the mandatory seat belt laws in South Australia, 37% of road users reported
wearing a seat belt when they were driving a vehicle (Milne, 1985). A year later in 1972, this percentage had
increased significantly to 81% (Milne, 1985). As such, the acceptance of the seat belt legislation was
adopted quickly by many Australian drivers. Consistent with this trend, the most recent community attitudes
to road safety survey found that 97% of 1,500 respondents reported always wearing a seat belt in the front
seat and 96% reported always wearing a seat belt in the rear seats (Petroulias, 2014). Similarly, seat belt
use in New Zealand is reported to be above 90% (Breen, 2004), with 89% of the 1,670 respondents who
were surveyed as part of a recent New Zealand attitudes to road safety survey agreeing that seat belt
enforcement reduces the road toll (Ministry of Transport, 2013).
Continued advancements in motor vehicle safety technology may have also contributed to the high seat belt
wearing rates amongst drivers and passengers. Additional safety measures such as seat belt locks and the
introduction of seat belt reminders, which provide an audible warning if a seat belt is unbuckled when driving,
have been introduced into newer vehicles. Research indicates that seat belt reminders are effective at
increasing seat belt wearing rates (Krafft, Kullgren, Lie, & Tingvall, 2006; Williams, Wells, & Farmer, 2002),
particularly in counties such as the United States which have lower seat belt compliance rates. Given that
seat belts are available in all motor vehicles and that the majority of road users in Australia and New Zealand
have favourable attitudes towards wearing seat belts, it is not surprising that a large proportion of individuals
report wearing seat belts.

As in the case study of anti-drink driving campaigns where a particular focus was on the campaigns as developed
and launched by the TAC, Figure 3.4 summarises, via a timeline, the types of seat belt advertisements which
have featured across recent decades with a particular focus on the campaigns developed by the TAC of Victoria.
Where relevant, however, notable campaigns from other jurisdictions are documented.
Early mass media campaigns promoting seat belt use relied heavily upon highly-emotive, physical threatbased appeals (Delaney, Lough, Whelan, & Cameron, 2004). For instance, two TAC advertisements (i.e.,
Bones and What Hurts Most) introduced in the early to mid-1990s showed young passengers unfastening
their seat belts prior to a collision. These advertisements highlighted the aversive consequences associated
with not wearing a seat belt in terms of the ongoing injuries that these passengers had to contend with. More
recently, however, the TAC has focused on approaches which may be regarded more informative and,
specifically, reinforcing of the already high rate of seat belt wearing compliance which exists in the general
community. For instance, in 2010, the TAC launched two advertisements addressing seat belt use which
consisted of famous sporting players from the Melbourne Victory and the Essendon football clubs. These two
advertisements were designed to remind (or reinforce) road users of the importance of wearing seat belts
(Transport Accident Commission, 2011b). Thus, similar to recent drink driving campaigns, contemporary seat
belt campaigns are adopting alternative approaches in order to persuade drivers to buckle up. Elliott (1993)
suggests that when baseline compliance rates are low (below 40%), a negative campaign approach may be
needed to drive change; however, when compliance rates in the general population are at a relatively higher
rate (i.e., above 40%) then positive approaches to reinforce the behaviour are more appropriate. Recognition
of this point appears to be well reflected in the approach to seat belt campaigns. Appendix D provides an
overview of the legislative and public education and advertising campaigns which have been applied in
Australia and New Zealand to contribute to social and behaviour change.
Initiatives that built upon the evidence associated with crash survivability/less serious injury when not thrown
from a vehicle have led to the high acceptance levels of seat belt use (arguably to the point of habituation),
and high compliance with seat belt use laws. Several lessons can be drawn from examining the trajectory of
seat belt use which first met opposition from the general community to contemporary society where seat belt
use is largely habitual.
Growing body of evidence relating to risk of being thrown from a vehicle, supported by the championing of
seat belt use by the medical profession.
Legislation introduced to mandate fitting of seat belts in all new cars, followed by compulsory belt wearing.
Physical threat of injury/death to self and/or others and which aimed to evoke strong fear featured in
earlier seat belt wearing campaigns. With increasing and overall high behavioural compliance rates,
however, approaches tend to be more positive or reinforcing in nature. This approach is consistent with
recommendations of Elliott (1993) that when behavioural compliance is below 40% a negative approach
is more likely required to engender change, whereas when compliance is high (i.e., above 40%), then a
positive approach which reinforces the behaviour may be implemented. Of note, Elliotts
recommendations were based on a meta-analysis of road safety advertising campaigns and the large
majority of these were anti-drink driving and seat belt campaigns.
Drawing from the information presented above in these three case studies, it can be seen that evidence
associated with the risks of each behaviour was built and, in turn, was used by credible advocates to help
begin the process of changing public opinion and acceptance of each behaviour. In addition to this evidence
base and associated advocacy support, other measures, including legislation, police enforcement and legal
sanctions (in the case of drink driving and seat belt use), and public education and advertising campaigns
have been effective in instituting positive social and behaviour change in these three behaviours. Taken
together, these past successes in instituting change present some key lessons that may be drawn upon in
relation to a future where social and behaviour change may be achieved in relation to speeding (Fleiter,
Lewis, et al., 2013; McLean, 2012; Watson & Soole, 2013). Importantly, what can be drawn from these
experiences is that no single intervention is likely to be effective on its own and that many components of the
road safety system (i.e., provision of appropriate legislation, adequate police enforcement, and persuasive
public education and advertising campaigns carefully and strategically targeted) must work together to
provide a consistent and clear message about the benefits of travelling at safer speeds, about what is
required (by law) of motorists, why that is the case, and what will happen if one does not comply.
1992: Bones
A young woman unfastens her seat belt prior to a
crash. Later seen in a rehabilitation centre
learning to walk again
1995: What Hurts Most

A young man explains how he unfastened
his seat belt just before a crash. His vision is
blurred, although he states that he might as
well be blind, cause I cant really do
anything for myself
1st January 1987

TAC established
1987
1998: No Belts
Two men driving home and are pulled over by police as the
driver is not wearing a seat belt. He is breathalysed and over
the legal BAC limit.
1990

Seat belt usage:
Front seat: 91% Always, 1%Never
Back seat: 73% Always, 4% Never
Campaigns
1993
1996
2004: Buckled up
Featuring cartoon character Thingle
Toodle, encourages young children to wear
their seat belt.
1999: Pinball
A young man and woman are driving in a
car. The man (passenger) is not wearing a
seat belt. They crash and the advertisement
shows the man being thrown about in the
car in slow motion. A surgeon explains the
injuries that occur to the man.
1999
2002
2010: 40 years of seat belts

Campaign included Melbourne Victorys Adrian Leijer and
Essendons David Hill to highlight seat belt safety
2005
2008
2011
2014

Seat belt usage:
Front seat: 96% Always, <1% Never
Back seat: 87% Always, 1% Never
Seat belt usage:

Front seat: 97% Always
Back seat: 96% Always
23% reported increase in amount of seat belt enforcement carried out by police
over past two years
16% reported increase in amount of seat belt enforcement carried out by police
over past two years
Negative/ threat-based (physical threat/strong fear), enforcement, and

informative
Slogan: Belt up, or suffer the pain
Campaign styles
Informative
Slogan: Belt up, or suffer the pain
Figure 3.4 Timeline of TAC seat belt campaigns
3.4 Speeding
Attention will now turn to discussing the same issues addressed in the three case studies presented above
as they relate to speeding so that similarities and differences amongst the behaviours (and associated
acceptance/disapproval levels) can be examined. Figure 3.5 provides a representation of the various
aspects relating to speeding across a timeline similar to that used in the three case studies above. Appendix
E provides an overview of the legislative and advertising-related countermeasures which have been
implemented to bring about social and behaviour change in relation to speeding behaviour.

As already described in Section 2.1, evidence has shown that speeding increases both the risk of crash
involvement as well as the severity of a crash when one occurs (Aarts & van Schagen, 2006; Elvik,
Christensen, and Amundsen, 2004; Kloeden, McLean, & Glonek, 2002; Nilsson, 2004). Kloeden and
colleagues crash risk case control studies (1997) have shown that for every 5km/h that a driver travels over
60km/h, their relative risk of crashing doubles. Kloeden and colleagues research coupled with evidence
derived from international experiences of raising and lowering posted speed limits and the subsequent
increases and decreases in crashes, provides evidence of the safety benefits associated with managing
speeds (as discussed further in Section 4.2.1 Speed limit reduction initiatives).
Moreover, as was discussed earlier in Section 1.1 (Safe Speeds as part of a Safe System), evidence relating
to the frailty of the human body and the speeds considered survivable for various road user groups
represents one of the cornerstones of the Safe System approach. There is a finite limit with respect to the
forces that a human body can withstand. Therefore, the Safe System recognises that a forgiving road
transport system should ensure that when a mistake is made and a collision occurs, the forces generated in
that collision are managed so that people are not exposed to impact forces beyond human physical
tolerance. Additionally, evidence relating to stopping distances at various speeds has also been produced
and widely used to attempt to educate motorists about the need to drive to the conditions (i.e., travelling at
faster speeds means that a vehicle will travel further while the driver recognises a hazard, responds to it, and
brakes or takes other evasive action to avoid it).
3.4.2 Legislation
Legislation relating to managing speeds has covered a range of areas including speed enforcement, speed
limit setting, and motor vehicle advertising.
Speed enforcement
Automated speed enforcement has expanded in nature and reach in recent decades in Australia and New
Zealand and represents a substantial component of mechanisms used by authorities to promote speed limit
compliance. Mobile speed cameras were first introduced in Victoria in 1985 and by 1991, were widely used
throughout the state (Delaney, Ward, Cameron. 2005). Mobile speed cameras were introduced in all other
Australian jurisdictions and New Zealand throughout the 1990s (e.g., Newstead & Cameron, 2003). From the
mid-to-late 1990s, fixed speed cameras started to emerge and were operational in all Australian States and
Territories by the mid-to-late 2000s. More recently, point-to-point speed cameras were introduced in
Australia from 2007 (Soole, Fleiter, & Watson, 2013). A large body of evidence has confirmed that speed
cameras have been effective at reducing speeding and related crashes, fatalities and injuries (see Wilson et
al., 2010 for a review), although it is recognised that the presence of cameras does not necessarily influence
speeding across the entire road network for all motorists.
Speed limit setting

In 1999, the Australian Transport Council approved the Australian Road Rules which included 60km/h as the
default speed limit in built up areas (Haworth, Ungers, Vulcan, & Corben, 2001). However, jurisdictions were
also trialling the implementation of lower limits, with NSW first introducing a default 50km/h speed limit in
urban and rural areas of the state in 1997. By 2005, 50km/h speed zones were extended to all residential
areas in Australia. Reducing the residential speed limit by 10km/h is reported to have resulted in reductions
of speed related injuries and deaths (Hoareau, Newstead, & Cameron, 2006; Hoareau, Newstead, Oxley, &
Cameron, 2002). For instance, Hoareau et al. (2002) reported that in South East Queensland, the 50km/h
default speed limit resulted in a significant reduction in crashes. Similar findings have also been reported in
other Australian jurisdictions (e.g., Victoria; Hoareau et al. 2006). However, it is noted that there is some
evidence that lowering residential speed limits by 10km/h has been more effective at reducing minor injuries
than serious injuries and deaths (Hoareau et al., 2006). As discussed in Section 2.5, there is currently one
example of an unrestricted speed limit on a stretch of highway in the Northern Territory. Apart from this
instance and 130km/h limits on some highways in the Northern Territory, posted limits are restricted to
110km/h in Australia.
Individual jurisdictions use specific guidelines for setting speed limits for roads outside built up areas (see:
Jurewicz, Phillips, Tziotis, & Turner, 2014). However, the level of community understanding about how speed
limits are determined is unclear. Better understanding by the broader community of issues considered when
setting speed limits (e.g., traffic volume, pedestrian activity, and crash history) is an area that could be fruitful
to enhancing public demand for safer speeds. This type of information should continue to be communicated
to the public to enhance appreciation of the rationale for speed limit setting.
Code of Practice for Motor Vehicle Advertising

The Voluntary Code of Practice for Motor Vehicle Advertising was introduced in Australia in 2002. This selfregulated code was designed to restrict the content that could be presented in motor vehicle advertisements
(i.e., unsafe driving and/or illegal behaviour). A content analysis of motor vehicle advertising in Australia
showed that vehicle performance indicators and themes related to the thrill and excitement of driving were
the most common themes of advertising until the introduction of self-regulatory codes (Sheehan, Steinhardt,
& Schonfeld, 2006). Since then, the focus of such themes has decreased, with the focus of such advertising
shifting more towards promotion of a vehicles safety features. However, it has also been argued that the
adjudication of motor vehicle advertising needs to more stringently ensure compliance with such selfregulations and should include pre-testing to assess consumer perceptions (Donovan et al., 2011; Donovan
& Henley, 1997). Further, the movie and television industry are also perceived by some to romanticise speed
and speeding behaviour (Redshaw, 2008).
Despite the existence of Australias code of practice, the Australian Standards Bureau (ASB) still receives
complaints from the general population about the material that is presented in motor vehicle advertisements.
Recently, a complaint about an advertisement by Nissan Motor Co. which portrayed unsafe driving behaviour
and exceeding the speed limit was upheld by the ASB. The advertisement showed a male driver driving a
pregnant female to hospital. The male driver stops in front of the hospital entrance and comments on the
speed in which they arrived at the hospital (i.e., 10.24. personal best). As the female leaves the vehicle it
turns out that she was not pregnant and the drive was to see how fast they could arrive at the hospital (ASB,
2014). The advertisement was modified to remove any impression of speeding (e.g., volume of engine noise,
words, quick, quick, quick and go, go, go, and the driver being encouraged to speed), before continuing to
be aired on television.
Empirical research has also examined drivers perception of speeding behaviour promoted in motor vehicle
advertisements (e.g., Donovan, Fielder, & Ouschan, 2011a; Donovan, Fielder, Ouschan, & Ewing, 2011b;
Redshaw, 2011; Vingilis et al., 2015). For instance, Redshaw (2011) presented participants with two
advertisements that had previously been shown on Australian television. The findings revealed that some of
the participants perceived that the advertisements encouraged reckless driving behaviour. Similarly,
Donovan et al. (2011b) reported that two (out of three) advertisements included in their study were perceived
by a large proportion of participants to promote illegal speeding behaviour (e.g., faster acceleration). As
such, these findings reveal that despite the Voluntary Code of Practice for Motor Vehicle Advertising, some
motor vehicle advertisements are still perceived to indirectly promote speeding behaviour.
Other studies have shown that commercial (promotional) motor vehicle advertising has the potential to
influence attitudes toward driving safety and in turn encourage unsafe driving behaviours, particularly among
young drivers (Donovan et al., 2011b; Donovan & Henley, 1997). In addition, it has been suggested that
speeding and other risky and illegal driving behaviours may be glorified through media portrayals in film and
television, or through motor sports (Hennessy, Hemingway, & Howard, 2008; Kaye, White, & Lewis, 2015;
Warn, Tranter, & Kingham, 2004). In particular, it has been suggested that the staging of iconic motor sports
events on public streets (e.g., Gold Coast 600) may influence implicit attitudes about the acceptability of
driving behaviours in such places (Tranter & Lowes, 2006). Given the impact of motor vehicle advertising,
movie and television, and media portrayals of particular driving behaviours, there appears to be a need for
further research to understand the potential impacts of mixed messages on on-road behaviours.
As described in Section 3.2.2, strict advertising bans have been implemented in the tobacco industry.
However in the driving context, the advertising codes are self-regulated. Therefore, legislative changes to
motor vehicle advertising represent an opportunity to help increase demand for safer speeds. For instance, a
revised code of practice could make it illegal to mention and/or infer speed capabilities of a vehicle and ban
the advertisement of vehicles which are equipped with speedometers greater than 140km/h. While it is
acknowledged that Australia and New Zealand are small players in the global car industry, such legislative
changes could assist in reducing the unsafe driving content currently presented in the media and in turn,
may encourage safer driving behaviours.
3.4.3 Public education, advertisement, and mass media campaigns

A common and long-standing approach to highlight the adverse consequences of speeding has been the
use of strong, physical threat-based approaches whereby advertisements depict drivers and/or passengers
being injured or killed as a result of a driver having engaged in speeding. In the 1990s the TAC campaign
approaches reflected this reliance upon fear, as illustrated by the advertisement Tracy which depicted a
young female driver who had been speeding and who had killed her best friend. Graphic images of the postcrash scene are shown as is the evident distress of the young driver. These commercials of death (Watson
& Tay, 2002) intended not just to evoke fear but to motivate individuals to do something to avoid the threat
from happening to them. A substantial body of research into the fear-persuasion relationship, however, has
since indicated that the situation is more complex that inducing fear and achieving persuasion; rather,
various other factors are likely to mediate and moderate the degree of persuasion achieved from fear-based
approaches (Lewis et al., 2007). Furthermore, the effectiveness of such fear-based physical threat
approaches has been shown to vary as a function of gender, such that males are less likely to report being
influenced by these messages than females. These findings contributed to the exploration of other,
alternative approaches.
These alternative approaches have extended to the use of different types of threats, for instance, social
threats (e.g., peer disapproval) and financial threats (e.g., monetary fines and loss of demerit points that
could ultimately lead to licence loss) as well as to the use of different types of emotions, including humorous
approaches. There is evidence to suggest that young males may respond more positively to messages
incorporating social threats than physical threats (Rotfeld, 1999). Furthermore, in regards to social threats,
Lewis and colleagues (2013b) found that young males were more likely to report being influenced by the
potential loss of demerit points and the implications that may have if they were to lose their licence as a
result (and have restricted freedom from being unable to drive). In contrast, however, young females
indicated that the monetary aspect associated with a fine and what it may mean in terms of them being
unable to buy other more desired things was more relevant.
In 2007, the NSW RTA launched the Speeding: No one thinks big of you campaign. This campaign was
more positive in its emotional approach in that it attempted to incorporate an element of light
heartedness/humour. It also incorporated a social threat whereby the focus was on highlighting the social
disapproval that one will experience for speeding. The campaign was designed to target young males aged
between 17 and 25 years and aimed to challenge the social norm regarding speeding being seen as
acceptable and that it represented a manly behaviour. The campaign was associated with high levels of
recall with 97% of the young male population surveyed reporting being familiar with the campaign and 78%
of drivers reporting that they believed the campaign was effective at reducing speeding behaviour (Watsford,
2008). It is acknowledged, however, that the RTA and the Australian Standards Bureau (ASB) received
complaints from some viewers who perceived the advertisement to be demeaning to men. Despite these
complaints, no action was taken by the RTA or the ASB because it was considered that this advertisement
complied with regulations. In addition, beyond just the implementation of different types of threats in
advertising messages, there have also been attempts to minimise the reliance upon any type of threat in a
message and instead, focus on the evoking more positive emotions. A notable example of this approach is
the Western Australian Enjoy the Ride campaign which focused particularly on the benefits and positive
feelings that one may experience from slowing down and, as the name of the campaign suggests, enjoying
the drive not only when behind the wheel, but in life more generally. The benefits of improved health and
calmness were promoted as benefits of complying with the speed limit - benefits for the individual as well as
the community more generally if everyone was to slow down and calm down. The Enjoy the Ride campaign
represented an innovative approach by focusing on the benefits of not speeding, rather than on the adverse
consequences of speeding.
Extending upon the use of positive approaches, some more contemporary anti-speeding public education
initiatives from Australia and New Zealand have reflected a growing focus on highlighting everyones
personal responsibility for road safety. For instance, the Drive Social campaign from New Zealand and the
Join the Drive To Save Lives campaign from Queensland are examples of attempts to encourage greater
social connectedness because they seek to persuade road users that they should take care of all those who
share the road with them.
It is recognised that novel, fresh, innovative, and attention grabbing messages are needed to continue to
engage the community in the debate about the need for speeds that are safe for all road users. Importantly
however, the search for innovative strategies need not start from a position of viewing all attempts which
have come before being as of no value. Rather, there is a need to carefully consider and take on board
lessons learned from previous communication successes (and even to learn from those less successful
campaigns) (Fleiter, Lewis, & Watson, 2013). In a recently completed Australian Research Council Linkage
Project with the TAC of Victoria, a range of anti-speeding messages were developed with the aim of
identifying particular approaches which may be effective in persuading young males not to speed. The
messages were designed to address a range of salient beliefs or motivations underpinning speeding (with
such beliefs having been identified in earlier, in-depth qualitative investigations) and to not rely solely or
principally upon the emotion of fear. Of note, some messages incorporated humour. The final evaluation
study comprising six different types of belief-based messages found a persuasive advantage for messages
focusing on control beliefs for young males and, in particular, messages which challenged the perceived
facilitators of speeding or emphasised the perceived barriers of speeding. These perceived facilitators and
barriers were identified from prior, in-depth qualitative investigations with groups of older and younger male
and female drivers. For instance, in regards to influencing young male drivers, control-related aspects were
identified in earlier phases of the project as being particularly important influences on young males speeding
behaviour (see Lewis et al., 2013b). Thus, in an attempt to challenge factors which may encourage speeding
(i.e., feeling pressure to speed to be on time for others or for some event), one message demonstrated how
a driver could in fact choose what speed they drove, thereby taking control, and subsequently being
rewarded for this behaviour. Thus, the message depicted positive outcomes (i.e., a chance meeting with a
celebrity) as being associated with not speeding and showing that an individual driver can ultimately choose
to stick to the speed limit. The second message related to emphasising a perceived barrier to speeding;
namely, personal vulnerability of others and how each individual may contribute to helping to keep others
safe on the road by taking control of their driving speed. Overall, this innovative research project highlighted
that although there has been focus particularly on attitudinal and normative approaches (the latter more
recently) in anti-speeding campaigns, there is also an important role to be played in developing messages
which target control beliefs when attempting to influence young male drivers.
Another recent example of a novel and attention grabbing approach was a campaign run by the TAC in
2011. The residents (approximately 45) of the town of Speed in rural Victoria were approached by the TAC
with a proposal aimed at highlighting the risks of speeding in rural areas and through small towns. The
residents were asked to consider changing the name of their town to SpeedKills for one month. The TAC
offered to donate $10,000 to the towns Lions Club if they were able to obtain 10,000 Likes on their
Facebook page, which would represent 10,000 individuals who supported the idea. A television commercial
calling for people to visit the Rename Speed Facebook page was aired. Reportedly, within 24 hours, the
Facebook page had received 10,000 likes, the figure doubled within one week, and at the time the town
was renamed as SpeedKills, there were more than 30,000 supporters on the Facebook page. Further, one
local resident, Phil Down, renamed himself as, Phil Slow Down as part of the campaign (see: Transport
Accident Commission, 2011a). At the heart of the campaign was TACs aim of making speeding as socially
unacceptable as drink driving had become in Australia.
Current status of speeding

It is recognised that substantial progress has been achieved in the development and implementation of
speed management strategies in recent decades and that community attitudes towards speeding,
particularly excessive speeding, have begun to change for the better. Despite these successes, speeding
remains a pervasive road safety and public health problem in all motorised countries (Elvik, 2010b). In
particular, the effect of such countermeasures appears to have plateaued in Australia (Australian Transport
Council, 2011; McIntosh & Smith, 2004). Speeding represents a road safety problem that is notoriously
difficult to resolve (Elvik, 2010b; Johnston et al., 2014).
As Elvik (2010b) outlines, the problem of speeding is characterised by numerous factors that contribute to its
persistent nature, including: (i) that it is widespread, not perceived as a serious problem and, to an extent, is
socially accepted (and not immoral); (ii) that many drivers have inaccurate perceptions regarding rational
speed choice and associated crash risks; and (iii) that many drivers overestimate the benefits associated
with speeding. In addition, the transient nature of speeding behaviour and the comparative perception of
control over consequences associated with the behaviour, compared to other high-risk driving behaviours
such as drink driving, have also been highlighted (Forward, 2006; Horswill & McKenna, 1999). For these
reasons, it is extremely likely that some drivers will perceive it as unreasonable to be coerced into adjusting
their speed-related behaviour a circumstance not dissimilar to that described above when compulsory seat
belt use legislation was first debated in Australia.
As discussed in Section 3.2, Elliott (1992) identified key considerations and changes that occurred to assist
in making drink driving socially unacceptable. Table 3.2 provides the full version of Elliotts table from 1992,
which offers a comparison of these same factors as he saw them applying to speeding at that time, as well
as an additional column that we have added that attempts to summarise the situation in 2015. Arguably, little
has changed in regard to speeding in 2015. The ratings in the third column of Table 3.2 reflect this position.
It is possible that there has been some movement in the positive direction in relation to: iv) current legal
levels/standards are accurate and appropriate to environmental settings since work has been done in
reviewing speed limits and introducing reduced speeds in school zones, for example, although many still
report speed limits as irrational or not justifiable; vii) high perceived probability of detection since the use of
automated enforcement across jurisdictions was minimal in 1992 compared to current levels; xii) focus is on
all who exceed circumscribed limits again, because of the increase in automated enforcement since 1992,
and xiii) proven relationship between transgressions of the law and road crashes since more research has
been conducted since 1992 to demonstrate links between speed and crash risk, although many motorists
still do not appear to comprehend this relationship. Nonetheless, the ratings in the third column of Table 3.2
indicate that little has changed in relation to how the community sees speeding and speed enforcement in
the last two decades.
Table 3.2
Factors contributing to compliance for drink driving compared to speeding
Contributing factors
Drink driving
(RBT)
As rated by Elliott
in 1992
Speeding
Speeding
As rated by
Elliott in 1992
2015
Moral attachment to the law as fair, proper,

necessary
Social proof most people like me obey this high approval of law
Non-compliers (a dominant minority) are in

need of punishment and forced behaviour
modification
Current legal levels/ standards are accurate

and appropriate to environmental settings
x?
Enforcement has road safety as primary aim

not revenue collecting
Belief that non-compliance is as socially

undesirable and indefensible as rape or assault
High perceived probability of detection
x?
Very strong desire to avoid punishment

because it is severe and certain
Non-compliance even at low levels is unsafe/

dangerous
Enforcement is highly visible and aims at

deterrence rather than detection
Circumscribed limits which are rigidly enforced

(i.e., no tolerance limits)
Focus is on all who exceed circumscribed limits
x?
Proven relationship between transgression of

the law and road crashes
x?
x?
Source: Adapted from Elliott, 1992
It has been argued that a fundamental redesign of cultural arrangements is necessary in order to challenge
the culture of speed in Australia (May, Tranter, & Warn, 2008: p.395). As noted earlier, research has
demonstrated that speeding is socially accepted to varying degrees according to demographic and socioeconomic groups and further, that levels of speeding and location are key determining factors in social
acceptance (Petroulis, 2014). Despite extensive evidence highlighting the relationship between speed and
crash risk and speed and crash severity, many drivers continue to debate these facts, in turn arguing that
police speed enforcement is primarily conducted not for road safety, but as a mechanism for revenue-raising
for governments (Delaney et al., 2005; Fleiter & Watson, 2012; Victorian Auditor-General's Office, 2011).
Perhaps not surprisingly then, a number of studies have demonstrated that some drivers report deliberately
exceeding the speed limit, instead preferring to choose speeds that reflect their perceived driving ability and
the prevailing road, traffic and weather conditions (Fleiter et al., 2007; Forward, 2006). Similarly, recent
national driver survey data has shown that almost half of all drivers believe that an enforcement tolerance of
65km/h or more in a 60km/h zone is acceptable (Petroulias, 2014). Further, for rural 100km/h zones, 21%
and 20% of all respondents perceived that enforcement tolerances of 105km/h and 110km/h, respectively,
are acceptable in this zone. Again, this finding represents a significant challenge when attempting to create
demand for safer speeds, particularly when the beliefs about enforcement tolerance levels described above
are at odds (i.e., higher than) with current operational enforcement tolerances in some jurisdictions. This
topic is discussed further in Section 4.4.3.
May et al (2008) argued that existing speed management strategies were developed within a paradigm that
relies heavily on symptomatic approaches, such as enforcement and engineering, and that in addition to
these approaches, more focus on community involvement is required. While these approaches have
undoubtedly been associated with road safety benefits, they argue that a holistic, social ecological model for
reconnecting road safety with communities that value social connectedness, quality of life and slower ways
of being is required (May et al., 2008: p.395). That is, change needs to be focussed at the community and
societal level to harness community support and community-driven acceptance of change, rather than at the
level of an individual road user. The primary challenge here is to convince motorists that they should forgo
personal benefits (e.g., saving a small amount of time on their journey), in order to promote community wide
safety benefits. As Johnston, Muir and Howard (2014) aptly summarised: Speed moderation by all drivers at
all times requires embracing the proposition that the resultant benefit to society is such as to warrant
forgoing the immediate personal gains that otherwise accrue (p.130).
As noted earlier, the objective of the current project is to identify interventions supported by theoretical and
empirical evidence which may assist with creating, increasing, and/or sustaining demand for safer speeds
among the driving and general public in the Australasian context. The next section reviews the literature
regarding effective countermeasures, as well as innovative approaches that show some promise, with a view
to developing an overarching Campaign Strategy to allow a strategic approach to address issues raised
throughout the literature review phase of the project.
April 1990 to September 1990:

Publicity supporting speed cameras
Slogan: Dont fool yourself, speed kills
Physical threat-based campaigns are introduced throughout the 1990s to highlight
negative consequences of speeding
1997: Campaign launched to address low

level speed.
1st January 1987

TAC established
1987
February 2008:
Campaigns introduced which aimed to make
speeding socially and morally unacceptable
Pictures of you campaign
1990
1993

33% first mentioned speed as a major factor contributing to crashes (second
factor, after drink driving)
28% reported driving over speed limit (did not specify by how much over)
1996
February 2011:
Rename township of Speed campaign:
community members of Speed, Victoria join
together to rename town for one month to
Speed Kills. Included TV ads/ Facebook
page
August 2001:
Wipe Off 5 campaign introduced
1999
2002
2005

37% first mentioned speed as a major factor contributing to crashes (main
factor)
11% always, nearly always, or mostly drive 10km/h over posted speed limit
32% agreed that its okay to exceed speed limit if driving safely
67% agreed that if you increase your speed by 10km/h you are significantly
more likely to be involved in a crash
90% agreed that a crash at 70km/h more severe than at 60km/h
Negative/threat-based (physical threat/strong fear), enforcement, and

informative
Campaigns
July 2010:
The Ripple effect campaign
Slogan: Everybody hurts
2008
2011
2014

31% first mentioned speed as a major factor contributing to crashes (main
factor)
5% always, nearly always, mostly drive 10km/h over posted speed limit
31% agreed that its okay to exceed speed limit if driving safely
66% agreed that if you increase your speed by 10km/h you are significantly
more likely to be involved in a crash
89% agreed that a crash at 70km/h more severe than at 60km/h
Negative/threat-based (blame and guilt; less physical threat/ strong fear-based),

enforcement, and informative (e.g., braking distances).
Community involvement: Negative/threat-based (e.g., individuals who have lost loved ones and community support to rename town of
Speed). Encouraging community to say no to speeding. Other campaign examples include, Join the drive (TMR, QLD), Drive Social
(NZ Transport Agency) and, Enjoy the ride (Office of Road Safety, WA).
Campaign styles
Figure 3.5 Timeline of TAC anti-speeding campaigns
Humorous campaigns (e.g., No one thinks big of you, June, 2007, RTA, NSW and Keeping the bromance
alive, February, 2015, MAC, South Australia).
4. Interventions previously used for creating,

increasing or sustaining demand for safer
speeds
4.1 Public education strategies
Mass media advertising and social marketing campaigns have been the predominant communication
approach in road safety. The design and extent of these approaches varies significantly, ranging from
traditional road safety advertising campaigns via a range of mediums (e.g., television, print, outdoor, online),
to more interactive campaigns utilising social media, communication technologies, and other innovative
approaches (e.g., mobile phone apps). There has been a recent strong shift in the approach to message
framing and the nature of content in road safety messages, from a traditional approach of relying on negative
emotional appeals (e.g., fear, guilt or shame), to more positive emotional appeals (e.g., humour, pride).
Themes relating to the value of social connectedness are also found in contemporary road safety messages.
These shifting trends in message approach and content as well as other characteristics of effective mass
media and social marketing campaigns are discussed in the sections below.
4.1.1 Mass media and advertising campaigns

Role of advertising as a countermeasure
At the outset, it is important to note that there has been a long-standing debate in the mass media field
regarding the role that advertising plays as a road safety countermeasure and, in particular, whether that role
is an indirect or direct influence on behaviour. The indirect role posits that advertising is unlikely to influence
driver behaviour on its own and must, instead, be used in conjunction with, and supporting or signposting,
other existing countermeasures including enforcement and engineering. Research evidence does support
this view (Elder et al., 2004; B. Elliott, 2003b; Vingilis & Coultes, 1990; Wilde, 1993). Evidence has shown
that together, advertising and enforcement may have complementary effects as is supported by findings of
significant interactions between these two types of initiatives (Delaney et al., 2003; Tay, 2005a). Extending
upon the concept of an indirect influence on behaviour, advertising may also function to influence behaviour
by facilitating changes in societal and cultural norms and attitudes (B. Elliott, 1993). An example of this
outcome being achieved is in regards to the shifting of public perceptions regarding societal disapproval of
drink driving, as discussed earlier.
The contrary view of advertisings role, the direct influence view, maintains that advertising may influence
individuals behaviours directly. This view is supported by social psychological models of attitude-behaviour
relations as well as persuasion models whereby changing individuals attitudes and intentions through
persuasive appeals will ultimately result in adoption of the desired behaviour (Donovan, Jalleh, & Henley,
1999; Vingilis & Coultes, 1990). There is also empirical evidence for this direct view of advertisings role with
behaviour changes found in response to campaigns addressing seat belt use, fatigue, drink driving, as well
as speeding (Ebel, Koepsell, Bennett, & Rivara, 2003; Farmer, 1975; Tay 2004; Tay, 2005b; Tay & Watson,
2002). Importantly, however, it is not possible to isolate the effects of advertising from all the other
countermeasures that have occurred in relation to altering these high risk behaviours.
Irrespective of the view that one adopts, it has been argued by some that the time for debating whether or
not advertising works as an indirect or direct influence on behaviour is best replaced with a focus on
identifying the most persuasive approaches (Donovan et al., 1999). This view is consistent with the one
adopted in this report, given the focus on how best to optimise communication strategies in the attempt to
bring about behaviour and social change regarding demand for safer speeds.
Characteristics influencing message persuasiveness

A myriad of characteristics have been examined in regards to message persuasiveness. Broadly these may
be classified in accordance with i) individual, ii) message, and iii) dissemination characteristics. The following
section provides an overview of some of the key considerations in each of these areas.
Individual characteristics
Understanding the target audience
It is crucial that the intended target audience is clearly identified and the motivations underpinning their
engagement in risky behaviour is elicited and subsequently targeted. Most importantly, a message needs to
be relevant to the audience for which it is intended, in terms of both message content and delivery approach
(Fitzgibbon et al., 2007; Lewis, Watson, & White, 2009; Snyder, 2007). A critical step in achieving this
objective is conducting formative research prior to the development of a campaign, such as conducting focus
groups and pre-testing with the target audience (Hornik & Kelly, 2007). The issue of communication
inequality should not be ignored. That is, individuals from disadvantaged segments of the population may not
have the same opportunities to access campaign delivery mediums or process the message content, and
these issues must be considered when developing the campaign to ensure the target audience is reached
(Fitzgibbon et al., 2007; Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011; Weenig & Midden, 1997).
A number of studies have shown that, rather than attempting to target an entire population, road safety
campaigns are most effective when targeting a specific segment of the population (Delhomme, De
Dobbeleer, Forward, & Simes, 2009; Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011; Lewis, Watson, & Tay, 2007; Wundersitz,
Hutchinson, & Woolley, 2010). Such a finding has important implications for anti-speeding campaigns, given
the relatively ubiquitous and pervasive nature of speeding. In such instances, it is argued that one of the
basic tenets of campaigns is to specify fairly homogenous target groups for the campaign and to create
messages designed for each group (Snyder, 2007: p.S35). The author points to the benefits of using
interactive technologies to increase the feasibility of tailoring messages to specific segments of the target
audience.
Gender differences
Gender differences have been noted in regard to the speeds at which a person would be willing to drive and
feel in control of the vehicle, with female drivers reporting lower preferred speeds overall than male drivers
on roads with a 100km/h speed limit (Lewis et al., 2012). Such findings suggest that efforts to influence
perceptions of what constitutes safer speeds must first acknowledge that the baseline level of acceptability
varies as a function of particular individuals (groups of individuals), such as young males. As an example of
the application of this concept, Lewis et al. (2012) suggested that anti-speeding messages targeting
particular demographic groups may enhance perceptions of personal relevance by ensuring relevant
speeds are depicted in a message. For males, this level was higher than females in regards to driving in
100km/h zones. In addition, gender identity may also influence the effectiveness of road safety messages.
For instance, Conway and Dub (2002) reported that both high masculinity men and women may be more
persuaded by humour appeals than by appeals that contained no humour. In this instance, masculinity was
assessed using a self-report measure where participants were asked to rate how much the following six
characteristics applied to them: aggressive, assertive, dominant, forceful, leadership skills, and strong
personality (previously thought to be more associated with higher masculinity). The findings revealed that
men and women who scored higher on these characteristics (i.e., higher in masculinity) were more likely to
be persuaded by appeals that consisted of humour when compared to men and women who scored lower on
these characteristics (i.e., lower in masculinity). Overall, these findings highlight that both sex (male/female)
and gender identity (high/low masculinity) may influence message acceptance.
The majority of anti-speeding campaigns are developed with the aim of influencing young males, as a high
risk group (Tay, 2005). This focus is consistent with, and justified by, prior research which has consistently
shown that young males are more likely to engage in speeding, have more positive attitudes toward
speeding, be high-range or recidivist offenders and be involved in more speed-related crashes (Harrison et
al., 1998; Stradling et al., 2003; Watson, Watson, Siskind, Fleiter, & Soole, 2015; Williams et al., 2006).
Moreover, young males are more likely to display perceptual biases (e.g., optimism bias) that increase their
likelihood of having inflated perceptions of their driving ability and/or engaging in high-risk behaviours (Harr,
Foster, & ONeill, 2005). Recent research has suggested that these perceptual biases influence the manner
in which messages are processed (i.e., third-person effects, see below), and thus their persuasiveness, in
relation to males (Goldenbeld, Twisk, & Houwing, 2008; Lewis, Watson, & White, 2008a; Walton &
McKeown, 2001).
Other factors
As well as these types of personal influences (age, gender) on perceptions of safer speeds, other personal,
social, and legal factors may also influence such perceptions. Other factors include prior speeding
infringement history and perceived enforcement tolerance or in other words, the speed at which one can
exceed the limit and not receive an infringement (Mannering, 2009); a speed that is often described as the
de facto speed limit (Cameron, 2008). Motorists perceptions about enforcement tolerances have important
implications for speed management as well as the promotion of safer speeds, suggesting that governments
may be able to increase the degree to which they encourage the public to acknowledge the safety
motivations behind speed limits by more stringently enforcing them. However, it is suggested that such an
approach should be tempered with accompanying communication strategies to advise drivers of the
approach being taken and why that approach is being implemented (for a discussion of the advantages and
disadvantages of publicising enforcement tolerance thresholds, see Elliott, 2001b). This issue is discussed
more fully in Section 4.4.3 and has particular relevance to the messages that authorities are sending to the
general public, especially when different jurisdictions operate different enforcement threshold levels.
The role of beliefs in assisting to understand the target behaviour
One of the first steps in developing an effective campaign is having a thorough understanding of the target
behaviour. However, an underlying barrier to developing effective anti-speeding campaigns, and overall
speed management approaches in general, is the fact that there is substantial heterogeneity in what drivers
perceive to be a safe speed (Elvik, 2010a). This has implications for what type of speeding is depicted in an
anti-speeding campaign (Lewis et al., 2012). In addition, it has been argued that mass media campaigns are
more likely to be successful if a single behavioural action is targeted, rather than simply targeting the overall
behaviour, especially if it is one that is habitual (Wakefield, Loken, & Hornik, 2010). This finding has
important implications for speeding-related messages, given the habitual nature of the behaviour. It suggests
that communication strategies may be more effective if they are targeted at specific instances that may assist
with not speeding (e.g., using digital speed maps to remain alert to the speed limit, challenging the notion
that lower speeds means the driver has to spend too much time checking the speedometer and in doing so,
is distracted from the road etc.).
Targeting these specific behavioural actions requires a comprehensive understanding of the underlying
beliefs that promote and discourage speeding. Lewis et al. (2013b) have demonstrated the importance of
eliciting key or salient beliefs underpinning speeding in accordance with theoretical frameworks such as the
Theory of Planned Behaviour ([TPB]; (Ajzen, 1991)). These researchers then showed how understanding
such motivations may help to inform the content of targeted anti-speeding messages. Key TPB beliefs
include (i) behavioural beliefs (which underpin attitudes and relate to the perceived advantages and
disadvantages of speeding), (ii) normative beliefs (which underpin subjective norms in the framework and
which relate to those perceived others who would approve or disapprove of the behaviour), and (iii) control
beliefs (which underpin perceived behavioural control in the TPB and which incorporate the perceived
barriers and facilitators to engaging in the behaviour). As noted previously, this approach was undertaken in
recent, yet to be published research that Lewis and colleagues conducted with the Transport Accident
Commission (TAC) of Victoria. The program of research into developing and testing the messages has been
informed by a conceptual framework, the Step approach to Message Design and Testing ([SatMDT]; in
press) which Lewis and colleagues devised to assist with development of innovative and targeted road
safety messages. This framework highlights key constructs, as supported by theoretical and empirical
evidence, for consideration when developing message content. The framework extends through to key
considerations when testing the persuasiveness of messages.
The literature has identified a number of salient beliefs underpinning speeding behaviour that may be used to
represent potential focal points for developing innovative anti-speeding message content; in particular those
campaigns targeted at young males (Elliott, Armitage, & Baughan, 2005; Lewis et al., 2013b; Warner &
berg, 2008). These beliefs include challenging and/or emphasising beliefs related to: (i) perceived social
pressure to keep up with the flow of traffic (e.g., the belief that other road users are inconvenienced by
someone driving at or below the speed limit, and that, therefore, there is a perceived pressure to exceed the
posted speed limit in order to comply with others who are speeding); (ii) journey time-benefits associated
with speeding (i.e., the belief that time will be saved by speeding); (iii) greater perceived hazard-detection
when driving faster (i.e., the belief that speeding heightens awareness levels and therefore, enhances the
ability to detect hazards); (iv) inflated perceptions of control (i.e., the belief that speeding offers a means of
controlling an uncontrollable situation); (v) positive affect associated with higher vehicle speeds (i.e., one
experiencing enjoyment/pleasure with driving fast); and (vi) (mis)perceptions of positive social stigma among
peers (particularly young females) (Horvath et al., 2012). In addition, drivers tend to ignore, place limited
importance on, or misunderstand the impact of their speeding behaviour (Job et al., 2012). For example,
some drivers misunderstand the environmental impact of their behaviour (e.g., pollution and noise from
faster driving speeds) and misperceive greater gains in travel time than what is actually achieved (Elvik,
2010a). Raising awareness of these misperceptions may also represent particularly promising focal points
for anti-speeding message content.
Third person effect
It has been suggested that threat appeals may be least effective in changing the behaviour of those whose
behaviour is most in need of change (Elliott, 2003b), such as young males who tend to perceive the threat, in
particular messages with physical threats (e.g., death or injury), as having less influence on them, relative to
other drivers known as the third person effect (Lewis, Watson, & Tay, 2007; Tay, 2002, 2005a). Research
has found gender differences in third-person effects associated with anti-speeding messages, such that
males report that messages are more likely to be effective for other drivers, while females report that
messages are more likely to be effective for themselves (Glendon & Walker, 2013; Lewis et al., 2008a). In
addition, it has been argued that such effects are most pronounced when considering negative appeals,
such as traditional threat appeals (Lewis, Watson, White, & Tay, 2007). Lewis and colleagues continue to
suggest that positive emotional appeals may negate this shortcoming given that they are less likely to be
perceived as condescending to young drivers ... and thus, less likely to be ignored and/or rejected (Lewis,
Watson, White, et al., 2007: p.70).
Message characteristics: the importance of using theoretical frameworks to guide message

development and evaluation
The importance of the role of a suitable theoretical framework in the development of road safety mass media
campaigns cannot be understated (Lewis et al., 2009; Wundersitz et al., 2010). While research has
demonstrated that theoretically-based mass media campaigns are more effective, road safety campaigns
have traditionally been atheoretical, perhaps due to the proliferation of available theoretical frameworks
(Lewis et al., 2009). Theoretical approaches should be used to help inform message content, as well as to
evaluate the success/effectiveness of it (see Section 2.6 for additional detail).
Prior research has identified response efficacy, or the provision of information and strategies, as a crucial
determinant of message effectiveness in terms of both reducing rejection and maximising acceptance (Floyd,
Prentice-Dunn, & Rogers, 2000; Lewis et al., 2008a; Lewis, Watson, & White, 2010; Tay, 2005a).
Specifically, response efficacy refers to the extent to which messages incorporate strategies and/or
information that may be useful for preventing and/or minimising a particular issue or threat (Lewis et al.,
2009: p.2). However, it has been noted that the most important construct is perceived response efficacy,
such that target audiences must correctly identify the proposed strategies as intended (Lewis et al., 2009,
2010). It has been suggested that it is relatively easier to identify strategies for inclusion in drink driving
campaigns, given that there are a range of options that individuals would have available, such as arranging a
(sober) designated driver or taking public transport. In contrast, however, speeding has relatively fewer
strategies with the main one being not to speed (see Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011; Lewis, et al., 2009, 2010;
Tay, 2005a).
Historically, road safety mass media and social marketing campaigns have been characterised by a strong
reliance on negative emotional appeals, or threat appeals. Specifically, threat appeals are designed to evoke
a negative emotional response (e.g., fear, shame, guilt) through the use of threats. According to the literature
(Donovan & Henley, 1997), there are four approaches to threat appeals: physical (e.g., death or injury),
social (e.g., stigma, disapproval associated with, for instance, licence loss, jail sentence), psychological (e.g.,
discomfort, guilt/shame) and financial (e.g., fines, hospital bills). The premise of such threat-based
approaches is that by depicting a negative consequence (e.g., a crash) as resulting from ones engagement
in an illegally/risky behaviour, individuals will fear the consequence and be motivated to do what they can in
order to avoid that consequence happening to them.
Despite the longevity and frequency in which this approach has been adopted in road safety advertising in
Australia and elsewhere, the empirical evidence about the effectiveness of threat appeals, and the fearpersuasion relationship is, at best, mixed (Elliott, 2003b; Lewis, Watson, Tay, & White, 2007; Sutton, 1992;
Witte & Allen, 2000; Wundersitz et al., 2010). Numerous explanations for the inconsistent evidence about
persuasiveness of threat appeals have been suggested.
Firstly, the relationship between fear and persuasion has been argued as being more complex than a linear
positive or negative relationship. Rather, the relationship is curvilinear such that increasing fear may increase
persuasiveness up to some critical point, which once reached, will see the fear becoming too much and
rejection of the message is likely to occur (Quinn, Meenaghan, & Brannick, 1992). Similar response patterns
have also been reported in relation to threat appeals that attempt to evoke other negative emotions including
guilt and shame (Brennan & Binney, 2010). Secondly, it has been suggested that the indiscriminate use of
threat appeals in mass media and social marketing campaigns across various public health disciplines has
contributed to audiences feeling emotionally overwhelmed or desensitised to such approaches which, in turn,
reduces message persuasiveness (Brennan & Binney, 2010; Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2007). Thirdly, it
has been argued that messages which evoke fear without encouraging appropriate alternative behavioural
options or strategies to reduce ones risk of experiencing the particular threat (defined as response efficacy,
see a discussion of this topic earlier in this section) are unlikely to be successful, and may even be
counterproductive, resulting in rejection of the message (Job, 1988). Research has supported the
importance of threat appeals including some form of fear-reduction mechanism in order to achieve a
persuasive effect (Algie, 2011; Algie & Rossiter, 2010). Fourthly, research has suggested that threat appeals
may not always successfully evoke fear as the intended emotional response. Instead, even messages
defined as fear appeals may evoke other unintended emotions and those unintended emotions have
varying effects on persuasion (see Dillard et al., 1996).
Similar to road safety advertising campaigns more generally, campaigns targeting speeding have also
traditionally focused on physical threats, such as the threat of death and injury to oneself and/or others (Tay
& Watson, 2002), although social threats including the potential legal ramifications associated with engaging
in the behaviour have been used (Fleiter, Lewis, et al., 2013). However, as noted, there is growing evidence
to suggest that physical threats have limited persuasiveness with individuals commonly targeted by such
campaigns, such as young males (Lewis, Watson, & Tay, 2007; Tay, 2002, 2005a). Instead, it has been
argued that campaigns that address social threats, such as the social disapproval or stigma experienced as
a result of, for instance, licence loss due to too many speeding fines and the associated limits to personal
freedom from being unable to drive, may be more persuasive, particularly for young males (Lewis, Watson,
White, et al., 2007; Schoenbachler & Whittler, 1996). Furthermore, rather than focusing on negative emotionbased approaches, evidence has been supporting the effectiveness of positive emotional appeals for
persuading males (Lewis et al., 2010; Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2007; Wundersitz et al., 2010).
Finally, in regard to message characteristics, traditional campaign approaches, as delivered by television or

radio messages, may be characterised as one-way communication. The changing technological landscape
in recent years, however, has seen substantial shifts in the manner in which individuals communicate and
seek information. It has been argued that mass media and social marketing campaigns need to involve a
greater degree of interaction and involvement on the part of the target audience (Elliott et al., 2005; Murray &
Lewis, 2011) and the changing communication landscape does allow for greater interaction between all
parties as well as more user-generated input/discussion (e.g., via mediums such as Facebook, Twitter, and
Instagram). It has been suggested that such an approach motivates the target audience to engage in more
issue-relevant thinking, which is more likely to bring about sustained attitudinal and behavioural change.
Examples of more interactive approaches, such as the use of social media, are discussed in the final part of
this section.
Garrard (2008b) recommended that campaigns should incorporate themes such as speed limit compliance
uses less fuel and reduces crash risk, as well as highlighting the inconvenience and (negative) social stigma
associated with receiving speeding infringements and the loss of freedom and independence associated with
licence loss. Moreover, evidence suggests that, in light of findings that parents have been known to accept
demerit points for their (driving age) childrens speeding infringements, there may be important benefits to be
gained in communication which targets parents to highlight that the practice of points sharing is not only
illegal, but is preventing their children from fully acknowledging the consequences of their driving behaviour
(Fleiter et al., 2007; Lewis et al., 2013b) and undermining the intended deterrent effects of speeding
infringements.
The shift towards positive emotional appeals
As noted previously, the effectiveness of threat appeals in road safety mass media campaigns has been
associated with mixed evidence (Elliott, 2003b; Sutton, 1992; Witte & Allen, 2000; Wundersitz et al., 2010).
There is emerging evidence which identifies positive emotional appeals, such as messages incorporating
emotions (e.g., humour or pride), as a potentially persuasive approach for influencing young males (Lewis et
al., 2010; Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2007; Wundersitz et al., 2010). This evidence is based on messages
addressing a number of road safety behaviours, including drink driving (Lewis et al., 2008a) and speeding
(Lewis, Watson, & White, 2008b; Lewis et al., 2010; Lewis et al., 2013a). Moreover, this research has shown
that the impact of positive emotional appeals appears to emerge over time suggesting that the
persuasiveness may continue over time, and that such approaches have been particularly effective for highrisk road user groups such as young males (Kaye, White, & Lewis, 2013; Lewis et al., 2008b, 2009).
However, similar to recommendations for the careful use of fear, research has also highlighted the
importance of ensuring that the use of humour in such a serious health issue as road safety is done in a
manner which is not considered inappropriate (Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2007).
Mass media campaigns can also invoke positive emotions by encouraging social connectedness. Some
have argued that communication strategies are most effective when they adopt a more holistic approach and
call for action, not only at the individual level (e.g., beliefs and perceptions) but also at the societal level by
attempting to reframe social and cultural norms (Fitzgibbon et al., 2007). It is recognised that in some
domestic and international jurisdictions, contemporary speed management strategies are increasingly using
a community-focussed approach to attempt to reframe the debate about the need for safer (and most often
slower) speeds. For instance, individuals and communities are being encouraged to be accountable for their
own actions and to respect the role that everyone has to play in road safety. A number of recent mass media
and social marketing campaigns have employed humour (e.g., Legend/Ghost chips, Blazed,
Shopkeepers, No excuses needed, and Speeding. No one thinks big of you) or social connectedness
(e.g., Join the drive and Drive social) and are outlined in Appendix F.
Negative, loss-framed versus positive, gain-framed messages

Relating to the use of negative and positive emotions in message approaches, there is conceptual overlap
with loss and gain-framed messages. Overall, a gain-framed message is more likely to incorporate and elicit
positive emotions whereas a loss-framed message is more likely to incorporate and elicit negative emotions.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the historical tendency for road safety mass media campaigns to rely on threat
appeals, messages have typically been framed in terms of the losses (i.e., loss of life, loss of licence) as a
result of engaging in risky/illegal behaviour. Related to the shift toward positive emotional appeals, a number
of recent studies have also highlighted the importance of framing messages in respect to the potential gains
of engaging in desired behaviours (Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011; Kaye et al., 2013; Lewis, Watson, White, et
al., 2007). In relation to speeding, some examples of how this approach may be/has been applied may
include demonstrating the positive rewards (and good feelings) one experiences for arriving home safely to
ones family and/or the social approval of peers and significant others when one opts to drive within the
speed limit because it is important to them to keep their friends/passengers safe. Additionally, positively
framed messages could also portray model citizens who do not speed and who, in turn, model driving
practices to their children and others around them (Johnston et al., 2014). To the extent that evidence
suggests that negative, fear-based approaches influence particular audiences (i.e., females; see Lewis et al.,
2007, 2008), it would appear that a mixture of both positive (framed, emotion-based) and negative (lossframed, emotion based) approaches will likely always be necessary for future campaigns promoting safer
speeds (Kaye et al., 2013; Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2007).
Another relevant consideration is the potential influence of priming where material viewed most recently
may have a direct impact on subsequent behaviour because it is the most proximal information available to
guide behavioural action. It has been suggested that campaigns displaying imagery of the abhorrent
behaviours (e.g., speeding, hooning) may in fact unwittingly invoke the very concept one is trying to prevent
(Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011: p.84). As a result, many researchers have highlighted the benefits associated
with positive modelling of desirable behaviours (Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011; Lewis, Watson, White, et al.,
2007). Research has shown that road safety advertisements that show drivers performing safe driving
behaviours can reduce the influence of explicit self-enhancement biases (Sibley & Harr, 2009). This
approach may also be relevant to, and beneficial for, young drivers and their parents, such that parents must
model appropriate driving behaviour. Cestac (2014: p.54) notes, the notion from parents to drive as I say
not as I drive is a very detrimental message in terms of road safety.
Message content in terms of normative influences and positive modelling
Previous research has highlighted the impact of normative influences of significant others on speeding
behaviour, including peers, parents, spouses and other motorists (Fleiter, Lennon, & Watson, 2010; Fleiter &
Watson, 2006; Haglund & berg, 2000; Horvath et al., 2012; Taubman - Ben-Ari, Mikulincer, & Gillath,
2005). As noted in Section 2, two types of normative influences appear particularly relevant to speeding: 1)
descriptive norms - perceptions regarding the extent to which others engage in a behaviour/perceptions of
how the majority of people behave (Elliott, 2008); and 2) injunctive (moral) norms - perceptions regarding
how the majority of people feel about a behaviour, in terms of morals and beliefs (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). A
number of studies have demonstrated that descriptive and injunctive norms are conceptually different
constructs and that descriptive norms may have a stronger influence on behaviour (including speeding) than
injunctive norms (Cestac, Paran, & Delhomme, 2014; Elliott, Thomson, Robertson, Stephenson, & Wicks,
2013), particularly for young drivers (Mller & Haustein, 2014), as well as for health and social behaviours
more generally (Manning, 2009). An important finding relating to the different types of norms is that their
ability to influence our behaviour relates to the degree to which our attention is focussed on the particular
norm. Furthermore, if we are focussed on normative considerations, we are more likely to act in a norm
consistent manner (Elliott, 2001a). For example, if the descriptive norm relating to the proportion of people
who do not speed is brought to our attention via in-vehicle communication (e.g., radio, GPS audio message)
or via external communication (e.g., billboard on the roadside), that norm is likely to take our attention and
become salient.
A number of studies have suggested that providing information indicating that the majority of people engage
in the desired behaviour can produce positive behavioural impacts (De Pelsmacker & Janssens, 2007;
Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011; Van Houten & Nau, 1983). More information about the studies using variable
message signs to achieve behavioural change in relation to speeding can be found in section 4.3.2. Thus, it
is argued that future campaigns could include focus on challenging perceived social norms, such that
compliance with speed limits becomes the perceived normative behaviour. Examples of recent mass media
and social marketing campaigns that attempted to reframe social norms through positive modelling include
the New Zealand Legend/Ghost chips advertisement and the NSW RTAs Speeding. No one thinks big of
you campaign (see the table in Appendix F for more detail).
Entertainment versus education value of a message
Research has suggested that entertaining content is preferred compared to instructional or educational
content, and that this is particularly true for content delivered online (Lister, Vance, Royne, Hanson, &
Barnes, 2013). In addition, there is evidence to suggest that information containing humour gets forwarded
to others within the social network more often than information containing other types of emotion (Hseish,
Hsieh, & Tang, 2012). Lister and colleagues (2013) argue that a particularly effective approach to social
marketing campaigns, coined the Laugh Model, is to ensure messages are primarily entertaining, with the
public health message presented in a more subtle and discreet manner. This approach is argued to be more
effective in gaining a captive audience, resulting in messages being more susceptible not only to initial
viewing, but also sharing within and between social networks. Synder (2007) outlines a number of message
presentation characteristics that may assist with ensuring a message has entertainment value, including:
being creative and innovative,

regularly refreshing message content, and
branding the campaign or including jingles and/or other content that captures the attention of the target
audience and enhances the ease of remembering the message.
One example of this type of approach is the Dumb ways to die campaign from Victorias Metro Trains (see
Appendix F for further detail). The campaign, which was released in November 2012, has amassed a
staggering 90.7 million views on YouTube. In addition, the campaign is associated with hundreds of press
mentions, with the video being shared, covered and parodied extensively (Moses, 2012). The song used as
part of the campaign also made the top ten on iTunes (Dumas, 2012), despite being freely available. This
campaign represents a unique blend of safety information (avoiding danger around trains) and innovative,
entertaining content that has enjoyed unprecedented exposure internationally. It is unique in that it was the
first transportation safety-related campaign to use music and lyrics to convey the message, rather than music
being simply an add on to message content. Further, the campaign followed a highly unconventional path of
a lengthy format (3 minutes), with the actual safety related content only appearing towards the end of the 3
minutes. However, despite these high levels of exposure and awareness of the campaign and its originality
and uniqueness in design and content delivery, its ability to influence safer behaviours around trains is not
clear because it is yet to be evaluated.
The role of efficacy in relation to threat
Self-efficacy has also been shown to be an important factor contributing to message involvement and
effectiveness, such that individuals must feel they have the capacity to adopt the resolving actions
recommended as part of the message. From a theoretical perspective, this aligns with the Extended Parallel
Process Model ([EPPM]; Kim Witte, 1992) which proposes that there are four key cognitive constructs that
help us to understand the likelihood that a fear-based message will succeed or fail. These constructs relate
to two appraisals, a threat appraisal and a coping appraisal. The threat appraisal includes perceived
susceptibility and perceived severity of a threat while the coping appraisal includes response efficacy and
message self-efficacy. Research has shown that all four of these constructs are positively associated with
message rejection and furthermore, that the principles of the EPPM are applicable to positive as well as
negative emotions (Lewis et al., 2013a).
Dissemination characteristics
Message exposure
Exposure has been argued to be an important aspect of message involvement (Hornik & Kelly, 2007;
Snyder, 2007; Wundersitz et al., 2010). According to this research, delivering a campaign at a sufficient level
of exposure increases the likelihood that members of the target audience will not only hear the message, but
hear it multiple times (i.e., repetition), hear it at a time they are susceptible to process it, and discuss it within
their social networks. This last point demonstrates how the dissemination of a message can reach incidental
audiences, potentially influencing social norms regarding the behaviour. Thus, there appears to be utility in
developing campaigns that encourage sharing of the message between members of the target audience
(i.e., peer-to-peer), such as through social media or communication technology (Hoekstra & Wegman, 2011).
Examples of this approach include Dumb ways to die, as well as the Phone legends and Yellow card
direct marketing campaigns (see Appendix F for further detail). However, it should be noted that evaluations
of these approaches may rely only upon metrics such as message recall or recognition or the extent to which
an advertisement may be liked by people and not upon attitudinal or behavioural change.
In the contemporary communication landscape, there are more options for message dissemination than has
been possible previously. Evidence suggests that using multiple message delivery mediums can enhance
the likelihood of exposure among the target audience (Hornik & Kelly, 2007; Wundersitz et al., 2010). It is
also argued that delivering the message through multiple mediums increases the perception that numerous
sources proscribe to the same message and that the issue is of social importance, in turn increasing the
likelihood that the content will be perceived as legitimate and credible (Hornik & Kelly, 2007). As such,
message credibility has been argued as being critical for persuasive effectiveness (Snyder, 2007).
Given the importance of situational factors on speeding behaviour, it seems appropriate to explore the
potential of outdoor advertising (e.g., billboards, bus stops, inside venues) as part of a campaign. Recent
meta-analytic evidence has suggested that such approaches are an effective component in drink driving
campaigns, highlighting that the target audience is presented with the message at times when they are
susceptible to take the message on board (Phillips, Ulleberg, & Vaa, 2011). A similar approach could be
adopted by targeting advertising along routes with known speed-related problems.
The role of technology in message dissemination
The delivery medium of a message is also important, and as noted above, many avenues are now available
to communicate messages to the intended audience. It has been noted that traditional road safety
advertising via media such as television, print media, radio and static roadside advertising is being overtaken
by a transition to broader campaigns that include the internet, digital marketing and direct marketing
(Faulks, 2011: p.34), and this tendency is particularly the case for younger adults. Understanding more about
the different message mediums and which approach is most suitable for reaching the intended audience will
be key to finding the most efficient and effective ways of communicating across target audiences (Lewis et
al., 2009).
It has been noted that this shift in the way campaigns are delivered is associated with increased interactivity
and direct participation of the target population (e.g., social media, forums, communication technologies),
which can enhance the persuasiveness of the message (Faulks, 2011; Murray & Lewis, 2011). In particular,
campaigns employing social media are particularly interactive, given that they encourage two-way
communication (Murray & Lewis, 2011). However, it is noted that a clear direction and objective is required
when developing social media campaigns, as well as choosing the appropriate channels for each campaign
objective (Murray & Lewis, 2011; Prince, 2012). Examples of more interactive campaigns, including social
marketing in the digital arena include Dumb ways to die, as well as the Phone legends and Yellow card
direct marketing campaigns (see Appendix F).
4.2 Community-based behaviour change initiatives

4.2.1 Speed limit reduction initiatives
Many have argued that the setting of speed limits involves a trade-off between mobility and safety (Fildes et
al., 2005). However, it has been noted that an acceptance of death and injury as part of mobility is a unique
characteristic of road transport, with other popular forms of mobility (e.g., air travel) placing significantly
greater emphasis on issues of safety (Archer, Fotheringham, Symmons, & Corben, 2008). The reduction of
speed limits in urban, metropolitan and residential areas represents one of the most straightforward and
cost-effective approaches to reducing road trauma (Archer et al., 2008; McLean & Anderson, 2008).
Research has shown that reducing speed limits typically produces reductions in mean vehicle speeds, which
subsequently has positive impacts on crash frequency and severity, in particular fatal and serious injury
crashes and crashes occurring at intersections (De Pauw, Daniels, Thierie, & Brijs, 2014). However it should
be noted that reductions in mean speeds are not always commensurate to the reduction in the speed limit
(i.e., average speeds may be above the reduced speed limit).
It has been suggested that particularly vulnerable road users, namely pedestrians and cyclists, may benefit
most from lowered speed limits in urban areas. That is, it has been argued that lowered speed limits
encourage better and safer forms of interaction between different types of road users, which in turn should
lead to a more attractive and liveable environment (Archer et al., 2008: p.45). The safety impacts of reduced
vehicle speeds on pedestrian survivability have been highlighted in previous research. Specifically,
pedestrian survivability has been reported as being 95% at speeds of 20mph, reducing to 60% at 30mph,
20% at 40mph and less than 1% at 50mph (Pasanen, 1992 in Leaf & Preusser, 1999). Moreover, it has been
estimated that a 5km/h reduction in vehicle speeds in urban areas would be associated with a 30% reduction
in fatal pedestrian collisions (McLean, Anderson, Farmer, Lee, & Brooks, 1994). Indeed, this research was
the basis for the long-running Wipe Off 5 campaign in Victoria. More recent research has also confirmed
this circumstance (Corben, D'Elia, & Healy, 2006; Devlin, Hoareau, Logan, Corba, & Oxley, 2010).
Numerous examples exist in Australia and elsewhere of community-based initiatives aimed at creating public
demand for lower residential speed limits. In the City of Unley in South Australia, a citywide 40km/h speed
limit for all local streets was introduced in 1999, following successful trials in selected areas since 1991
(Banawiroon & Yue, 2003). The initiative was associated with mean and 85th percentile speeds close to
40km/h during most weekday day-time periods, although speeds were generally slightly higher during nighttime and weekend periods. Moreover, the additional impact of engineering and enforcement on travel
speeds was noted. The reduced speed limits were also noted as having positive effects on crash rates
(Woolley & Dyson, 2003). Finally, it was noted that the reduced speed limits had limited impact on
discouraging excess vehicle flow from arterial and major collector roads during periods of peak capacity,
suggesting a need for additional traffic management initiatives for these roads (Banawiroon & Yue, 2003).
To reduce crashes occurring on the Mornington Peninsula, Victoria, the Mornington Peninsula Shire
introduced the Peninsula Safer Speeds project. As part of this project, speed limits were reduced by 10km/h
or 20km/h on 100km/h rural roads and by 10km/h on 50km/h residential roads within several areas of the
shire in 2012. Evaluation of community responses to such changes revealed high public support for these
reduced speed limits (Pyta & Pratt, 2013). Of the 150 community members partaking in the second wave of
the telephone interviews, 83% perceived that the reduced residential speed limits were appropriate, with
81% stating that they supported the reduced speed limit of 40km/h. Further, 70% of respondents supported
reducing the residential speed limit to 40km/h in other parts of the shire. Similar findings were also reported
for the reduced 100km/h zones, with 90% of respondents supporting the 80km/h speed zones and 93% of
respondents supporting the 90km/h speed zones. In addition, 76% of respondents supported reducing the
rural speed zones in other areas of the shire.
Lower urban speed limits have also been evaluated in New South Wales (RTA, 2000 in Dyson, Taylor,
Woolley, & Zito, 2001). Specifically, the evaluation reported reductions in mean and 85th percentile speeds
and a 22% reduction in crash risk equating to 262 fewer crashes and social cost savings of $6.5 million. In
addition, community support for the initiative was reported to be high (80%) with the vast majority of drivers
(92%) perceiving the initiative to be associated with improved road safety. Reduced mean speeds
associated with 50km/h urban speed limits have also been reported in Queensland (Dyson et al., 2001). The
impact of extending 50km/h residential speed limits to include urban arterial roads in Australia has also been
estimated (Haworth, Ungers, Vulcan, & Corben, 2001). The report found that the initiative would be very
cost-effective (excluding costs associated with increased travel times), with substantial reductions in both
casualty and property damage crashes and modest reductions in vehicle emissions.
In Europe, the 30km/h making streets liveable initiative for lower residential speed limits was launched
seeking 1,000,000 signatures from citizens within EU member states, such that the European Commission
would subsequently be obligated to consider the proposal under the Citizens Initiative scheme (Aghte,
2014). While the initiative fell well short of the required number of signatures (46,449), it reportedly
succeeded in putting the initiative on the political agenda, establishing a network of individuals and
organisations dedicated to further exploring lower residential speed limits, and produced actual change, with
six towns throughout Europe either enacting or discussing the adoption of 30km/h residential speed limits
(Aghte, 2014).
In the United Kingdom, the 20s Plenty for Us campaign is a grassroots movement producing growing
demand from communities for lower speed limits in residential areas (i.e., 20mph as the default speed limit
on residential and urban streets). This demand has been assisted by a non-profit organisation which
provides advocacy and support for communities to demand changes in speed limits from their governmental
agencies, with rapid expansion of areas with 20mph default limits throughout Great Britain (Toy, Tapp,
Musselwhite, & Davis, 2014). The use of the phrase 20s is Plenty Where People Live has been used to
empower communities to advocate on their own behalf to attain lower speed limits and, in turn, encourage
them to change their own driving speeds. A recent survey of driver perceptions regarding 20mph speed
limits in the United Kingdom found that only 31% of drivers reported agreement with 20mph limits in all urban
areas, with support lower among males and young drivers (The Institute of Advanced Motorists, 2014).
However, there was strong support for the adoption of lower urban speed limits in particular areas, such as
near schools (94%), and to a lesser extent, in areas frequented by pedestrians (37%) and crash black-spots
(27%). Encouragingly, many drivers acknowledged the potential benefits associated with 20mph urban
speed limits for improving the safety of vulnerable road users, including pedestrians (76%), and, to a lesser
extent, cyclists (21%). Interestingly, only 44% of respondents suggested they would like a 20mph speed limit
on the street on which they reside, despite 62% suggesting that reduced urban speed limits were either a
medium or high road safety priority. Additionally, Living Streets, formally known as the Pedestrians
Association, is a registered Scottish charity which was formed in 1929 to campaign for pedestrian safety.
Since then, this national charity has influenced highway codes, speed limits, and various government
policies which aim to protect the safety of pedestrians. While it is difficult to determine the effect that Living
Streets has had on increasing pedestrian safety due to a lack of formal evaluation, this charity has been
successful in increasing public walking levels (e.g., Hertfordshire schools project increased walking from
54% to 71%) and improving the safety of pedestrians (e.g., influencing public policies which aim to protect
pedestrian safety; Living Streets, 2012).
In Canada, the reduction of residential speed limits in Edmonton, from 50km/h to 40km/h revealed
statistically significant reductions in mean vehicle operating speeds and speed variation, which were
observed during both day-time and night-time and weekday and weekend periods (Islam, El-Basyouny, &
Ibrahim, 2014). While overall compliance with the reduced speed limits was reportedly low, the initiative was
effective in reducing excessive vehicle speeds (i.e., 15km/h or more over the limit) and compliance was
shown to improve over time.
Community-based programs have also been designed to increase compliance with urban and residential
speed limits. In Rockhampton in Queensland, stickers displaying a 50km/h roundel and the added message
of in my street have been placed on many wheelie bins, in an effort to remind drivers to slow down on local
streets (Rockhampton Regional Council, 2014). To date, no evaluation is available to determine the impact
of this program.
In a review of the impact of lower speed limits in urban and metropolitan areas, Archer and colleagues
(2008: p.45) noted that achieving community acceptance and support for speed limit reductions is critical, as
is the need to encourage better safety awareness by changing attitudes toward speeding and giving greater
consideration to the needs of less prioritized road users. Research has shown high levels of public support
associated with reductions to the default urban speed limit in Australia from 60km/h to 50km/h, with some
suggesting further reductions are possible by expanding the 50km/h default to other types of roads in urban
areas and reducing speed limits on residential streets even further (i.e., 20-30km/h) (Archer et al., 2008).
In Japan, a study investigating perceptions of 30km/h speed limits on residential streets revealed that drivers
typically had positive beliefs about their ability to comply with reduced limits but almost all admitted to having
sped in such zones and reported intentions to do so again in the future, particularly as a way to reduce their
travel time (Dinh & Kubota, 2013). Encouragingly, many drivers reported understanding the increased crash
risk associated with higher traffic speeds and understood that reduced residential speed limits have
important safety benefits for vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians. However, drivers highlighted the
need for 30km/h residential speed limits to appear credible, and they also suggested a need for mass media
and social marketing campaigns or engineering measures. Participants in that research also reported
difficulty in driving at slower speeds (i.e., 30km/h) (Dinh & Kubota, 2013), which replicated findings from a UK
study where the majority of drivers surveyed reported their agreement with experiencing difficulties in
manoeuvring a modern car at speeds slower than 56km/h/35mph (Stradling et al., 2003).
A number of ancillary benefits of reduced urban and residential speed limits have also been noted including
reductions in fuel consumption, vehicle emissions and noise and vehicle maintenance costs, as well as only
marginal impacts on journey travel time (Archer et al., 2008; Woolley, Dyson, Taylor, Zito, & Stazic, 2002).
However, a modelling study conducted in Germany highlighted the importance of considering the spatial
characteristics of a city, such that it was argued that uniform speed limit reductions across an entire urban
area may not be the optimal approach for improving safety and amenity (Nitzsche & Tscharaktschiew, 2013).
Instead, it was suggested that restricting speeds only in the city centre and not on suburban connector
roads, may produce the greatest positive impacts.
Finally, a number of health organisations in Australia (e.g., Heart Foundation) have voiced their support for
reduced residential and urban speed limits, suggesting that such initiatives have important implications for
physical activity (Garrard, 2008b; Kemp, 2014). Specifically, they argue that reduced speed limits improve
the safety of vulnerable road users (i.e., older adults and young children), which in turns increases the
likelihood of active transportation, such as walking and cycling. The following section reviews communitybased initiatives aimed at adopting a holistic approach to speed management, taking into account initiatives
such as active transportation and eco-driving.
4.2.2 Holistic approaches (active transportation and eco driving)

In a series of papers (May et al., 2008; May, Tranter, & Warn, 2011), it is argued that a cultural shift is
required regarding current approaches to mobility management, including speed management. Specifically,
the authors argue that current paradigms are characterised by a dominance of motorised transportation. As
was highlighted earlier, they suggest that a holistic, social ecological model for reconnecting road safety
with communities that value social connectedness, quality of life and slower ways of being is required (May
et al., 2008: p.395). Essentially, this approach argued that change needs to be focussed at the community
and societal level, rather than at the level of the individual driver.
A number of innovative approaches for achieving speed management under a more holistic, social
ecological have been suggested (May et al., 2008, 2011). These include:
Encouraging alternative transportation, in particular active transportation (e.g., walking, cycling), in order
to reduce the volume of motorised vehicles and promote health and fitness;
Highlighting the environmental benefits associated with slower speeds, such as a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions and noise (i.e., eco-driving); and
Improving neighbourhood planning and community cohesion, such as emphasising environmental

protection and sustainability, efficient use of public space, social equity, a slower pace of living and an
improved quality of life.
Two of these approaches, active transportation and eco-driving, will be discussed in more detail below.
Active transportation
Active transportation, which includes walking, cycling and using public transportation, represents an
approach to alternative transportation that is both sustainable and beneficial for promoting health and
general well-being through increased physical activity. Specifically, advocates have highlighted the social
cost savings associated with a lower reliance on motorised transportation and the positive health outcomes
associated with active transport, and have called for increased support for such initiatives, including the
design of cities to promote healthy spaces and associated infrastructure (e.g., walking trails, cycle routes,
etc.), reduced residential and urban speed limits, as well as programs and social marketing campaigns to
promote active transportation (Carver, 2011; Garrard, 2008b).
Various initiatives have been introduced in an attempt to encourage active transportation. For example, the
concept of the Walking School Bus, where students walk to and from school under adult supervision, aims to
encourage active transportation and enhanced physical activity, as well as safety education (e.g., crossing
behaviours, stranger danger, etc.), while also representing a shift away from the increasing reliance parents
have on motorised transport as the means for getting their children to school (May et al., 2008). This initiative
has been implemented in various places in Australia, New Zealand, North America and England
(Brake.org.uk, 2014; May et al., 2008).
In addition, community-based behaviour change programs have also been developed to encourage greater
reliance on walking and cycling as primary forms of transportation. In Australia, the TravelSmart program has
been introduced to reduce the reliance on motorised transport and enhance the ability for individuals to make
smart choices regarding active transportation, in turn enjoying a number of environmental and personal
health benefits (James & Brog, 2001). The program involves numerous maps, publications and other
resources to assist individuals, households, schools, workplaces and communities to travel smarter.
Eco-driving
Eco-driving refers to driving in a manner that aims to reduce fuel consumption, vehicle emissions and traffic
crashes. Numerous behaviours are associated with eco-driving, from vehicle performance and handling
(e.g., acceleration, speed, etc.), to more broad behaviours (e.g., towing, vehicle maintenance, etc.).
Research has highlighted the potential benefits associated with eco-driving, including reduced vehicle
running costs (e.g., fuel costs, maintenance) and reductions in vehicle emissions and noise (Andrieu &
Pierre, 2012; Barkenbus, 2010; Barth & Boriboonsomsin, 2009; Beusen et al., 2009; Graves & Jeffreys,
2012). For instance, Bath and Boriboonsomsin (2009) report that drivers can save up to 10-20% in fuel costs
when performing eco-driving strategies (e.g., avoiding accelerating quickly). Further, eco-driving has been
reported to reduce fuel consumption by 7-20% (Ando & Nishihori, 2011; Larue, Malik, Rakotonirainy, &
Demmel, 2014) and, as such, reduces carbon emissions. Additionally, research has found some evidence
that eco-driving can positively impact the behaviour of following motorists and has little effect on travel
journey time (Ando & Nishihori, 2011; Bath & Boriboonsomsin, 2009).
Research has shown that drivers under time-pressures are more likely to engage in speeding (Cugnet,
Miller, Anceaux, & Naveteur, 2013). Moreover, numerous studies have highlighted time-saving biases
among drivers, whereby they incorrectly overestimated the amount of time saved by driving faster,
particularly in lower speed areas (Cugnet et al., 2013; Debnath, Haworth, Rakotonirainy, Graves, &
Jeffreys, 2013; Peer, 2011). In addition, research has suggested that drivers typically have low perceptions
of the impact of increased vehicle speeds on vehicle emissions (Debnath et al., 2013). These findings have
important implications for eco-driving, suggesting that highlighting the non-safety benefits of choosing lower
vehicle speeds (e.g., limited impact on travel time, reduced vehicle emissions) could prove an effective way
to encourage slower speeds.
4.2.3 Incentive/rewards schemes

A number of road safety practitioners have argued that incentives and rewards for safe driving should be
explored (Bailey, 2011; Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2007). Incentive schemes aim to encourage safer road
use by motivating people to perform the desired behaviour when they would not otherwise do so, whereas
reward schemes can be considered as providing a reward after a period of safe driving behaviour in order to
reinforce the desired behaviour (e.g., discounts on car insurance for infringement-free driving). Recent
research has revealed that both rewards schemes (Bailey, 2011) and incentives schemes (Rowden et al.,
2013) have the potential to produce positive road safety outcomes.
In a review of the literature on rewards programs, Bailey (2011) found that the use of rewards instead of
punishment can effectively achieve behaviour change. Specifically, extrinsic rewards were argued to invoke
only short-term behaviour change (e.g., behavioural modification limited to while the reward is offered),
which was not typically internalised. However, the author noted that this is likely due to the nature of the
reward and that, to date, in the road safety domain, when used with technology (Intelligent speed adaptation
[ISA]), rewards appear to have been monotone in administration. Other research suggests intermittent
reinforcement schedules have more success in inducing enduring behavioural change and as such,
represent a worthy area for further research in the speeding domain (Bailey, 2011). It was further suggested
by Bailey (2011) that an optimal approach may be to use both rewards and punishments in a complementary
manner, with a critical factor being that rewards are perceived as salient by drivers, such that a range of
rewards may be required to target specific road user groups (e.g., young drivers). The use of in-vehicle
technology to provide immediate feedback to drivers was supported, as was the immediate provision of
rewards. Finally, it was suggested that the impact of driving exposure, punishment avoidance and other risky
behaviours should be monitored through the use of technology, to ensure provision of rewards only to
motorists driving in an appropriate manner.
Rowden and colleagues (2013) reviewed the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of incentive
schemes and found that incentive programs can influence a range of safe driving behaviours, as well as ecodriving. In addition, the review found that young drivers and fleet drivers may be particularly susceptible to
benefitting from incentive programs. It was once again argued that in-vehicle technology represented an
effective approach to monitoring behaviour in order to assess eligibility for incentives. Potentially effective
incentives were noted as including monetary incentives, insurance discounts or token economies, and that
partnering with organisations in the public and private sectors may facilitate the efficiency of incentives
schemes. Barriers to such initiatives were listed as including privacy concerns, potential driver distraction,
and restrictions associated with in-vehicle technology (e.g., the availability of sufficient digital speed zone
maps).
More recently, Mullen, Maxwell, and Bdard (2015) used a driving simulator to examine if a feedback or a
token economy (gift card) could reduce speeding among young men (N = 28). The findings revealed that
young males assigned to the token/feedback and token only groups were significantly less likely to spend
time driving above 90.0km/h and 93.5km/h than the control and feedback only groups. Compared to the
token only group, the combined token/feedback group had a lower percentage of time spent above the
90.0km/h and 93.5km/h speed limits. Based on these findings, it could be argued that a combination of both
incentives and feedback may be more effective at reducing speeding behaviour of young males than
incentives alone. This issue is further discussed in Section 4.3.1.
4.2.4 Gamification and mobile phone applications

Gamification is an innovative approach, often involving elements of incentives and rewards programs that
can motivate behaviour change through competition in order to maximise engagement with a program or
campaign (Schroeter, Oxtoby, & Johnson, 2014). Gamification has been primarily used in a
business/marketing context in order to motivate behaviour change and has been reported to have positive
effects on behaviour (Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014). Hamari et al. (2014), for instance, reviewed findings
from 24 studies investigating the effects of gamification and found that it had positive effects on both
psychological (e.g., enjoyment and engagement) and behavioural (e.g., increased learning and performance)
outcomes. Further, and in a road safety context, Schroeter et al. (2014) argued that gamification may reduce
risk-taking driving behaviours for high risk population groups, such as young males. Mobile phone
applications (apps) which engage the user are a popular approach within this sphere. While there are, to
date, very few formal evaluations of gamification initiatives, a number of promising programs have been
developed recently and are currently being trialled.
A simple gimmick using gamification principles was part of Volkswagens Fun Theory initiative. A Speed
Camera Lottery was designed and trialled in Stockholm, Sweden (Volkswagen, 2010). The initiative involved
a speed camera placed on a 30km/h stretch of road which captured a photo of every vehicle that passed it.
Speeding offenders were fined and the fines were pooled into the lottery which was used to reward selected
drivers who passed the site at or below the speed limit. A total of 24,857 vehicles passed the camera over a
three day period with a reduction in average speeds reported from 32km/h to 25km/h. This outcome
suggests improved compliance even where baseline compliance was relatively high. However, while
speeding decreased during the trial, it returned to almost the previous levels after the trial ceased (ITS
International, 2011). This return to regular driving speeds after removal of an incentive is an important
consideration in behaviour change programs.
Mobile phone applications are increasing rapidly and offer the opportunity to engage people in innovative
ways regarding monitoring on-road behaviour of self and others. Some of the apps released recently that
offer potential for enhancing prosocial/safer driving include:
Samsung S-Drive (Newcastle, NSW): specialised cradle with near field communication (NFC) technology
automatically launches S-Drive app and switches phone to safe driving mode (voice-activation only);
alerts driver when they are speeding or touches their phone, as well as real-time traffic and weather
information; earn points for each kilometre travelled to redeem for rewards, such as movie tickets, tablets,
and ski trips (partnered with companies for the prizes); can create three-person Drive Teams with friends
who also use S-Drive in order to earn special team points for even more prizes, in an attempt to harness
positive peer pressure (Baker, 2014).
CityGT released by TAC Victoria: designed to look like a regular driving game rather than a road safety
campaign (which was raising awareness of the risks associated with distracted driving when using a
mobile phone while driving); the public launch of the app reached thousands of people; it has been
downloaded more than 30,000 times; was ranked in the hottest apps on iTunes and was one of 2009s
most popular free apps on the Australian iTunes store (Public Relations Institute of Australia, 2010 in
Murray & Lewis, 2011).
Road Wars app (USA) released November 2013. The Road Wars app is targeted towards younger
drivers and was designed to encourage safer driving habits. The application awards virtual currency for
safe driving behaviours (e.g., complying with the posted speed limit) and reduces this currency for unsafe
driving behaviours (e.g., speeding, excessive acceleration etc.). The application enables users to
compare their driving data with their Facebook friends.
The Australian Associated Motor Insurers (AAMI) Safe Driver AppTM - released by AAMI in December
2014 (see: http://www.aami.com.au). The application was designed to encourage safe driving and uses
GPS technology to assess factors associated with driving behaviour (e.g., vehicle speed, duration of trips,
acceleration, and braking behaviours). The application calculates a score out of 100 that rates the safety
of the journey (i.e., a higher score equates to safer driving behaviours). The application also provides
information to the driver on where they were exceeding the posted speed limit and when hard braking
occurred. Although the application is available to be downloaded by all Australian road users, current
AAMI customers can receive free road side assistance if they have received a score of 60 points or
higher and meet the additional eligibility criteria (e.g., drive at least 300km or 10 journeys over the
previous 180 days).
Speed Advisor smart phone application released by NSW Centre for Road Safety in February 2014.
The application was designed to reduce speeding behaviour and features a range of features including,
but not limited to: speed zone information and auditory warnings when exceeding the posted speed limit.
The speed advisor app is compatible with both iPhone and Android devices and in the first two months of
being available on a smartphone device was downloaded 43,000 times (Costabile, Wall, Vecovski, &
Bailey, 2014).
Teen Driver Support System (TDSS; University of Minnesota, USA) currently in development. The
TDSS (not an app) is a small device which is installed on the vehicles dashboard. The device generates
reports about traffic violations (e.g., speeding behaviour), prevents mobile devices (e.g., phones) being
used while driving and can control the volume of the car stereo. If young drivers do not adhere to the road
rules, a text message is sent to their parent(s). Parents also have the ability to view their childs driving
behaviour via the associated website.
4.2.5 Community-based programs targeted at specific groups

Finally, there are a number of groups within the community who may particularly benefit from being the target
of community-based behaviour change programs, namely fleets in an occupational setting, and schools. In a
broad sense, it could be argued that there is a need for increased corporate responsibility regarding road
safety, such as having key performance indicators and other stipulations within contractual agreements
regarding safe driving behaviour. As will be discussed in Section 4.3, the use of technology such as
intelligent speed adaptation may assist in the development of schemes for providing feedback to
occupational drivers and providing incentives for not speeding; however recent research has suggested that
even feedback programs that do not include incentives can have significant positive impacts on vehicle
speeds of occupational drivers (Newnam, Lewis, & Warmerdam, 2014).
As noted previously, the typically habitual nature of speeding makes it a difficult behaviour to change (De
Pelsmacker & Janssens, 2007; Richard et al., 2012, 2013), particularly given the fact that attitudes toward
road safety develop during childhood and adolescence, and thus are engrained and more resistant to
change by the time an individual learns to drive (Waylen & McKenna, 2002). Thus, it is argued that
attempting to create positive attitudes towards road safety among youth by engraining social norms should
be a focus of community-based behavioural change programs. While it is acknowledged that there is limited
evidence of effectiveness for driver training amongst this group (Beanland, Goode, Salmon, & Lenn, 2013;
Christie, 2001) and mixed evidence regarding the effectiveness of school-based driver education (Lonero &
Mayhew, 2010), it is suggested that future research should seek to explore innovative approaches to
targeting interventions at this age group, such as the use of technology and social media for delivering mass
media and educational campaigns, and active transportation initiatives (e.g., Walking Buses).
4.3 Intelligent transportation systems

Recent technological advancements represent a potentially useful avenue for developing innovative ways to
create or increase demand for safer speeds. That is, intelligent transportation systems can be utilised to
either remind drivers of the general need to drive safely, alert them of unsafe behaviour in real-time, and in
some instances actively regulate their behaviour. Such systems approaches may have particular applicability
for encouraging safer speeds among high-risk groups, such as young males. Indeed, previous research has
noted that many young males report that only technological approaches that actively control their speeds are
likely to influence their driving speeds (Lewis, Watson, White, et al., 2013).
4.3.1 Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA)

Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) systems use a range of in-vehicle electronic devices to enable the speed
of vehicles to be monitored, and in some instances automatically regulated. The technology can operate at
varying degrees of complexity, but all systems require the use of global positioning systems (GPS) and
digital speed mapping. In addition, systems differ in regards to their level of regulation over the speed of the
vehicle, from voluntary systems that simply warn drivers through audio and visual cues of their speeding
behaviour, to more controlling systems that actively influence the vehicle (i.e., deceleration) in order to
regulate speed (Carsten, 2012). In this sense, the technology, if implemented across the entire network in a
controlling manner, has the capability of making speeding virtually impossible. However, the level of
community acceptability of such an extreme, controlling option is an important issue for consideration. For
instance, concerns may arise from the general public about privacy, enduring records of speeding behaviour,
ownership of the driving data and/or inaccuracy of recorded data. Such concerns would need to be
addressed if ISA systems were implemented. Despite these issues, recent research has reported that the
ISA systems are one of the most effective systems at reducing on-road fatalities (Vaa, Assum, & Elvik.
2014).
Overall, research has reported significant reductions in vehicle speeds and the proportion of speeding
behaviour with the use of ISA technology. However, these findings have been observed as being limited to
when the technology is fitted to the vehicle, with no sustained effect evident after the technology is removed
(Chorlton & Conner, 2012; Ghadiri, Prasetijo, Sadullah, Hoseinpour, & Sahranavard, 2013; Lahrmann,
Agerholm, Tradisauskas, Berthelsen, & Harms, 2012; Lai & Carsten, 2012; Regan et al., 2006; Vrhelyi &
Mkinen, 2001; Vlassenroot et al., 2007; Young, Regan, Triggs, Jontof-Hutter, & Newstead, 2010; Young et
al., 2013). The technology has also been found to have significant potential effectiveness when used as a
sanctioning tool for repeat and high-range speeding offenders, although effects are once again restricted to
while the devices are fitted to the vehicle (van der Pas, Kessels, Veroude, & van Wee, 2014; van der Pas,
Kessels, Vlassenroot, & van Wee, 2014; Young et al., 2013). Young and colleagues (2013), for instance,
reported that despite the effectiveness of ISA devices in reducing speeding behaviour for repeat speeding
offenders, the devices did not influence drivers attitudes towards speeding and, once removed, drivers
reverted back to their previous driving patterns (i.e., exceeding posted speed limits). Thus, and as concluded
by Young et al. (2013), ISA devices need to remain active in order to reduce the speeding behaviour of
repeat offenders. Agerholm (2009) concluded that ISA devices are more effective for drivers who are
motivated to comply with the speed limits compared to drivers who are not motivated to comply.
Market penetration is commonly perceived to be a fundamental barrier to widespread implementation of ISA
systems. Specifically, while some segments of the driving population have shown a willingness to install
such devices in their vehicles, a number of political, social and technological factors represent significant
barriers to wide-scale implementation (Carsten, 2012; van der Pas, Marchau, Walker, van Wee, &
Vlassenroot, 2012). Nonetheless, research has suggested that when ISA systems are perceived to be
reliable, acceptability of the approach is reasonably high (Carsten, 2012; Garvill, Marell, & Westin, 2003;
Marell & Westin, 1999; Regan et al., 2005; Vrhelyi & Mkinen, 2001; Young et al., 2010). This is particularly
true when the adherence with the system is accompanied with meaningful incentives (Chorlton, Hess,
Jamson, & Wardman, 2012) and when the potential personal and societal benefits of the systems are clearly
articulated (Molin & Brookhuis, 2007).
Interestingly, perceived acceptability has been observed as differing, depending on vehicle and driver type.
That is, research suggests greater support for mandatory ISA in relation to speeding offenders, as well as
public transport and commercial vehicles, and lower levels of support for mandatory installation in private
passenger vehicles, with more informative or advisory systems preferred in such instances (Browne, 2014;
Molin & Van Den Bos, 2014; Warner, zkan, & Lajunen, 2010). However, research has also shown that
when such schemes are voluntary, drivers whose behaviour is most in need of change typically do not
participate, or tend to override the system more often (Agerholm, Tradisauskas, Juhl, Berthelsen, &
Lahrmann, 2012; Jamson, 2006; Lahrmann, Agerholm, Tradisauskas, Nss, et al., 2012; Lai & Carsten,
2012; Lai, Hjlmdahl, Chorlton, & Wiklund, 2010; Warner et al., 2010). Indeed, a Danish study showed poor
recruitment rates associated with a Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) insurance incentive scheme aimed at young
drivers, such that only 50 drivers (from 11,400 approached) signed up for the offer of a 30% discount
associated with safe driving (Lahrmann, Agerholm, Tradisauskas, Nss, et al., 2012). Thus, a fundamental
barrier to widespread implementation of ISA systems appears to be increasing the demand for installation,
particularly among the most at-risk drivers.
In the United Kingdom, it was estimated that mandatory implementation of ISA at a national level would be
associated with a 37-59% reduction in fatal crashes and a reduction in injury crashes of between 20-36%.
These estimates were contingent upon the complexity of the ISA system. The cost-benefit analysis indicated
that benefit-cost ratios ranged between 7.9 and 15.4 (Carsten & Tate, 2005). While the reduction in social
costs associated with crashes reportedly represents 98% of the saving attributable to ISA, the approach has
also been estimated to produce important savings associated reductions in fuel costs and vehicle emissions
(Lai, Carsten, & Tate, 2012). Research has also suggested that sustained experiences with using ISA may
have the potential to produce changes to underlying attitudes toward speeding (Chorlton & Conner, 2012).
Specifically, the research found that, after prolonged experience with the technology, drivers reported
reductions in speeding intentions and beliefs regarding the time journey benefits associated with speeding,
although these changes in cognitions failed to translate into behaviour change.
The use of ISA systems may be particularly beneficial when enhanced with capabilities to warn drivers of
other high-risk driving situations, such as curve approach speeds (Jimnez, Liang, & Aparicio, 2012) and
vehicle headway (Merrikhpour, Donmez, & Battista, 2014). The TAC SafeCar Project in Victoria, where
vehicles were fitted with a suite of safety technologies including ISA, following distance warning, seat belt
reminders, daytime running lights and reverse collision warning, produced a number of positive changes in
behaviour including reductions in speeding, increased headway and greater restraint use (Regan et al.,
2006). Research investigating the potential for driver over-reliance on ISA systems is mixed, with some
studies showing increased distraction and engagement in other high-risk behaviours (Comte, 2000; Vrhelyi
& Mkinen, 2001), while others have failed to find evidence of increased cognitive demand on drivers
(Reagan & Bliss, 2013; Young et al., 2010).
A particularly interesting application of ISA involves the use of the technology for incentive schemes, in
particular those based on the PAYD principle (Hultkrantz, Nilsson, & Arvidsson, 2012). A number of
evaluations of ISA-incentive projects, including PAYD insurance-incentive schemes and fleet-safety penalty
schemes, have revealed that the provision of incentives can be effective in reducing speeding behaviour,
with some evidence of differential impacts depending on road type (Agerholm, Waagepetersen,
Tradisauskas, Harms, & Lahrmann, 2008; Bolderdijk, Knockaert, Steg, & Verhoef, 2011; Hultkrantz &
Lindberg, 2011; Reagan, Bliss, Van Houten, & Hilton, 2013; Stigson, Hagberg, Kullgren, & Krafft, 2014).
Moreover, a number of studies showed that more complex systems that monitored additional behaviours
(e.g., headway) also produced positive results on behaviour (Merrikhpour et al., 2014).
Of relevance to the discussion of normative influence in Section 2 is that ISA and gamification principles (see
Section 4.2.4) both have the potential to provide personalised normative feedback to drivers. Personalised
normative feedback refers to comparing ones own speeding behaviour to the speeding behaviour of the
general population (Fylan et al., 2006). Assessing speeding behaviour in the context of the general
population may result in drivers evaluating their own risky driving behaviour and consequently, may
encourage drivers to comply with the speed limit.
4.3.2 Dynamic vehicle-activated signs

A number of studies have investigated the implementation of dynamic vehicle-activated signs, including
those that display actual vehicle speeds and/or feedback messages (e.g., THANKS, SLOW DOWN).
Applications elsewhere in the world have shown some evidence of effectiveness, with greater behavioural
changes associated with those signs that provide some level of feedback, although the impacts on behaviour
dissipate quickly if the sign is removed (Gehlert, Schulze, & Schlag, 2012; Kalla et al., 2010; Sandberg,
Schoenecker, Sebastian, & Soler, 2008; Spiegel, Kalla, Spiegel, Brandt, & Strupp, 2010; Walter &
Broughton, 2011).
In addition, vehicle-activated variable message signs (VMS) which display relevant safety messages to
drivers engaging in risky behaviours have been shown to influence behaviour. Specifically, an installation of
the technology in Queensland to present penalty-related messages to drivers detected exceeding the speed
limit or following too closely produced a number of significant behavioural changes, including speed
reductions and increased vehicle headway (Schramm et al., 2012). Moreover, driver acceptance of the
messages was reported as being very high, with self-reported changes in behaviour found to be higher in
association with the speed-related messages (53%) compared to the headway-related messages (30%). The
importance of perceived credibility and relevance of the messages being displayed was argued as being
critical for effectiveness. However, more general use of VMS (e.g., non-vehicle-activated) has been found to
produce limited behavioural change (Tay & De Barros, 2010).
As noted earlier, there are some examples of providing feedback to drivers via VMS in order to attempt to
alter normative perceptions about the proportion of motorists who were speeding. For instance, a series of
experiments were undertaken in Canada to examine the influence of posting information about the
percentage of drivers complying with posted speed limits in the previous week on roadside message boards.
The information displayed to drivers was manipulated to indicate larger or smaller proportions of motorists
complying (Van Houten & Nau, 1981). Findings indicated consistently that as the reported percentage of
drivers complying with the speed limit increased, travel speeds of traffic passing the signs decreased and
this effect was sustained during a six-month follow up. Similar trials based on this concept have been
conducted more recently in Australia and New Zealand with mixed results (Harwood, 2001; Wrapson, Harre,
& Murrell, 2006). In New Zealand, motorists were given three types of feedback from roadside signage on a
stretch of road with a speed of 50 km/h: 1) the average speed of passing vehicles (to invoke social
comparison with speeds of other motorists), 2) a warning that speeds were being measured (to imply that
surveillance was being conducted), and 3) a combination of both types of message (to examine whether a
combination of messages was superior to one over the other) (Wrapson et al., 2006). The authors noted that
the primary aim of the study was to increase proportion of motorists travelling at or below 60 km/h (i.e., within
10 km/h of the posted 50 km/h limit). Results were positive in that the proportion of motorists travelling 60
km/h increased throughout the trial when compared to baseline data for each of the three messages
displayed, although not to the same extent as in the studies conducted by Van Houten and colleagues in
Canada in the 1980s. The authors concluded that these findings may reflect differences in the traffic culture
of New Zealand compared with Canada. They suggested that such signage may be most useful at locations
were small reductions in speed may assist in preventing crashes (e.g., blackspot locations) and also noted
the value in giving feedback about what other motorists are doing on the road as a means of providing
information with which to compare personal driving experiences with those of others. In addition, they
indicated that there may be value in considering the provision of information that could introduce goal setting
at a broader level. For instance, Van Houten and colleagues (1980) provided information about the highest
achievement to date during their experiment (e.g., Drivers not speeding yesterday 85%. Best record 85%).
Wrapson et al. (2006) did not provide this kind of information, but noted the potential for this to type of goal
setting to be incorporated in this type of road safety countermeasure, such that motorists not only receive
comparison data about what others are doing, but receive data that allows them to contribute to a larger,
community-based goal. Therefore, there is likely to be value in continuing to explore ways of providing
normative information about the prevalnce of speeding behaviour, as discussed in section 2.2.
4.4 Enforcement
While it is acknowledged that enforcement approaches are not the primary focus of this project, it is
nonetheless important to give a brief review of how these heavily relied upon approaches have shaped
speed management practices in the past, as well as innovative ways they may contribute into the future. A
brief summary will be provided regarding the more traditional speed enforcement practices followed by an
overview of recent innovative countermeasures, such as average (point-to-point) speed cameras. Finally, the
impact of enforcement tolerances and mass media campaigns that accompany enforcement efforts will be
discussed.
4.4.1 Effectiveness of police speed enforcement

Despite the widespread global use of speed cameras for speed management, there remains considerable
debate regarding the perceived effectiveness of such methods within the public sphere. Nonetheless,
notwithstanding the methodological limitations of existing research, the empirical evidence supporting speed
cameras and other forms of police speed enforcement is plentiful and consistently positive. Indeed, a
number of systematic reviews have demonstrated the effectiveness of speed cameras in reducing vehicle
speeds and traffic crash frequency and severity (Decina, Thomas, Srinivasan, & Staplin, 2007; Pilkington &
Sanjay, 2005; Thomas, Srinivasan, Decina, & Staplin, 2008; Wilson, Willis, Hendrikz, Le Brocque, & Bellamy,
2010), while other research conducted in Australia has highlighted the effectiveness of various speed
camera programs, including both mobile (Cameron, Newstead, Diamantopoulou, & Oxley, 2003; DElia,
Newstead, & Cameron, 2007; Delaney et al., 2003; Newstead, 2009) and fixed cameras (ARRB Group
Project Team, 2005; Diamantopoulou & Corben, 2001). Further, additional research has reported that fixed
digital speed and red light cameras are also effective at reducing crashes (Budd, Scully, & Newstead, 2011).
Budd et al. (2011) reviewed casualty crash data from 76 digital speed and red light camera intersection sites
in Victoria between 2000 and 2009. The authors estimated that for each year, the speed and red light
cameras would prevent 17 serious/ fatal crashes and 39 minor crashes.
A number of operational characteristics have been found to increase the effectiveness of speed camera
programs. For instance, highly intensive and randomly operated programs have been shown to increase the
unpredictability of operations, and in turn enhance program effectiveness (Leggett, 1997). Research has also
suggested that both overt and covert speed cameras are effective, and that a mixture of the two is optimal
(Delaney et al., 2003; DElia et al., 2007; Diamantopoulou & Cameron, 2002; Keall, Povey, & Frith, 2001,
2002). While covert approaches are characterised by less pronounced immediate effects on behaviour, they
have been shown to produce long-term, network-wide reductions (Harrison, 2001).
However, the use of speed cameras is not without limitations. Research has highlighted that highly overt,
automated approaches are typically associated with site-specific effects, referred to as halo effects
(Champness, Sheehan, & Folkman, 2005; Harrison, 2001). Finally, the use of more traditional approaches to
speed enforcement, such as routine traffic patrols, hand-held lasers and moving-mode radars, has also been
found to be effective (Diamantopoulou, Cameron, & Shtifelman, 1998; Newstead, Bobevski, Hosking, &
Cameron, 2004; Newstead, Cameron, & Leggett, 1999).
4.4.2 Innovative approaches to speed enforcement

One of the most promising recent innovations in speed enforcement is that of point-to-point speed cameras
(also commonly referred to as average speed cameras or section control), an approach that is gaining
popularity throughout Europe and Australia. Briefly, point-to-point speed cameras use a range of
technologies to measure vehicle speeds between two cameras, using a simple time over distance equation
to calculate average speed. Thus, point-to-point speed cameras offer a greater network-wide approach to
managing speeds, reducing the impact of halo effects associated with other automated speed enforcement
approaches.
There is an emerging body of evidence demonstrating the road safety benefits associated with the approach
(Soole, Watson, & Fleiter, 2013 for a comprehensive review). Specifically, point-to-point speed cameras
have been found to be associated with: high rates of speed limit compliance; reductions in average and 85th
percentile speeds; reduced speed variability; and reductions in crash rates (particularly fatal and serious
injury crashes). The approach has been demonstrated to be particularly effective in reducing excessive
speeding behaviour. Furthermore, numerous ancillary benefits have been observed, including improved
traffic flow, reductions in vehicle emissions and noise, and high levels of public acceptance.
Together, the numerous benefits associated with point-to-point speed cameras and the typically high rates of
public acceptance suggest that the approach may have the potential to increase the demand for safer
speeds. That is, it is possible that, over time, motorists may come to associate sustained experiences of
travelling at the speed limit with a range of positive safety, environmental and personal outcomes, such that
their underlying attitudes are adjusted and their behaviour is influenced outside of the enforced areas. In
addition, it is argued that the approach may assist with improving the overall public opinion of police speed
enforcement.
4.4.3 Enforcement tolerances

As noted in the section discussing the prevalence of speeding (see Section 2.2), research has indicated that
perceived enforcement tolerances can influence speed choice (Elliott, 2001b; Fildes et al., 2005) via the
concept of the de facto speed limit (Cameron, 2008). Queensland research has indicated that many drivers
report preferred driving speeds approximately 10% above posted speed limits which likely reflects
perceptions about tolerance levels (Fleiter & Watson, 2006; Fleiter, Watson, Lennon, King, & Shi, 2009).
This finding is consistent with national survey research (Petroulias, 2014) and is an issue of concern among
authorities who wish to send consistent messages about what acceptable, legal, or safe speeds are.
Across the Australian jurisdictions, there are some differences with regard to the policies and practices of
enforcement tolerances. For instance, Victoria, for some time, publicised the enforcement threshold level.
However, more recently, the figure has not been publicly available, a practice similar to what has occurred in
Queensland. By contrast, New Zealand has historically used a 10km/h enforcement tolerance, except on
public holidays when it is reduced to 4km/h. Recent changes to the enforcement tolerance threshold were
undertaken in New Zealand (van Lamoen, 2014). In an effort to reduce preventable deaths during the high
risk time summer holiday season of 2013/14, the speed enforcement threshold was reduced from the usual
10km/h to 4km/h over a two month period. Noted as having a short time frame which likely provided
insufficient opportunity to examine full road trauma reduction effects, the evaluation did find a significant
reduction of 35% in episodes of speeding 10km/h over the posted limit and of 45% for episodes of speeding
in excess of 10km/h above the posted limit (van Lamoen, 2014). Furthermore, research conducted in Finland
found that speeding decreased when the enforcement tolerance was reduced from 20km/h to 4km/h on a
43km long rural road (Luoma, Rajamki, & Malmivuo, 2012). Specifically, compared to the control road (i.e.,
the same road pre- and post- tolerance implementation), mean speeds reduced by 2.5km/h during the four
week implementation stage. Drivers were informed of the tolerance changes via a campaign and the authors
concluded that speed reduction can be achieved by a combination of a lower tolerance level and an
accompanying informative campaign.
One of the key issues related to decisions to disclose enforcement tolerance levels is associated with the
desire to inform the motoring public that some degree of error is inherent in speed measurement devices, but
that excessive speeding will not be tolerated. Calls have been made for changes in speeding infringement
penalties to reflect the concept of harsher penalties for those exceeding the tolerance level (Elliott, 2001b).
On the other hand, one of the key issues related to the decision to not disclose enforcement tolerance levels
is associated with not wanting to portray the idea that speeds up to that tolerance amount are acceptable
(i.e., that it is appropriate to drive at a speed above the posted limit, but that is below the reported tolerance
level i.e., to drive at the de facto speed limit).
As described earlier, despite the success of speed enforcement efforts in reducing crashes and the
associated road trauma burden, a degree of negativity about enforcement activity remains prevalent among
sections of the community. Opposition towards speed enforcement, particularly automated enforcement, and
less so towards other forms of speed enforcement (despite both types of enforcement raising identical
monetary amounts [Auditor-General New South Wales, 2011; Fleiter & Watson, 2012]) is frequently and
openly expressed. Some of this negativity is likely to be linked to the concept of perceived legitimacy of
enforcement approaches (McKenna, 2007). McKenna (2007) describes this concept as relating to whether,
and to what extent, the community accepts the concept that intervention to reduce harm is necessary. While
perceptions have changed over time regarding the legitimacy of other risky behaviours, such as drink driving
and not wearing seat belts, the same change has clearly not occurred when thinking about speeding.
Therefore, the challenge of persuading those not in favour of speed enforcement, and/or of other speed
management countermeasures overall, must address the underlying issue of a lack of perceived legitimacy
of the need for these measures in the first instance (Soole, 2012). Over time, if public perceptions about
speeding can be moved in a more positive direction, it could be expected that perceptions regarding the
legitimacy of enforcing speeds would also move in a positive direction.
A concise way to conceptualise the issues relating to lack of acceptance of speed enforcement was
described by Goldenbeld (2003, as cited in Delaney et al., 2005), and was extended upon from an Australian
perspective by Delaney and colleagues (2005) and Fleiter and Watson (2012). Goldenbeld identified four
dilemmas associated with speed camera programs: 1) the Credibility dilemma (concerns about the purpose
of the countermeasure including concerns about revenue raising rather than safety motivations); 2) the
Legitimacy dilemma (fairness of the countermeasure); 3) the Implementation dilemma (acceptance
hampered by difficulties with implementation); and 4) the Social dilemma (mismatch between individual and
collective interests including that speeding is appropriate if done safely). This categorisation of the various
dilemmas associated with acceptance of the need for speed enforcement provides a useful structure in
which to consider how policies and practices relating to the deployment of speed measuring devices can be
enhanced. Additionally, it provides information about how communication strategies relating to speed
enforcement may be strengthened in order to help address some of the issues of concern among the
community.
4.4.4 Accompanying communication strategies

While it is noted that enforcement is not the primary focus of this review, the communication strategies that
accompany enforcement activities can assist in helping to shape community perceptions about speeding and
speed management initiatives. This issue received particular attention in the review of Victorias road safety
camera program in 2011 (Victorian Auditor-General's Office, 2011), where it was concluded that there was a
need to develop and manage communication and public education programs so that the following issues
were specifically addressed: misconceptions about revenue raising being the primary purpose of the
program; perceptions of camera inaccuracy; and the need to focus more attention on the promotion of the
positive contribution of cameras to community safety. Similar recommendations were made from more recent
reviews conducted in New South Wales and the ACT (ACT Auditor-Generals Office, 2014; Auditor-General
New South Wales, 2011).
In light of the issues described above and in the preceding section, it is important that future communication
strategies address barriers to attaining favourable attitudes towards speed enforcement. There is need to
structure communications in a way that increases the perceived legitimacy of the need for enforcement, as
well as for the various types of enforcement approaches. This need may be assisted by addressing, in
tandem, the issue of perceived transparency of policies and practices relating to speed enforcement (see
Soole, 2012 for a more detailed discussion of these issues). By improving community understanding of the
ways in which speed enforcement locations are determined and the ways in which enforcement is
conducted, there is scope to reduce the misconceptions related to enforcement practices (e.g., to change
perceptions that covert speed cameras are used to entrap drivers).
Finally, the issue of hypothecation of revenue from camera-detected offences is worthy of consideration.
There may be value in making the community more aware of the extent to which hypothecation of revenue
occurs. For instance, in Queensland, legislation provides for the hypothecation of funds from penalties
associated with speed camera detected offences to cover administrative costs of the camera program as
well as road crash injury rehabilitation projects, improvements to safety of Queensland roads, road safety
awareness and education programs, and programs such as the Prevent Alcohol and Risk Related Trauma in
Youth (PARTY) program (Queensland Government, 2014a). Despite this legislative requirement, the level of
awareness about it is arguably not high. The statewide community surveys have indicated that approximately
one-third of the sample were aware that the government is required by law to use money collected from
speed and red light/speed camera fines for road safety programs and improvements to Queensland roads
(Department of Transport and Main Roads, 2014b). Currently, there is no evidence to indicate whether
jurisdictions that devote this revenue to road safety and/or public health issues experience greater
community support for speed enforcement than jurisdictions that do not. However, this issue is worthy of
consideration and may serve, over time, to improve community acceptance of the need for speed
enforcement, especially if road safety benefits achieved by such hypothecation of revenue (e.g., improved
road infrastructure) are communicated effectively to the community (Soole, Fleiter & Watson, 2012). This use
of funds for road safety benefits may assist in reducing the revenue raising criticisms that are commonly
associated with speed camera programs.
5. Considerations for potential countermeasures

Based on evidence reviewed in the preceding sections, this next section presents a range of concepts for
countermeasure development that may assist in creating demand for safer speeds.
5.1 Road safety advertising

As highlighted in Section 3, the review of public education and advertising campaigns over the previous
decades reveals evolution of practice and research. This evolution encompasses changing and refining of
message-related characteristics, individual characteristics, as well as dissemination strategies in regards to
road safety advertising campaigns. An important note to acknowledge is that the search for innovative
strategies need not start from a position that all which has come before cannot be of value again. Rather,
there is a need to carefully consider and take on board lessons learned from previous communication
successes as well as to learn from less successful campaigns. In Australia, some notable examples of
successes are able to be drawn upon in regards to drink driving and seat belt campaigns, with evidence of
behavioural change as well as important shifts in social and community perceptions regarding these
behaviours.
In the case of anti-speeding campaigns more specifically, when reviewing the approaches used over the last
few decades as well as message content and campaigns, it can be seen that there has been a long and
predominant focus on strong physical threats of death and injury. There is support to indicate that such
approaches do have persuasive benefit for certain audiences, particularly females, but relatively less so for
males (Lewis et al., 2007, 2008). These differential persuasive effects for gender findings also reflect the
impact that individual characteristics may have on persuasive outcomes and links to the literature on market
segmentation and the one-size-does-not-fit-all approach to campaign development. The need to ensure
messages are relevant to, and have influence on, particular audiences has seen approaches focusing on
other types of threats including financial (e.g., monetary fines) and social threats (e.g., receiving disapproval
from important others) as a means of identifying which motivations are most salient and likely to lead to
change in attitudes and behaviour. Social threats and social disapproval is underpinned by the important role
that normative influences have on individuals behaviour. Normative influence may be from important others
who are near and dear to individuals (e.g., spouse, family members) through to broader social normative
referents. Much research evidence has supported the need to consider other normative influences upon
speeding. As discussed earlier in this review, these normative influences include descriptive norms and
moral/injunctive norms.
Finally, in regards to dissemination strategies, the changing communication landscape and, most notably,
the shifts towards dynamic communication interaction as opposed to one-way models of communication from
source to audience, have meant that end users may now be active participants in the communication. This
changing communication landscape has supported the implementation of campaigns of social change where
individual responsibility for the greater social or community good have been able to capitalise on individuals
ability to contribute to, and create, message content to help promote the message that society and the
community support change. In order to have active participation in this communication context, it is more
important than ever that individuals are entertained by, engaged with, and willing to voluntarily contribute to
the two-way communication process. However, it is important to acknowledge that contemporary
communication approaches may not be suitable for all road users (e.g., older drivers; people without internet
access) and thus, traditional communication approaches still need to be considered and utilised.
5.2 Community-based behaviour change initiatives

Given that there is evidence to suggest that reduced speed limits in urban and residential areas can have a
positive impact on vehicle speeds and casualty crashes, there is a need to further explore the expansion of
lower urban speed limits to other road types (e.g., arterial and connector roads). However, current evidence
does not provide clear direction on optimal speed limits for various types of roads. Evidence does, however,
illustrate the importance of community acceptance of reduced speed limits, suggesting that such initiatives
be accompanied by an appropriate communication strategy.
Holistic approaches: A number of road safety practitioners have advocated that there is a requirement to
shift from current mobility management paradigms that have an over reliance on motorised transportation,
towards a more holistic approach that focusses on reconnecting road safety with communities that value
social connectedness, quality of life and slower ways of being (May et al., 2008, p.395). Examples of more
holistic approaches include active transportation (e.g., promotion of walking and cycling, Walking Buses) and
eco-driving initiatives.
Incentive/rewards schemes: Evidence indicates that both incentive and reward schemes have the capability
to produce positive behavioural change when used correctly. Specifically, the research shows that it is
necessary to ensure that the reward/incentive is salient to the user. It is recognised that in-vehicle
technology represents an effective approach to monitoring behaviour in order to assess driver eligibility for
incentives/rewards.
Gamification and mobile phone applications: Despite minimal evidence in this novel area of behaviour
change, gamification and the use of mobile phone applications represents a promising avenue for creating
demand for safer speeds. The potential effectiveness of such applications relates to the issue of it being
highly engaging for the user. Further, it could be particularly of use for younger drivers, given their high
usage of communication technologies and the highly social nature that is typical of participation (e.g.,
positive peer pressure).
5.3 Intelligent transportation systems

5.3.1 Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA)
There is strong evidence to indicate that ISA is effective in reducing vehicle speeds, however, these effects
are limited to when the device is fitted to a vehicle. The systems operate with varying levels of complexity
(e.g., advisory versus active regulation) with evidence indicating that the greatest behavioural effect is
associated with systems that actively regulate vehicle performance (e.g., deceleration). However, these
systems notably receive the lowest levels of driver acceptance. This technology, if implemented across the
entire network in a controlling manner, has the capability of making speeding virtually impossible. However,
the level of acceptability of such an extreme, controlling option is an important issue for consideration. Given
the presence of these kinds of barriers to widespread implementation of ISA, one option to consider is the
use of this technology for specific road user groups, such as a sanctioning option for speeding offenders, or
in fleet settings. Styles et al., (2009), for instance, reported that combining both ISA and in-vehicle data
records (IVDRs) with a motivational/educational component may be more effective for recidivist speeding
offenders in the short to medium term than individual use of these approaches. In addition, voluntary
acceptance of ISA may be increased by use of the technology in PAYD insurance incentive schemes. An
additional consideration is for ISA to be readily incorporated as a standard safety feature on new vehicles.
This outcome would ensure that the future vehicle fleet would be equipped with speed adaptation technology
that would assist in normalising speed limit compliance.
5.3.2 Dynamic vehicle-activated signs

There is evidence to show that displaying messages that directly relate to behaviour in real-time can have a
significant effect on driving (e.g., speeding, headway distances; Schramm et al., 2012; Wrapson et al.,
2006). Overall, the key aspect relating to the effectiveness of this technology is ensuring that information
displayed is perceived to be accurate. Further research is needed to explore more about the differences
relating to the way in which messages are framed (e.g., you are speeding versus thank you for not
speeding; Best record to date x%) and how information is displayed, in order to optimise engagement of the
driver/rider.
5.3.3 Enforcement-related issues

From an enforcement perspective, there is a critical need to enhance communication strategies related to
speed management (e.g., hypothecation of camera revenue, misconceptions regarding policies and
practices). In addition, there is a need to continue using and developing innovative speed management
approaches, such as point-to-point speed cameras.
5.4 Changing the conversation about speeding to help change public

perception about speeding
The use of terminology and language to alter perceptions may be worthy of consideration in regard to
speeding (Johnstone et al., 2014). Within the road safety context, there are a number of examples worth
reflecting upon where terminology has been intentionally used in order to refocus or reframe a debate or
issue. For instance, the WHO recommended adoption of the word crash in place of accident to reflect a
subtle but important distinction: crash implies that something may have been done to prevent the incident
occurring whereas accident implies something which occurred by chance and therefore something which
may be viewed as unavoidable and as part of life (WHO, 2005). The aforementioned experiment by the
TAC, to rename the Victorian town of Speed to SpeedKills for a period of time, is another example of how
terminology or language could be used to alter the focus on an issue. Furthermore, a noteworthy and
deliberate step was taken in Queensland in 1990 (immediately after the Fitzgerald Commission of Inquiry) as
part of widespread reforms to help restore community confidence in policing by changing the name from the
Queensland Police Force to the Queensland Police Service (Queensland Police Service, 2014). Finally, a
speeding-related example comes from research that explored factors influencing speeding in school zones in
Queensland. During pilot testing of concepts in focus groups, it was identified that speeding in school zones
was perceived so negatively by participants (licensed drivers from Queensland) that focus moved from
discussion of factors influencing speeding in school zones to factors influencing compliance with the speed
limit in school zones (Abdul Hanan, 2014). This finding suggests that there is an existing and strong
community view against speeding in school zones, at least in Queensland, the location of that research.
These examples highlight potential scope for the road safety community to take a proactive lead in helping to
alter current community perceptions about speed and the need for speed enforcement by carefully choosing
the language used with discussing speeding. In turn, it is possible that in the longer term, this could lead to
an increased recognition by the broader community of the need for and value of managing the risks
associated with increased travel speeds. It is noteworthy that the words for road safety have been added to
speed camera signage in some jurisdictions. It is recognised that speed cameras are distinct from red light
cameras. However, if both of these cameras are aimed at improving road safety, perhaps the broader
terminology of safety cameras could be adopted over time to help change the public conversation about
speeding.
Moreover, as mentioned earlier in this review, since the link between crash risk, crash severity and speeding
is not fully appreciated and/or accepted by the public overall, there may be a need to use wording other than
safe speeds in order to create more demand for safer speeds. For instance, use of the phrase healthy
speeds (Garrard, 2008a) could be beneficial from a number of reasons:
1. to continue to promote the risks of death and injury in the event of a collision;
2. to represent issues relating to lower emissions, creating safer and more liveable environments for
everyone, especially for vulnerable road users on roads and footpaths via active transportation options,
and
3. promoting health via reducing stress on drivers/riders that has been linked to issues such as perceived
pressure from other road users to drive above posted speed limits.
5.5 Summary
To summarise the information presented in this review, the first draft of a Campaign Strategy containing the
key aims, challenges, and potential countermeasures to address them was developed. The potential
countermeasures are not presented in order of priority or importance. Rather, they are presented as an
overarching Campaign Strategy to reflect the three key themes underpinning this research project: 1)
creating, 2) increasing, or 3) sustaining public demand for safer speeds on the road. This categorisation is
based on the premise that different sections of the Australian and New Zealand communities are at different
stages along a demand for safer speeds continuum. That is, in some jurisdictions, and/or in some parts of
jurisdictions, and/or amongst specific groups within jurisdictions (e.g., older road users, motorcycle riders,
pedestrians), different levels of demand for safer speeds exists. Therefore, where it is deemed that there is
not yet demand for safer speeds, the proposed countermeasures in the top section of the Campaign
Strategy table may be relevant to groups/areas when trying to create demand. The middle section of the
Campaign Strategy table contains proposed countermeasures that may be relevant when some demand for
safer speeds is deemed to exist, but it requires improvement (i.e., some level of demand exists but can be
increased). The final section of the Campaign Strategy table contains potential countermeasures that aim to
sustain relatively high levels of demand for safer speeds in order to assist in not letting such demand fall
back to less supportive levels as well as to increase the proportion of the population who do not tolerate
speeding as view it as socially unacceptable. Where possible, these categorisation decisions have been
based on data from national attitudinal surveys or Queensland attitudinal surveys in order to provide some
rationale for whether there is need to create, increase, or sustain demand, based on historical and current
levels (see Table 5.1). However, it is recognised that there are likely to be discrete differences within
individual jurisdictions/areas/target groups. Therefore, it may be necessary to choose countermeasures from
different sections of the Campaign Strategy, according to the needs of areas/groups requiring specific
attention.
The draft Campaign Strategy represented an attempt to provide an overall strategy to help achieve the aims
of creating, increasing, and/or sustaining public demand for safer speeds. It contains various elements for
consideration, including facilitators and barriers to implementation of the various countermeasures proposed,
as well as considerations for evaluating them. In addition, where relevant, it also notes opportunities to
enhance the broader understanding of safer speeds specifically relating to misperceptions held by the
community (i.e., myth busting opportunities). The provision of information to address these misperceptions is
identified. This draft formed the basis for the stakeholder consultation phase of the research project which is
documented in the next section. A summary of the draft Campaign Strategy that was used in the consultation
process is presented below.
Table 5.1
Rationale for categorisation of nine aims according to the need to Create, Increase, or Sustain Demand for Safer Speeds
Category
Intervention Aims
Rationale for categorisation
Create
demand
(1) Increase Speed = Increase in Crash

Risk
National attitudinal data: 66% of respondents surveyed in 2013 agreed that if you increase your speed by 10km/h you are
significantly more likely to be involved in a crash (compared to 67% of respondents in 2001). Therefore, perceptions that
increased speed leads to an increase in crash risk are stable suggesting a need to create change.
(2) Increase Speed = Increase in Crash

Severity
National attitudinal data: 89% of respondents surveyed in 2013 agreed that a crash at 80km/h is more severe than a crash
at 70km/h (compared to 90% of respondents in 2001). Therefore, perceptions that increased speed leads to an increase in
crash severity remains stable suggesting a need to create change.
(3) Increase awareness of purpose and

benefits of speed enforcement
National attitudinal data: Stable trend since 1995: ~50% of sample report belief that fines for speeding are mainly intended
to raise revenue. Efforts needed to create change in this stable trend.
(4) Challenge descriptive norm that

everyone speeds
National attitudinal data: 30% of respondents in 2013 reported never driving 10km/h over the speed limit (compared to 19%
in 2001). Further, 5% of respondents in 2013 reported always, nearly always, most occasions driving 10km/h or more
over the posted speed limit (compared to 11% in 2001). These findings indicate more drivers are choosing not to speed,
suggesting change is in the appropriate/desired direction and therefore efforts need to increase demand further.
(5) Challenge moral norm that speeding

is acceptable and approved by
others
QLD attitudinal data: 73% of those surveyed in 2014 agreed it was time the community took a stand against speeding
compared to 78% in 2013. These figures indicate a slight decrease in perceptions that community accepts speeding but that
reasonably high levels of support exist for taking a stand. Efforts needed to increase and ensure progression in desired
direction.
(6) Challenge the belief that speeding

saves time/ can make-up lost time
Commonly cited reason for speeding, yet evidence indicates that people are aware that the impact on travel time is
negligible. There is need to increase demand by increasing awareness of the inaccuracy of this perception as a benefit of
speeding.
(7) Challenge the belief that compliance

is hard/ impossible & promote
individual responsibility for & ability to
choose and control ones speed
QLD attitudinal data: 96% of those surveyed in 2014 agreed that they were responsible for the speed that they drove
(compared to 97% in 2013). Thus, these high figures remain consistent across 2013 and 2014 and suggest efforts should
focus on maintaining such high levels of demand.
(8) Continue to build the culture around

road safety and speeding
As discussed in the literature review summary
(9) Change language associated with

speeding in order to alter public
perception of its importance
As discussed in the literature review summary
Increase
demand
Sustain
demand
CREATE DEMAND
Aim 1. Enhance community

understanding of risks
associated with speeding
Example: Education campaign

to publicise and explain
evidence from jurisdictions
where increased speed limits
have demonstrated increased
road trauma (e.g., Germany).
Aim 2. Enhance community

understanding that
increased speeds result in
increased crash severity,
based on uncontested laws
of physics
to explain link between speed
and; (a) distance travelled
while recognising a hazard; (b)
distance travelled while
reacting to hazard; (c)
braking; (d) impact forces on
body as a result of not
stopping before collision.
Aim 3. Increase awareness

of purpose and benefits of
speed enforcement

to explain (a) contribution that
speed enforcement has made
to improving road safety; (b)
site selection of enforcement
locations; (c) strict
requirements for enforcement
technology certification; (d)
benefits of deterring rather
than catching speeders.
INCREASE DEMAND
Aim 4. Challenge the prevailing

descriptive norm that everyone

describing proportions of motorists
actually speeding and noting that
excessive speeding is rare.
Aim 5. Challenge injunctive/moral

norm that speeding is acceptable
and approved of by others
Examples: Education campaigns to: (a)

show that Australia has high posted
speed limits compared to many other
countries; (b) parts of our community
are not happy that you speed, and that
you risk our lives by choosing unsafe
speeds (e.g., use real examples of town
of Clunes campaigning to keep their
speed camera).
Trial of intervention with parents by
invoking the Induced Hypocrisy
Paradigm to highlight to parents that
they use some safe behaviours (e.g.,
child restraints), but speed with children
in car (unsafe behaviour).
Aim 6. Challenge the perception that

speeding saves a large amount of
time, and/or that it is possible to
make up a large amount of lost time
by speeding
Example: Education campaign run as a

natural experiment to encourage people
to monitor how much time they save, if
any, from travelling at their normal
speed. Could be run in conjunction with
ISA trial to increase awareness of ISA
product and its advantages could
target young drivers and include
incentives linked to insurance premiums.
SUSTAIN DEMAND
Aim 7. Challenge the perception

that complying with the speed
limits is hard/ impossible and to
promote individual
responsibility for and ability to
choose and control ones speed
Example: Trial with motorists who
are close to losing licence (due to
accumulated demerit points for
speeding) to use Implementation
Intentions to assist them to not
speed when faced with a situation
on the road where they may
ordinarily speed.
Aim 8. Continue to build a
positive culture surrounding
road safety more broadly, and
speeding more specifically
Examples: Education campaign to
raise awareness about significant
reductions in road fatalities,
success in transforming seat belt
use from a behaviour seen as
unnecessary to one of habitual
compliance in Australia.
From a corporate responsibility
perspective, make compliance
with speed limits a contractual
requirement for awarding
contracts for supply.
Aim 9. Challenge language
associated with speeding in
order to alter public perceptions
of its importance
Examples: Emphasise the concept

that it is okay and healthy to travel
at or below posted speed limits.
Encourage jurisdictions to
hypothecate funds from speeding
penalties to road safety and
continue to inform community of
such.
Continuum of Demand for Safer Speeds
Figure 5.1 Summary of Proposed Campaign Strategy

6. Stakeholder consultations
Prior to consulting with the broader range of stakeholders outlined in the next section, a small international
expert advisory group reviewed the draft literature review and proposed Campaign Strategy and provided
written feedback to the research team. The three advisory group members were selected because of their
expertise in road safety-related behaviour change: Mr Barry Elliott, Independent Research and
Communication Psychologist from Australia; Dr Sonja Forward, a researcher from The Swedish National
Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI); and Professor Nicholas Ward, Professor of Mechanical and
Industrial Engineering, Montana State University and Director of the Center for Health and Safety Culture,
Western Transportation Institute. Feedback from the advisory group was incorporated into the draft
documents before they were used in the stakeholder consultation process.
The second phase of this research project was a series of consultations with stakeholders from the
behavioural change and road safety community. Representatives from Austroads member authorities, road
user advocacy groups, transport authorities from each of the nine jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand,
Members of Parliament, and researchers in the road safety and advertising/behaviour change fields were
invited to participate with the aim of obtaining a diverse range of views on demand for safer speeds.
Stakeholders were consulted about the proposed Campaign Strategy described in the previous section.
More specifically, they were asked to comment on the suitability, feasibility and likely costs of the
countermeasures within the proposed Strategy as well as its applicability in the Australian/New Zealand
contexts. Approval for the consultation process was granted by the University Human Research Ethics
Committee of the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) (reference number 1400000854). This section
describes the outcomes of the stakeholder consultation process.
6.1 Method
6.1.1 Participants
In total, 61 organisations and individuals were invited to participate in the stakeholder consultation phase via
an online survey. In some cases, more than one person from an organisation responded. In other cases, an
organisations response was a combination of input from a range of personnel within it. The transport
authority in New Zealand and in each Australian jurisdiction was invited to participate via Austroads Safety
Task Force representatives. Twenty one responses were received from organisations/individuals in the road
safety or behaviour change/advertising fields nationally and internationally as summarised in Appendix G.
6.1.2 Online questionnaire

Road safety experts
Initial emails were sent to prospective stakeholders in road safety areas to invite feedback on the proposed
Campaign Strategy. Reminder emails were sent to respondents three weeks after initial contact. These
stakeholders were provided with an information package, which included a six page summary of the
literature review findings, a table providing the rationale for the categorisation of the nine aims that sit within
the proposed Campaign Strategy (see Table 5.1 and Figure 5.1), the draft Campaign Strategy (i.e., a
previous version of Table 6.2) and a link to the online questionnaire. Participants were asked to read the
information package prior to completing the online questionnaire. The online questionnaire comprised 11
items, which asked stakeholders to comment on the Campaign Strategy (see Appendix H).
Advertising/ behaviour change experts

Initial emails were sent to prospective advertising/ behaviour change stakeholders in order to seek their
ideas and opinions regarding effective behaviour change programs that have been applied in disciplines
other than road safety. Reminder emails were sent to respondents three weeks after initial contact. These
stakeholders were asked to read the six-page literature review summary prior to completing the online
questionnaire. Stakeholders were asked to briefly describe any campaigns or interventions they were aware
of that had successfully produced change in community norms, attitudes or behaviour, irrespective of
whether they were related to road safety issues (see Appendix I for the advertising/ behaviour change expert
stakeholder questionnaire).
6.2 Results
This section documents the feedback received from the 21 stakeholders who participated in the consultation
process. Feedback is grouped according to themes arising from specific items on the questionnaire as well
as arising from any additional comments made by participants.
6.2.1 Support for the Campaign Strategy

There was overwhelmingly positive support for the proposed Campaign Strategy by the majority of
respondents, with one organisation noting that some of the angles in the strategy are new, and havent been
seen. A variety of respondents indicated that the Campaign Strategy was comprehensive and built upon
existing wisdom:
While the Campaign Strategy presented here does not provide any radically new insight, it
does offer a systematic framework for trial.
The Campaign Strategy was also supported because it was viewed as addressing key misperceptions with
supporting evidence. Furthermore, myth busting was identified as an important component of the Campaign
Strategy:
Research evidence already shows substantial belief in need for greater speed moderation.
Myth-busting will amplify this solid base
As highlighted in the comment above, dispelling the myths about the benefits of speeding could potentially
create greater demand for safer speeds.
Many respondents also noted that the countermeasures addressed in the Campaign Strategy were
complementary to approaches already adopted in many jurisdictions and that a widespread campaign, as
proposed in a Strategy arising from this current program of research, would equate to more benefits,
particularly for long term change (i.e., changes occurring over 10 years and beyond). Furthermore, three
respondents identified that the Campaign Strategy would need to be sustained to enhance the effectiveness
of the suggested countermeasures. However, it was also noted that in those jurisdictions that currently have
a less comprehensive approach, the introduction of countermeasures proposed in the Campaign Strategy
would be more difficult to implement. However, one respondent stated that in those jurisdictions that were
further behind on the issue, some of the suggested countermeasures that seem quick and easy to adopt
could be implemented in these areas instead of attempting to address all components of the Campaign
Strategy at once.
One respondent noted their belief that the countermeasures outlined in the Campaign Strategy would be
more likely to bring about changes in community attitudes than in actual speeding behaviour, based on
evaluations they had seen from other countries (e.g., Scotland). This comment is important because it
highlights the difficulty in understanding the temporal ordering of behavioural/attitudinal change (i.e., whether
attitude or behaviour change comes first, as discussed in Section 3). It also highlights the need to view the
Campaign Strategy as a tool that does not operate in isolation from all other speed management strategies,
including speed enforcement measures and engineering treatments. To further emphasise this point, another
respondent specifically noted that the Campaign Strategy must integrate with enforcement, not be a
substitute for it.
6.2.2 Broadening the Campaign Strategy

Various suggestions on additional areas that would broaden the Campaign Strategy were offered. Several
respondents stated that a much stronger emphasis on the societal and personal benefits of not speeding
would enhance the proposed Campaign Strategy, as a complement to its focus on reducing road trauma.
Examples of social benefits included:
reduced vehicle emissions and associated benefits to the climate

reduced noise pollution
more modal shift choices
better child independent mobility
greater elderly mobility and activity
cheaper travel options (walking and cycling) for economically disadvantaged
healthier travel options (walking and cycling) for all because of an environment conducive to safer travel
more pleasant shopping/recreation precincts
better communities in which to live and work because of the factors identified above
better community cohesion.
Examples of personal benefits included:
fuel cost savings

increased sense of tranquillity or calmness
reduced stress levels
increase in active trip options to improve health
improved wellbeing.
One respondent also reported that creating a different strategy for self-dialogue may also assist people to
change (reduce) speeding behaviour. This example was provided to demonstrate that point:
My husbands dialogue is that when we are in the car together, he is already home so he
does not need to hurry to get there.
As highlighted in the comment above, altering individual dialogue may, in turn, lead to different ways of
viewing the time we spend on the road and, potentially to safer driving behaviours. This respondent also
reported that Western Australias Enjoy the Ride Campaign is one approach which has provided a different
strategy for promoting a different self-dialogue about the way we use the road.
The next statement summarises the overall sentiments expressed in regard to the issues described above:
Put speed into the context of blighting communities and narrowing individual choice to walk
and cycle, have clear air etc. Create a social norm about what is the right limit for
communities and roads based on the presence of people rather than the width of the road.
The focus of the proposed Campaign Strategy was also linked to this topic. One respondent queried whether
the strategy should be aimed at decision makers, road users, or citizens. Their conclusion, as described
below, was that communities and their citizens would be the best focal point for such a strategy:
The question for me is whether such a strategy should focus on decision makers or on road
users/citizens. I have my doubts about a focus on road users; for communities/citizens I am
more optimistic, especially when it comes to urban/residential problems.
Finally, a greater focus on corporate responsibility and organisational fleets was proposed by several
respondents to further enhance the proposed Campaign Strategy. Encouraging industry, including vehicle
manufacturers, to promote social responsibility was seen as important. Improving safety policies within
organisations was also noted as an option to improve driving behaviour in the short term:
Enlisting corporate safety policies early, given the preponderance of fleet vehicles on the
road, may be an attractive way of building in some sustained change earlier rather than later
under the OH and S banner.
6.2.3 Campaign Strategy (or parts) lacking support

A small number of respondents expressed some concerns with the proposed Campaign Strategy. For
example, one respondent thought that it was too theoretical. Further, two respondents reported that some
parts of the Campaign Strategy could backfire, as highlighted by the following two quotes:
No one wants to feel shame. The induced hypocrisy paradigm means forcing people to
confront cognitive dissonance, which could backfire [refers to Aim 5].
Some of the short term impacts could be problematic. For example, young male drivers
could take the VMS [Variable Message Signs] postings of percentages of speeding drivers
as a joke or challenge (to increase percentages) [refers to Aim 6].
When asked if the Campaign Strategy (or individual aims/potential countermeasures within) would or would
not be successful in positively influencing community norms about speeding, one respondent reported that
the Campaign Strategy did not meet the availability heuristic (i.e., where individuals judge the probability/risk
of a situation based on the ease to which similar events/ situations come to mind; Tversky & Kahneman,
1973). Specifically, this respondent stated:
You are trying to tell people that something with a lower chance than winning Lotto is risky.
Thats a terrible definition of risky. The availability heuristic simply isnt there [refers to Aim
1].
The same respondent also reported that the proposed Campaign Strategy would not resonate in New
Zealand (reasons not stated) and instead, may displace local (New Zealand) campaigns. This respondent
stated that the ideas presented in the proposed Campaign Strategy were old and tired in both concept and
delivery. Unfortunately, the respondent did not offer any further details about their concerns, or alternative
suggestions for creating, increasing, or sustaining demand for safer speeds when specifically asked in the
questionnaire to provide any additional ideas.
6.2.4 Political will is crucial to success

Many participants noted that the success of the Campaign Strategy was dependent on long term social and
political discussions that it may elicit. For instance, a number of respondents reported that political support
and political will were crucial to the success of the Campaign Strategy. That is, without political support, the
short and long term goals of the campaign may not be successful. However, political will was identified by
several respondents as generally lacking in Australia. Indeed, this issue was the most common one raised in
regard to barriers to success for the Campaign Strategy. The comments below highlight the key points raised
by many respondents:
Speeding is a sacrosanct behaviour in the minds of many senior decision-makers in
Australia, mainly because they believe in decisions to benefit individuals rather than society
as a whole. Their thinking is pragmatic and lacks abstract concepts to understand the
inconsistency between the individual benefits and the societal costs. Unlike impaired driving,
speeding is a behaviour undertaken by everybody (every driver) at some time, so there is no
underlying social evil associated with it at this time.
One key element for political support is public support. It is my experience that citizens/road
users are not convinced at all about the need for speed management. As a result of this,
costs will be considered as 'too high' .
Threat of short term setbacks (e.g., lack of instant success) is the biggest threat to the
maintenance of political will.
Accepting that this is a journey that we need to take the public on over up to 10 years
should lead to incremental acceptance. Do we [government] have the patience to accept
small incremental change?
6.2.5 Feasibility of the Campaign Strategy

All respondents were asked to rate the feasibility of the Campaign Strategy in the Australian/New Zealand
context. Ratings ranged from 1 (not at all feasible) to 7 (extremely feasible), with an average of 4.8 (SD =
2.83). The most common rating was 5, which indicates that overall, stakeholders viewed implementation as
feasible.
When asked to comment specifically about the feasibility of the proposed Campaign Strategy, comments
generally indicated a positive view on this issue. However, the primary concern raised by a large number of
respondents was the issue of the longer term sustainability of the Strategy, which is inevitably linked to its
adequate resourcing in order to see change in the long term.
For instance, it was reported that:
If properly resourced it does have a good chance of shifting community opinions about
speed.
Some in the community will support the strategy and all of its actions. Some will continue to
speed until it truly becomes socially unacceptable. But unlike BAC [blood alcohol
concentration], the risks of travelling at various speeds are not as clear. So the campaign
would need to be sustained over a long period of time.
Overall, there was broad recognition that resourcing the Campaign Strategy in the longer term was vital, yet
could also be costly. One way to assist in overcoming this issue may be to harness the widespread reach of
social media. One respondent noted that using social media may help to make sustaining the Campaign
Strategy more feasible in the current communications climate than has historically been possible using
traditional media outlets.
6.2.6 Barriers to the Campaign Strategy

A number of barriers were identified by respondents which could limit the effectiveness of the Campaign
Strategy. These barriers included:
Low level speed enforcement (especially) is seen by some members of the public solely as revenue
raising, and not linked to any safety benefits at all.
The lack of speeding (i.e., the proportion of motorists complying with speed limits) is not as obvious to
the eye as speeding is. For example, while road users who are complying with the speed limit may
notice when they are overtaken by a speeding driver, they are less likely to witness (or be aware of)
drivers who are travelling at the same (legal) speed as themselves. Additionally, drivers are not overtaken
by other drivers who are driving at the same speed as themselves. Therefore, having a true picture of
how much speeding is occurring across the network is difficult for a motorist to observe.
More needs to be done to convince the influencers (e.g., motoring publications, journalists, and the
media) that the countermeasures are based on sound research.
There are key elements that are missing from public understanding about speed limits. For example,
some members of the public believe that higher speeds are suitable on higher quality roads. Further,
lowering speed limits might be viewed by some members of the public as governments having failed to
maintain roads to a level that allows safe travel at reasonable speeds. Thus, speed limit setting needs to
be better explained to the public in order to minimise collective risk.
People do not think about travel, they think about what they are going to do on arrival. Therefore,
attempts to delay arrival voluntarily may not be popular with the public.
The media themselves could be a target for key messages of the campaign, since they can be a big
barrier to getting safety messages across.
Humans are not programmed to speed. For instance, one respondent reported, its important to
acknowledge that from cave man times we fear heights but that fear of high speeds has never been built
into our systems.
The issue of personal risk is difficult to determine. One respondent reported that, It is not so easy to
accept lower driving speeds if you dont experience (safety) problems of higher driving speeds. If that is
correct, a campaign should not be based on individual experiences.
Speed limit setting needs to be better explained to the public. Providing more information would help to
minimise collective risk.
6.2.7 Other considerations

Evaluation
Several respondents highlighted the importance of evaluation to determine short and long term success of
the Campaign Strategy. More specifically, the use of lag time indicators (e.g., changes in perceptions about
social norms and changes in free-running vehicle speeds over time) were noted as useful to examine and
guide which elements of the Campaign Strategy were more or less successful. It was noted by some
respondents that elements identified in the proposed Campaign Strategy would help to change social norms
about speeding over time. Further, one respondent highlighted that there had been some movement on
influencing norms about speeding in Australia, identifying the Mornington Peninsula as one example of
norms changing in an encouraging direction over time. As noted in the literature review, speed limits were
reduced on several rural roads (by 10km/h or 20km/h on 100km/h roads) and residential roads (by 10km/h
on 50km/h roads) within the Mornington Peninsula area (see Section 4.2.1 for a more detailed discussion). In
that project, follow-up telephone interviews revealed strong support from community members for these
reduced speed limits. In addition, one respondent suggested that more specific information about evaluation
options be included in the final version in the Campaign Strategy.
Speed management is part of a holistic approach to road safety

It was noted that the Campaign Strategy needs to be implemented alongside additional countermeasures
(e.g., enforcement, existing road safety advertisements) to increase demand for safer speeds. Two
respondents highlighted the point that speed is only one factor to consider in the larger road trauma
discussion and that a more holistic view of managing on-road risks was required.
An understanding of the role that safe road infrastructure and safe vehicles plays in the
government's overall approach to reducing serious road trauma (i.e., it's not all about
speeding, but speed management is part of a holistic view of managing risk on the road
network).
In addition, one respondent noted that there was a risk in the general public perceiving that the government
wants to reduce speeds on all roads, despite this not necessarily being the case.
A key element missing from public understanding is that there is still a desire to retain
higher speeds on high quality routes. Most assume that the policy direction would be a
blanket reduction in speeds.
6.2.8 Additional ideas

Respondents provided a range of additional ideas that they believed could be included within and/or
alongside the proposed Campaign Strategy to enhance its effectiveness. These ideas appear below:
Education
More education is required to inform the public that increases in speed equate to increases in
braking distances
Further education is required to inform drivers on the vulnerability of unprotected road users (e.g.,
pedestrians) at lower speed limits
There was good support for Aim 6 which highlighted the need to educate people about the futility of
speeding in terms of time saving (i.e., To challenge the perception that speeding saves a large
amount of time, and/or that it is possible to make up a large amount of lost time by speeding).
Incentivising good driving behaviour
Two respondents suggested that insurance companies could introduce incentives to reward drivers
(individual drivers and companies) who comply with the posted speed limits
Offering drivers discounts on equipment (e.g., Intelligent Speed Adaptation [ISA] in a NavAid
device) that drivers can use to monitor their speeds.
Implementation of additional countermeasures linked to enforcement
Sending frequent traffic offenders informative warning letters that inform them of their risky
behaviour
Implementing warning fines for first time offenders, which would only be implemented if the offender
repeats a speeding offence within 3 to 4 months
Providing warnings to the public when new speed limits are introduced.
Additional strategies to assist local action
Implementing personalised speed limits in local streets with childrens drawings and captions such
as, we like to play here.
Enabling the public to send speeding-related complaints to road safety organisations to help the
community address local speed problems. One respondent noted that in the Netherlands, members
of the community can send complaints to an internet-site of the Dutch road safety organisation Safe
Traffic in the Netherlands. The organisation then helps and organises the neighbourhood into
fulfilling a more active role in the local road safety work and thus, helps the community to address
local speed problems.
Provide the public with more information on individuals attitudes towards speeding behaviour. For
example, after speeds were reduced in the Mornington Peninsula, 83% of community survey respondents
perceived that the reduced residential speed limits were appropriate, with 81% stating that they supported
the reduced speed limit of 40km/h. Further, 70% of respondents supported reducing the residential speed
limit to 40km/h in other parts of the shire. Providing this additional information to the public . would help
counteract the shock jock/vocal minority voice who most likely reflect the view of only a small part of the
community, as stated by one respondent.
Additional messaging ideas
Drivers should be encouraged to give themselves a gift of a safety buffer. This represents an
alternative way of selling the message that a person is driving too fast for the unexpected.
Messages that open dialogue, rather than shut it down with authoritative messages (e.g.,
enforcement) are welcomed
Drawing upon the social norm of not speeding, consider public education surrounding enforcement
to go with the theme that speed enforcement is protecting you from the speeding driver.
6.3 Conclusions and recommendations

The aim of this research project was to identify interventions that could create, increase, and/or sustain
public demand for safer speeds in Australia and New Zealand. Future Austroads projects may seek to trial
and evaluate potential countermeasures to help achieve this aim.
As noted in the introductory section of this report, sufficient evidence exists to establish the link between
increased speed and increased crash risk and severity of the crash outcome. Despite extensive efforts to
educate the community about these risks, speeding remains a significant contributor to road trauma.
Therefore, it has been widely acknowledged that there is a need to alter the way in which the community
thinks about speeding on the road. More specifically, it has been argued that there is a need to decrease the
social acceptance of speeding and increase compliance with posted speed limits, which, in turn, should lead
to the creation of greater public demand for safer speeds (Australian Transport Council, 2011; National Road
Safety Committee, 2013). These outcomes are likely to only occur as a result of ongoing efforts across many
domains within the road management system. It is recognised that each part of the system has a different,
yet complementary role to play in continuing to advise the community about the risks associated with
speeding, as well as to find better ways of communicating the positive outcomes associated with speed limit
compliance. However, this challenge is significant.
As has been highlighted throughout this report, there are many factors that can influence a drivers choice of
speed. Some of those factors act in a reactionary manner, such that a motorist is forced to reduce their
speed (e.g., to safely manoeuvre around a tight curve or to avoid receiving an infringement from a speed
camera). Other factors, however, can be considered in a more voluntary manner, such that motorists willingly
reduce their speed to an appropriate (safe/legal) speed. Some examples of these factors include the desire
to obey the law, the desire to remain safe and protect other road users, and the desire to retain ones licence
in order to access work opportunities that require a driving licence (particularly where public transport options
are limited). Any increase in current public demand for safer speeds would, ideally, result from increases in
the voluntary category of influences, rather than an increase in the reactionary influences, although it is
acknowledged that both are likely to have safety benefits.
The information presented in the preceding sections of this report has highlighted that there are a range of
ways that show promise in creating, increasing, and/or sustaining public demand for safer speeds. However,
it is acknowledged that while innovative strategies are required in order to achieve this outcome, there is also
likely to be great value in current and/or former countermeasures that should not be disregarded. Rather,
existing countermeasures that have sought to improve community acceptance of safer speeds and promote
the benefits of safer speeds should continue and, where relevant, could be shared across jurisdictions so
that consistent messaging occurs. It is vital that the successes gained from earlier speeding
countermeasures be capitalised upon, and that challenges or difficulties experienced be learned from.
Australias current National Road Safety Strategy (2011-2020) has highlighted this issue by citing the need to
harness community support for current and future speed management strategies and also by calling for
ongoing public engagement to build sufficient acceptance of new initiatives (Australian Transport Council,
p. 67).
As a result of the literature review and stakeholder consultation phases of this project, the proposed
Campaign Strategy was developed and refined and is presented in Table 6.2. This Campaign Strategy
represents the culmination of available evidence, expert opinion, and stakeholder input regarding
implementation feasibility of potential countermeasures aimed at creating, increasing and/or sustaining
public demand for safer speeds in the Australasian context. As discussed earlier, it is acknowledged that
some interventions in the Campaign Strategy are drawn from areas outside the road safety research field
and, therefore, do not have a road user evidence base to draw upon. Therefore, it is recommended that
future research investigating the effectiveness of these interventions in achieving the nine aims be
conducted and further, that future speeding-related research be targeted to the specific aims contained in the
Campaign Strategy.
6.3.1 Considerations for individual jurisdictions

It is important to acknowledge that no two jurisdictions in Australia/New Zealand are the same. There are a
range of issues, facilitators, barriers, and costs unique to individual jurisdictions that will need to be
considered and addressed accordingly by them before trialling part or all of the proposed Campaign
Strategy. Additionally, specific road user/community groups are likely to have a different focus across
jurisdictions. For instance, jurisdictions where the majority of the population reside in urban areas may
require a different focus compared to jurisdictions with a greater number of rural and remote communities
(e.g., the Australian Capital Territory has 0.3% rural residents while the Northern Territory has 28.3%;
Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2014). Further, specific groups within the community (e.g., indigenous
people, people from a non-English speaking background, and other culturally sensitive community members)
also represent groups with particular needs and may vary in the populations represented across the
Australian and New Zealand jurisdictions. Of particular note, Australian indigenous people are overrepresented in crash statistics (Sheehan et al., 2008). Compared to the non-indigenous population,
Australian Indigenous people are three times more likely to be involved in a crash (e.g., Fitts, Palk, &
Lennon, 2013). Similar findings have also been reported in New Zealand, with Mori people significantly
more likely than non-Mori to die as a result of a road crash (Ministry of Social Development, 2010).
Individual jurisdictions may also have a particular need to focus on specific road user groups (e.g., young
drivers, international drivers, motorcycle riders, heavy vehicle drivers) in addressing demand for safer
speeds. It is also acknowledged that there will be differing levels of support across jurisdictions for speeding
interventions from key stakeholders including politicians, transport, health, and policing agencies, as well as
media organisations. Advocacy work with these groups will continue to be necessary to maintain consistent
messaging that demand for safer speeds is an important road safety priority.
As highlighted in comments received from stakeholder consultations, the importance of political will in
garnering support for safer speeds is critical, and without it, interventions such as the proposed Campaign
Strategy presented in the next section of this report may have reduced impact. Therefore, it is seen as vital
that the Australian and New Zealand road safety communities continue advocating for recognition of the
importance of issues raised in this report. The need to influence the influencers will be a necessary step in
continuing to promote the safer speeds message. From the perspective of the media, there will likely be
individuals/organisations in individual jurisdictions that are less supportive of such messages. Therefore,
these groups/individuals could be targeted with information specifically about the need for safer speeds
whenever individual interventions are launched/trialled, or at times when motoring is in the public eye (e.g.,
UN Global Road Safety Week, local Road Safety Weeks in Australia/New Zealand, motor shows, Fatality
Free Friday, World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims, public holidays such as Christmas and
Easter). Such actions may provide individual opportunities for myth busting (as outlined in the Campaign
Strategy) among those who have loud voices in the community and currently report on road safety issues
from a scientifically uninformed perspective.
6.3.2 Implementation considerations

The wide diversity that exists across Australian and New Zealand jurisdictions makes the recommendation of
individual interventions for specific areas problematic. There is need for individual jurisdictions to consider a
range of costs and benefits of the proposed Campaign Strategy and its individual parts in order to determine
the likely feasibility from their unique perspective. This section provides an overview of the likely issues to be
addressed when considering implementation of interventions contained in the proposed Campaign Strategy.
Diversity exists across jurisdictions in areas including speed limit setting policies, resourcing, messaging and
advertising strategies, and political will associated with promoting safer speeds.
The information in Table 6.1 will assist in determining the issues to consider when deciding which aims to
address and which potential interventions to trial in individual jurisdictions. The table contains a range of
considerations including factors influencing costs and benefits associated with each of the interventions. It is
recognised that costs may vary substantially across jurisdictions. There are a number of other factors that
may influence the feasibility and willingness of jurisdictions to implement the proposed countermeasures,
including:
Level of political will for speed management

Jurisdictional commitment to prioritising low level speeding (in relation to other types of speeding)
Levels of resourcing across relevant government agencies (police, health, transport)
Level of system development and capability (e.g. mapping road network speed limits for ISA
implementation)
Existing and future police enforcement constraints

Existing road safety messaging and future capacity requirements
Offence rates - levels of low, mid and high level speeding across different speed zones/roads
Proportion of serious and repeat offenders
Proportion of motorists with nil demerit points
Strength of community views on issues such as those noted by Elliott (1992; documented in Table 3.2)
including moral attachment to the law as fair, proper, necessary, perceptions about non-compliance with
speed limits as unsafe, even at low levels, etc.
Table 6.1
Issues to consider when addressing each aim
Intervention Type
Factors influencing costs
Factors influencing benefits
Feasibility
Education
Campaign
(Aims 1-8)
Level of use of traditional vs

social media
Contracting arrangements with
media provider
Length of run of campaign +
production and distribution of
supporting materials
Longevity of message in
market place if sustained via
traditional media
Sharing of message among
key target groups via social
media which may also sustain
in the market place
Dependent on resourcing
and level of political will to
address sustained
messaging re safer
speeds
Considered highly
feasible in Australasian
context
Real time feedback

on proportion of
people speeding
(Aim 4)
Equipment:
Actual (or manipulated)

information about proportion of
current road users speeding is
provided to those who use the
road to change descriptive
norm
and political will
Considered highly
context
Variable messaging signs

(existing or purchase new)
Devices to record proportion
of traffic exceeding posted
speed limits
Development of app to
communicate with road users
Maintenance and devaluation
of assets
Other:
Distribution of app or
advertising to facilitate uptake
of app by road users
Reliant on internet connection
to provide feedback to road
users via app
Research staff costs for follow
up with participants
Intervention with
parents by invoking
the Induced
Hypocrisy
Paradigm
Recruitment and participant

expenses
up with participants and analysis
Dependent on scale of trial

and number of people reached
and political will
Considered highly
context
ISA trials
(Aim 6)
Equipment:
Potential for sustained level of

speed compliance while
devices are in use
Involvement of partners
(insurers) to assist with
sustainability of program
Dependent on resourcing,
political will, buy in from
insurers
Dependent on ISAfriendly road network
Considered highly
context
Enhanced control beliefs if

successful with
implementation strategies
Fewer motorists becoming
unlicensed
Dependent on resourcing,
political will
Dependent on ISAfriendly road network if
ISA option used
Considered feasible in
Australasian context
Purchase and installation of

ISA devices
Maintenance and devaluation
of assets
Other:
reimbursement
up with participants and
analysis
Legal expenses relating to
mandating for repeat
speeders and costs of follow
up
Implementation
intentions for those
with limited demerit
points remaining
(Aim 7)

reimbursement
Monitoring of progress, perhaps
via ISA devices (costs as per
above)
up and data analysis
Intervention Type
Factors influencing costs
Factors influencing benefits
Feasibility
Corporate
responsibility
options
(Aim 8)
Legal requirements relating to

mandating speed limiting of
heavy/fleet vehicles
Speed limiting devices fitted in
all contracted vehicles
Monitoring for compliance of
contractual arrangements
Enhanced compliance with

speed limits across road
network
Dependent on consistent use
of this contractual agreement
condition
Dependent on political
will to mandate
contractual agreements,
resourcing
Change the
language
(Aim 9)
Requires change in the way

policy makers, reporters, road
safety advocates describe
speed.
Some education/staff training
costs would be incurred
Costs associated with altering
legislation to hypothecate
revenue from speed
enforcement programs
Gradual shift in the way

speeding is reported/described
Gains for funding of road
safety programs via
hypothecation of revenue from
speed enforcement programs
Dependent on political
and resourcing
Table 6.2
Proposed Campaign Strategy containing nine aims and potential countermeasures to address each aim
Aim
Rationale/ problem to
be addressed
Potential countermeasure
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
a) Education campaign to
publicise and explain evidence
from jurisdictions where
increased speed limits have
demonstrated increased road
trauma
Myth Busting Opportunities:
National surveys report

relatively high %
respondents (66%) agreeing
more likely to crash at
70km/h than at 60km/h
Previous examples of public
demand for slower speeds
(e.g., Town of Clunes
campaigning to keep speed
camera; renaming of the
Victorian town of Speed to
SpeedKills; community
action groups in other places
that call for safer speeds)
Using existing community
support (e.g. citizens of the
towns of Clunes and Speed)
may be seen as more
credible than authority
(government) voices in future
campaigns
Speeding means different
things to different people;
need to concept-test
materials from existing
campaigns to determine how
best to portray risk concepts
to different target groups
Partners (e.g., Police,
citizens of towns who have
already shown support for
safer speeds)
National survey data on

this topic has remained
stable for last 10+ years
(see Department of
Infrastructure and Regional
Development, 2015)
Prior personal experience
of no harm from speeding
reinforces concept that
personal risk is low
Collective risk is a difficult
concept to explain
Crash risk methodology
difficult to explain to lay
audience and it is often
criticised
Risk of crash involvement
from speeding is not as
precise as showing risk of
increasing BAC and level
of physical impairment/risk
of crashing
Public misperception that
roads with unrestricted
speed limits (e.g., German
autobahns) are safer than
Australian roads; often
cited comparison to justify
faster speeds as low risk
Petroulis, 2014
Kloeden at al. risk
curves
Jurisdictions
where speed
limits have been
raised and shown
an increase in
trauma & where
lowered and
shown a decrease
in trauma (e.g.,
Elvik et al., 2004;
Graham &
Sparkes, 2011)
European
Transport Safety
Council 2015 PIN
report re German
fatalities on
motorways with
unrestricted speed
limits
Level of whole of
population
understanding of
link between
crash risk and
speed (Petroulis,
2014)
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure). Selfreport data could
be used to assess
the effectiveness
of specific
campaigns. Use of
both experimental
and control
groups.
Short and long
term evaluation.
More specifically, it
is recommended
that short term
specific evaluation
of the campaign
messaging is
required. Further,
that the Campaign
Strategy needs to
be implemented
long term (and be
subjected to
ongoing
evaluation) to have
the greatest
impact.
Create Demand for Safer Speeds

Aim 1 To
enhance
community
understanding
of risks
associated with
speeding
Lack of understanding of
relationship between
increased speed and
increased crash risk
German autobahns are

safer than other roads
Our communities dont want
reduced speeds or speed
cameras
b) Education campaign to
provide information to compare
increased BAC, impairment
level and crash risk with
increased speed, extended
reaction time/stopping and
crash risk
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Aim 2 To
enhance
community
understanding
that increased
speeds result
in increased
crash severity,
based on
uncontested
laws of physics
Relationship between
increased speed and
increased severity of
crash outcome not fully
understood
Education campaign to explain

link between travel speed and:
Laws of physics are difficult

to dispute
Concept of severity easier to
explain than crash risk
concept
Relationship between speed
and outcome severity likely
to be easier to explain than
the crash risk relationship
Concept of a survivable
speed or a healthy speed is
difficult to argue when
human frailty is examined
Highly skilled racing car
drivers die in crashes
because they are not able to
control vehicle when
something goes wrong,
despite having more
protective equipment than
average car driver
Prior experience of
no/minimal injury from
speed-related crash may
counter beliefs in the
relationship between force
& harmful consequences
Lack of knowledge about
who/what is most credible
source of information in the
speeding domain.
Research needed to
determine who/what is
credible source of scientific
information for different
target groups
The speed paradox the
mismatch between beliefs
about speeding and actual
behaviour (i.e. Believe that
speeding is not acceptable
but also report engaging in
speeding)
Convincing people about
difficulty controlling vehicle
if something goes wrong
may be contrary to their
experience; Vehicle
improvements (e.g.
Antilock Braking System)
may counteract belief in
need for safer speeds due
to misperceptions about
increased protection
offered
Evidence from
physical sciences
re impact
forces/human
tolerance
Provision of info
re harm of
tobacco from
authoritative,
credible sources
had impact over
time.
Level of whole of
population
understanding of
link between
crash severity and
speed (Petroulis,
2014)
Fleiter & Watson,
2006; paradoxical
nature of attitudes
toward speeding
and actual
speeding
behaviour
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure). Use of
both experimental
and control
groups.
Short, medium,
and long term
evaluation
The safety aspect of

the low level speed
message has not
been well understood
Misperceptions exist
about ability to control
a vehicle at speed

recognising a hazard;
reacting to hazard;
braking;
impact forces on body as a
result of not stopping before
collision
Consider emphasising
established scientific principles
and use of high profile
scientific personnel (e.g.,
Physics Professor) to deliver
credible message re physical
properties of speed and impact
on human body. Also consider
emphasising positive message
re braking distance (e.g.
keeping a larger following
distance from the vehicle in
front will provide a safety
buffer and decrease likelihood
of crashing).
Consider use of simulation to
demonstrate vehicle handling
skills decrease with increasing
speed
Crashes are survivable at
high speeds
Id be able to stop in time
Id be able to control my car
in that crash scenario
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Aim 3 Increase
awareness of
purpose and
benefits of
speed
enforcement
Relationship between
speed enforcement &
safety outcomes not well
understood
a) Education campaigns to
increase awareness and
understanding of:
Some sections of community

have high levels of support
for speed enforcement (not
necessarily known by all
e.g. Town of Clunes
campaigning to retain
decommissioned speed
camera
Evidence can be used to
demonstrate that speed
enforcement has had
positive benefits to society
Relatively higher levels of
support for overt
enforcement compared to
covert
citizens of towns who have
already shown support for
speed enforcement, parents
who support enforcement
around schools)
As per Aim 1 and 2, lack of

understanding about need
for speed compliance
among sections of
community (re risk and
severity)
Variation in enforcement
tolerance levels across
jurisdictions. Public
misperceptions about
tolerance levels and impact
of perceptions of de facto
speed limit
Perceptions of unfairness
at how speed enforcement
is deployed (e.g., speed
traps), lack of faith in
camera accuracy, often
fuelled by negative media
stories.
Benefits of point-to-point
speed enforcement not yet
well explained to
community
Wilson, Willis,
Hendrikz, Le
Brocque, &
Bellamy, 2010
Cameron, 2008
Newstead &
Cameron, 2003;
evaluations
showing benefits
of speed
enforcement
programs
Victorian AuditorGeneral's Office,
2011
NSW Centre for
Road Safetys
Annual NSW
Speed Camera
Performance
Review, 2014
Qualitative data
(e.g., interviews
with different road
user groups can
be used to
demonstrate
changes in levels
of awareness/
benefits)
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure; changes
in annual
attitudinal
surveys). Use of
both experimental
and control
groups.
Short, medium,
and long term
evaluation
Lack of understanding
about success of
speed enforcement in
reducing crashes &
road trauma
about primary
purpose of speed
enforcement (Safety,
NOT revenue)
about benefits of new
speed management
approaches (e.g.
point-to-point)
contribution that speed

enforcement has made to
improving road safety (e.g.,
crash reductions; cameras
protect you and your family
from speeding drivers)
site selection for
enforcement
locations/camera
deployment
strict requirements re
enforcement technology
certification
benefits of deterring
speeding as opposed to
catching those who exceed
speed limits
primary safety purpose of
speed cameras, as opposed
to revenue raising
Speed cameras are used to
trap motorists
Speed enforcement makes
no difference to safety
Speed cameras are only
used to raise money for
government
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
a) Education campaign
describing proportions of
motorists actually speeding
(i.e. less than half) and noting
that excessive speeding is
rare. Could demonstrate this
via showing footage of typical
road with a virtual car
travelling at speed limit,
demonstrating majority not
speeding past virtual car (using
data captured from current
CCTV cameras); public
release of speed survey data
which shows that less than half
are speeding
b) Community challenge:
challenge people to
count/observe proportion of
traffic above/below posted
speed limit when travelling and
link to education campaign re
proportions of motorists who
are actually speeding using
actual speed survey data
c) Real time feedback re
proportion of motorists
exceeding speed limit on
particular roads (via VMS or
via data collected from apps
that could pool data about
speed compliance on specific
routes).
d) Trial VMS feedback re %
motorists complying with
speed limit (actual or
manipulated) to encourage
Objective data from speed

surveys can be used to show
more than half vehicles
travelling at or below posted
speed limit.
Transport Authorities who
capture speed survey data)
VMS signage available on
many major roads
Potential disbelief in speed

survey data, based on
what people experience on
the road (i.e. perceptions of
being overtaken by lots of
people exceeding speed
limits)
Development of material
and credible source to
deliver. Who/what is
credible source?
Potential for motorists to
intentionally speed to
manipulate the % figures
displayed
Survey data from

multiple
jurisdictions
showing that more
than 50% of traffic
complying with
posted speed
limits
Provision of
normative
feedback data
shown to be
effective at
reducing speeds
when proportion
of compliance
higher (Van
Houten et al.
1980; 1981;
Wrapson et al.,
2006)
Personalised
normative
feedback (Fylan et
al., 2006)
Schramm et al.,
2012 VMS
feedback re speed
and headway
altered driver
behaviour
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure); Official
records/ annual
survey data (i.e.,
review and
compare yearly
speeding statistics)
Qualitative data
pre and post
intervention (e.g.,
interviews to
examine changes
in particular target
group beliefs about
descriptive norm
e.g., do learner
drivers still think
everyone speeds?)
Short, medium and
long term.
Objective data
(e.g., download
data from apps to
show extent to
which speeding
occurs and
whether this has
changed over
time).
Increase Demand for Safer Speeds

Aim 4 To
challenge the
prevailing
descriptive
norm that
everyone
speeds
Community
misperceptions
regarding the
prevalence of speeding.
The belief that everyone
speeds is contrary to onroad speed
assessments
demonstrating that less
than half of traffic is
exceeding posted speed
limit, and that
prevalence of high range
speeding is extremely
low
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Growing number of
examples nationally and
internationally of reduced
speed limits (lower than in
Australia), particularly in
residential areas (e.g., 20s
Plenty For Us in the UK)
Evidence of reduced speed
limits equating to reduced
crashes and trauma
Evidence from Australia
(e.g., Mornington Peninsula)
showing approval of reduced
speeds
Parental desire to protect
child
Drawing on pester power of
children to influence parental
behaviour
Note recent examples of
childrens involvement in car
companies using the
perspective of children in
new car advertisements to
describe features of a new
vehicle (e.g., The New MY15
Colorado It Wont Look
New for Long:
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=-UJLX4bWzk0; and
the 2015 Holden Cruze :
Residential areas are often

also commuter roads, used
as transit roads, not just
viewed as spaces where
people live
Comparing SA speed limit
(25km/h) could create
difficulties for other
jurisdictions
Would need to devote
class time in schools in an
already crowded national
curriculum
Induced hypocrisy
paradigm: a novel
way of raising
individuals
awareness of their
being in a state of
dissonance
(Stone, Aronson,
Crain, Winslow, &
Fried, 1994). By
drawing attention
to the fact that
there is
dissonance which
does not make
sense, individuals
should be
motivated to
change
Induced
hypocrisy/
dissonance based
interventions
literature; Freijy &
Kothe, 2013
The use of media
outlets was trialled
as an Easter road
safety campaign
on Brisbane Radio
96.5 by presenter
Liam Renton in
2010.
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure to assess
changes in
normative beliefs;
Official
records/annual
survey data (i.e.,
review and
compare yearly
trends in normative
acceptance of and
beliefs about
speeding))
Short, medium and
long term.
Assess individual
changes in
intentions to speed
and speeding
behaviour (could
be self-report or
app based/ISA
based) after
exposure to
information that is
contradictory to
their stated
intentions or actual
speeding
behaviour.
social comparison (personal

normative feedback) and
promote communal goal
setting (Best recorded
compliance %).
Aim 5 To
challenge
injunctive/mora
l norm that
speeding is
acceptable and
approved of by
others (i.e.,
that speeding
is no big deal)
Speeding is an illegal
high risk behaviour and
normative influences are
a key factor influencing
speeding
Need to find ways to
harness the power of
other people to demand
safer speeds from those
who speed
Invoke moral norms to
demonstrate the issue
that many do not
approve of speeding and
its deadly consequences
a) Education campaigns to:

demonstrate that Australia
has high posted speed limits
compared to many other
countries
parts of our community are
not happy that you speed,
and that you risk our lives
by choosing
unsafe/unhealthy speeds
(e.g., could use real
examples of towns of Speed
name change and town of
Clunes in campaigning to
keep speed camera;
example of SA 25km/h
school zones compared to
40 km/h elsewhere)
challenge parents to
consider how they model
safe driving to their
children, including
challenging the notion of
safe to drive above the limit
b) Trial of intervention with
parents by invoking the
Induced Hypocrisy Paradigm.
Show that parents willingly
protect themselves and their
children in other ways (i.e.,
always use appropriate car
restraints, always drink
responsibly if driving/take taxi
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
home, turn phone off while

driving so as not to expose
child to danger; do not allow
guns to be used by children,
do not allow swimming after
food/in rough surf), yet
paradoxically:
https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=-UJLX4bWzk0
allow teen child to speed

and model speeding as
acceptable
speed when own child is in
the car, thereby risking their
life
speed when alone in
vehicle, even though their
speeding can affect others
c) Education campaign,
supported by school-based
activity, to alert children to the
importance of remaining safe
on the road and challenge
children to monitor their
parents on road behaviour
(e.g., a We dont speed
campaign, similar to the
Nobody smokes here
anymore anti-smoking
campaign)
d) Via media outlets (including
social media), encourage
public to nominate who they
want to protect on the road
(e.g., name their loved ones) in
order to promote the idea that
others on the road are also
responsible for the safety of
my loved ones.
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Fleet setting may
be a useful starting
point for
evaluation,
especially if
monitoring devices
are already fitted
to fleet vehicles.
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Smart phone apps & in

vehicle monitoring
equipment already available
and marketed to wide
audience (e.g. AAMI Safe
driver app)
Insurance companies
interested in linking
monitored driving
performance with incentives
for good driving
Young drivers previously
shown to engage well with
gamification linked to road
safety, particularly with
reductions in speed
outcomes achieved
Partners (e.g., insurance
companies)
One example of a current
advertisement that
Time saving is a perceived

advantage of speeding.
This represents a
behavioural belief
underpinning positive
attitudes towards speeding
that has previously been
difficult to alter due to
intuitive link between
travelling faster and time
saving
Belief that constantly
monitoring speedo leads to
distraction from driving task
Mandating ISA devices
requires appropriate
mapping of speed limits
across road network have
been conducted and is
accurate
Chorlton &
Conner, 2012;
Chorlton, Hess,
Jamson, &
Wardman, 2012;
ISA
Dutschke &
Wolley, 2009;
modelling of time
saved on trip
Young et al.,
2013; 2014 re
time saving on
journeys
Styles et al., 2009;
ISA for repeat
speeding
offenders
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure).
Controlled
environment
evaluation (e.g.,
assess the time
difference between
drivers who drive
just below, at, and
just above the
speed limit. Would
expect that there
would be very
minimal time
difference between
these drivers
journeys. The
findings could then
be publicly
reported.
e) Why are we still banging on

about speeding? represents an
idea that a campaign could
adopt to highlight that change
has occurred in many road
user behaviours for the better
in Australia (e.g., seat belt use
among highest in the world,
reductions in acceptability and
prevalence of drink driving),
but that speed, while also
harmful, remains prevalent and
problematic. These changes
may not be well known by all
sectors of the community and
may be worth emphasising to
indicate that we can change.
Aim 6 To
challenge the
perception that
speeding
saves a large
amount of time,
and/or that it is
possible to
make up a
large amount
of lost time by
speeding
Research indicates
minimal-to-no time
saved by exceeding
speed limits
a) Education campaign run in

conjunction with a trial using
aggregate data (e.g.,
organisational fleet) of travel
speeds and time taken for
journeys. Comparisons could
be drawn between actual time
taken vs. perceptions by
drivers of how long the
journeys would take when
observing the speed limit.
b) As above but run in
conjunction with ISA trial to
increase awareness of ISA
product and its advantages
could target young drivers and
include incentives linked to
insurance premiums could
provide evidence that
monitoring speed is not difficult
and not distracting (promote
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
cruise control, ISA, Speed

limiters)
c) Extend ISA trials to mandate
use of ISA for repeat speeding
offenders
emphasises the idea of not

making up additional time is
WAs Enjoy the Ride
campaign
(https://www.youtube.com/w
atch?v=QDlN_9fSAis).
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Specifically, that
speeding
behaviour does not
save time).
Short, medium,
and long term
evaluation
Short and medium
term evaluation
Speeding saves time

I can make up lost time if I
speed
Watching speedo is
distracting
Sustain Demand for Safer Speeds
Aim 7 To
challenge the
perception that
complying with
speed limits is
hard/impossibl
e and to
promote
individual
responsibility
for and ability
to choose and
control ones
speed
Commonly reported that

compliance with speed
limits is difficult, even if
desired, due to:
time constraints (see
above)
lack of awareness of
speed limit because
they change
frequently (see above
re use of ISA to
advise correct posted
speed limit)
perceptions of
reduced efficacy to
comply (e.g., cant
attend to road and
speedo at the same
time)
modern cars creating
false sense of travel
speed
Control belief exists that
I am not able to take
a) Community challenge
countermeasure could be
conducted as a natural
experiment to challenge
people to discuss with peers,
colleagues, family why
complying is hard, and then
challenge them to drive and
comply for a set amount of
time (e.g., a week) to
demonstrate that they have
control over their speed and
that it is possible to comply,
discuss where difficult to
comply, share strategies to
assist with compliance
b) Education campaign could
provide examples of previously
difficult behaviours (seat belt
use) that have now become
habitual and easy for most
people
c) Trial with motorists who are
close to losing licence due to
Availability of previous
examples of how a nonhabitual driving-related
behaviour (e.g. seat belt use)
has become habitual
Socially-based anti-speeding
initiatives such as Enjoy the
Ride, Drive Social and Join
the Drive all encourage a
prosocial approach to road
use. Outcomes for a
community challenge
countermeasure fit with this
concept
Expressed desire for some
(e.g., inadvertent speeders)
to observe speed limits but
dont know what they are.
Could pitch this idea as a
way of helping you be a lawabiding citizen
GPS devices in vehicles
already available
Reverting to habitual
speeding on well-travelled
roads, even if not intending
to
Convincing people of the
value of trying to comply
Perceptions that
motorcyclists can break the
speed limit without much
risk of penalties, so why
charge car or truck drivers
with those offences? (i.e.,
inconsistent enforcement
across road user groups)
Recruitment and retention
of participants who are
close to losing licence
Lack of accurate mapping
of speed zones for use by
ISA systems/apps
Lewis, Watson,
White & Elliott;
2013
Lewis, 2014
(unpublished) re
control beliefs
Carsten, 2012
Styles, Imberger,
& Cairney (2009)
ISA repeat
speeders trial
Implementation
Intentions (IFTHEN plans)
noted as effective
at reducing
speeding among
unintentional
speeders. E.g., If
other vehicles are
overtaking me
THEN I will drive
in a lower gear to
help me drive
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure)
Short and medium
term evaluation
Assess change in
self-reported
speeding or in
monitored speed
(via ISA or app) of
participants who
are close to
licence loss due to
demerit
accumulation.
Qualitative data
(e.g., interviews)
could assist in
understanding
what strategies
worked and why to
inform future
intervention.
Aim
be addressed
control of how fast I

drive. Need to build
perception of efficacy re
not speeding; need to
provide evidence that
monitoring speedometer
is not distracting
The notion that lower
freeway speeds lead to
driver boredom and
distraction, leading to
lane departure crashes
accumulated demerit points for

speeding to use
Implementation Intentions to
assist them to not speed when
faced with a situation on the
road where they may ordinarily
speed
d) Education campaign to
promote idea that we are in
control of our speed, not others
- show strategies for how to
keep control (e.g., use cruise
control, look at speedo to
monitor speed, use
GPS/ISA/apps to advise
speed limit, have passengers
check prevailing speed limit,
have kids check and advise
posted speed limits).
e) Conduct experiment with
instrumented vehicle (eye
tracking) to assess time eyes
are off road when checking
speedometer to provide
evidence that monitoring
speed is not distracting
Messages relating to time
management; ignoring pleas of
others to drive fast
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
slower (Brewster,
Elliott, & Kelly,
2015)
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Aim 8
Continue to
build a positive
culture
surrounding
road safety
more broadly,
and speeding
more
specifically
Need to continue to
promote safety culture
on the road to assist in
reducing death and
injury
AU/NZ have high speed
limits compared to many
other countries, though it
is not clear how well
understood this is
among the general
community
It is also not known how
well the AU/NZ public
understand the value of
speed management in
reducing road trauma,
nor the historical
perspective of overall
improvements in
reducing deaths in
Australia as well as
Australias road safety
performance, relative to
many other countries.
There is scope to
improve community
understanding of how
speed limits are set and
how speed enforcement
locations are determined
a) Education campaign to raise

awareness among the public
about significant reductions in
road-related fatalities, success
in transforming seat belt use
from a behaviour seen as
unnecessary to one of habitual
compliance in Australia
b) From a corporate
responsibility perspective,
make compliance with speed
limits a contractual
requirement for awarding
contracts for supply (e.g.,
government contracts) in order
to promote the message that
compliance is valued and
expected
Building on etiquette
established via initiatives
such as Join the Drive,
Drive Social, Enjoy the
Ride.
Some communities have
been vocal at lobbying to get
and keep speed cameras to
keep their streets safe.
Success of renaming town of
Speed to SpeedKills
Speed governors/limiters in
trucks
Personal gain vs expense

of collective gain
Contractual agreements
would need to be
developed and proof of
compliance necessary
Government and industry
would need to support
insertion of speed
compliance into contracts
Contractual
requirement cited
as current practice
in Sweden,
reported by
Anders Lie at
Trafinz
Conference
Keynote address,
2013.
Quantitative data
(e.g., self-report
pre-post evaluation
measure) to
examine change in
knowledge about
previous
successes in road
safety in Australia
Short and medium
term evaluation
Monitor number of
companies/fleets
willing to
undertake changes
to contracts
could commence
with audit of
government policy
and willingness to
include in
contracts
Aim
be addressed
Facilitators
Barriers
Aim 9
Challenge
language
associated with
speeding in
order to alter
public
perception of
its importance
Language can play an

important role in shaping
attitudes towards and
perceptions of a
behaviour
a) Cease using safe speed

terminology since it appears
that the link between safety
and speed has not been well
understood by the community,
Instead, consider use of
healthy speed to make
reference to safe from injury,
safe re reduced emissions,
safe re more inviting for active
transportation/vulnerable road
users to use the road
b) Emphasise the concept that
it is ok and healthy to travel at
or below the posted speed
limits
c) Cease use of revenue
raising phrase in relation to
speeding penalties. Alternative
wording examples: funds
generated by speeding
penalties, income derived from
safety cameras
d) Encourage jurisdictions to
hypothecate funds from
speeding penalties to road
safety and continue to inform
community of such
European trend towards

lower speed limits to
encourage sense of place,
more active transport etc
Success of renaming town of
Speed to SpeedKills
Disbelief in healthy speed

concept, particularly re
reduced emissions
Disbelief in risks
associated with speeding
Media representatives
presenting personal
opinion (persuasive)
versus road safety experts
Supporting
evidence/other
considerations
Evaluation
considerations
Content analysis
via social media
listening tools
(e.g., Radian6) to
investigate
language used 10
years ago to today
and/or compare
current language
with language
used in the
future/language
pre-post
introduction of the
countermeasure)
References
Aarts, L., & van Schagen, I. (2006). Driving speed and the risk of road crashes: A review. Accident Analysis
& Prevention, 38(2), 215-224. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.07.004.
Abdul Hanan, S. (2014). An application of an extended Theory of Planned Behaviour to understand drivers
compliance with the school zones speed limit in Australia and Malaysia. Unpublished QUT PhD
Dissertation.
ACT Auditor-Generals Office. (2014). ACT Auditor-Generals Office Performance Audit Report Speed
Cameras in the ACT.
Adminaite, D., Allsop, R., & Jost, G. (2015). Ranking EU progress on improving motorway safety. PIN Flash
Report 28. Retrieved from http://etsc.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015-03-pin-flash-report-28.pdf.
Agerholm, N. (2009). Intelligent Speed Adaptation the effect of incentives. 2009 Intelligent Speed
Adaptation Conference, 10 November, Sydney, New South Wales.
Agerholm, N., Tradisauskas, N., Juhl, J., Berthelsen, K., & Lahrmann, H. (2012). Intelligent speed adaptation
for involuntary drivers - final results. Paper presented at the 19th Intelligent Transport Systems World
Congress, ITS 2012.
Agerholm, N., Waagepetersen, R., Tradisauskas, N., Harms, L., & Lahrmann, H. (2008). Preliminary results
from the Danish intelligent speed adaptation project pay as you speed. IET Intelligent Transport Systems,
2(2), 143-153.
Aghte, H. (2014). 30 km/h Making Streets Liveable! In C. Berg & J. Thomson (Eds.), An ECI that Works!
Learning from the First Two Years of the European Citizens Initiative. Alfter, Germany: The ECI
Campaign.
Ahie, L. M., Charlton, S. G., & Starkey, N. J. (2015). The role of preference in speed choice. Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 30, 66-73.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
50, 179-211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Algie, J. (2011). The importance of fear reduction in fear-based road safety advertising appeals. Journal of
the Australasian College of Road Safety, 22(4), 99-105.
Algie, J., & Rossiter, J. R. (2010). Fear patterns: A new approach to designing road safety advertisements.
Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 38(4), 264-279. doi:
10.1080/10852352.2010.509019.
Anderson, G. F., & Hussey, P. S. (2000). Population aging: a comparison among industrialized countries.
Health Affairs, 19(3), 191-203. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.19.3.191
Ando, R., & Nishihori, Y. (2011). How does driving behavior change when following an eco-driving car?
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 577-587. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.08.064.
Andrieu, C., & Pierre, G. S. (2012). Comparing effects of eco-driving training and simple advices on driving
behavior. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 54, 211-220. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.740.
Archer, J., Fotheringham, N., Symmons, M., & Corben, B. (2008). The Impact of Lowered Speed Limits in
Urban/Metropolitan Areas. Melbourne, Victoria: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
ARRB Group Project Team. (2005). Evaluation of the Fixed Digital Speed Camera Program in NSW.
Sydney: Roads and Traffic Authority.
Auditor-General New South Wales. (2010). Improving road safety: School zones. Road and Traffic Authority,
Sydney, Australia.
Auditor-General New South Wales. (2011). Improving road safety: Speed cameras. Road and Traffic
Authority, Sydney, Australia.
Australian Bureau of Statistices. (2000). Health risk factors: Trends in smoking. Retrieved 6th March, 2015,
from
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/2f762f95845417aeca25706c00834efa/738d23457b86defbca25
70ec000e2f5c!OpenDocument.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2014). 3105.0.65.001 Australian Historical Population Statistics, 2014.
ttp://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/3105.0.65.0012014?OpenDocument.
Australian Federal Police. (2015). 500 drivers caught speeding in February. Retrieved 5th March, 2015, from
http://www.police.act.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/act/2015/march/500-drivers-caught-speedingin-february.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2014). National Drug Strategy Household Survey: 2013.
Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.
Australian Local Government Association, Bus Industry Confederation, Cycling Promotion Fund, National
Heart Foundation of Australia, & International Association of Public Transport. (2010). An Australian
Vision for Active Transport. Canberra: Australian Local Government Association.
Australian Standards Bureau (2014). Motor vehicle advertising. Retrieved 25th March, 2015, from
http://www.adstandards.com.au/process/theprocesssteps/specificproductsandissues/motorvehicleadvertis
ing.
Australian Transport Council. (2011). National Road Safety Strategy 2011-2020. Canberra: Australian
Transport Council.
Bailey, S. (2011). Rewarding Safe Road Use Behaviour. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Transport and
Main Roads.
Baker, R. (2014). Samsung tackles safe driving with gamification reward app. Retrieved October 22, 2014,
from http://www.adnews.com.au/news/samsung-tackles-safe-driving-with-gamification-reward-app.
Banawiroon, T., & Yue, W. L. (2003). A further investigation of 40km/h speed zone case study of Unley of
South Australia. Paper presented at the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Fukuoka, Japan.
Barkenbus, J. N. (2010). Eco-driving: An overlooked climate change initiative. Energy Policy, 38(2), 762-769.
doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.10.021.
Barth, M., & Boriboonsomsin, K. (2009). Energy and emissions impacts of a freeway-based dynamic ecodriving system. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 14(6), 400-410. doi:
10.1016/j.trd.2009.01.004.
Bates, L., Watson, B., & King, M. (2009b). Factors influencing learner driver experiences. Canberra:
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government.
Beck, K. H., Shattuck, T., Raleigh, R., & Hartos, J. L. (2003). Does graduated licensing empower parents to
place greater restrictions on their newly licensed teens' driving? Health Education and Behavior, 30, 695708.
Begg, D.J. & Stephenson, S. (2003). Graduated driver licensing: the New Zealand experience.
Journal of Safety Research, 34, 99-105.
Beanland, V., Goode, N., Salmon, P. M., & Lenn, M. G. (2013). Is there a case for driver training? A review
of the efficacy of pre- and post-licence driver training. Safety Science, 51(1), 127-137. doi:
10.1016/j.ssci.2012.06.021.
Beusen, B., Broekx, S., Denys, T., Beckx, C., Degraeuwe, B., Gijsbers, M., . . . Panis, L. I. (2009). Using onboard logging devices to study the longer-term impact of an eco-driving course. Transportation Research
Part D: Transport and Environment, 14(7), 514-520. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2009.05.009.
Blackman, R. A., Debnath, A. K., & Haworth, N. L. (2014). Influence of visible work activity on drivers speed
choice at roadworks. Paper presented at the Occupational Safety in Transport Conference, Gold Coast,
QLD.
Bolderdijk, J. W., Knockaert, J., Steg, E. M., & Verhoef, E. T. (2011). Effects of Pay-As-You-Drive vehicle
insurance on young drivers speed choice: Results of a Dutch field experiment. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 43(3), 1181-1186. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.12.032.
Bonita, R., Duncan, J., Truelsen, T., Jackson, R. T., & Beaglehole, R. (1999). Passive smoking as well as
active smoking increases the risk of acute stroke. Tobacco Control, 8(2), 156-160. doi:
10.1136/tc.8.2.156.
Brake.org.uk. (2014). Giant Walking Bus. Retrieved October 8, 2014, from
http://www.brake.org.uk/campaigns-events/take-action/giant-walking-bus-for-schools
Breen, J. (2004). Review of the road safety to 2010 strategy.
Brennan, L., & Binney, W. (2010). Fear, guilt, and shame appeals in social marketing. Journal of Business
Research, 63(2), 140-146. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.02.006.
Brewer, M.A., Pesti, G., & Schneider, W. (2006) Improving compliance with work zone speed limits:
Effectiveness of selected devices. Transportation Research Record,1948: 67-76.
Brewster, S. E., Elliott, M. A., & Kelly, S. W. (2015). Evidence that implementation intentions reduce drivers
speeding behavior: Testing a new intervention to change driver behavior. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 74, 229-242.
Burgess, C. N. W., & Webley, P. (2002). Evaluating the Effectiveness of the United Kingdom's National
Driver Improvement Scheme - Report: School of Psychology, University of Exeter.
Brown, B., & Russell, A. (1995). MADD and traffic safety: Grassroots success. Paper presented at the 13th
Internation Conference on Alcohol, Drugs, and Traffic Safety, Adelaide, South Australia.
Browne, D. (2014). Two thirds support mandatory speed controlling technology. Retrieved September 8,
2014, from http://www.transport-network.co.uk/Two-thirds-support-mandatory-speed-controllingtechnology/10794#.VDRkRvmSx8H.
Budd, L., Scully, J., & Newstead, S. (2011). Evaluation of the crash effects of Victorias fixed digital speed
and red-light cameras. Victoria, Australia: Monash University.
Bureau of Infrastructure Transport and Regional Economics. (2015). Road deaths Australia: December
2014. Canberra: Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development.
California Department of Transportation (2003). The con zone goes statewide. California Department of
Tranportation Journal, 4(1), 37-39.
Cameron, M. (2008). Development of strategies for best practice in speed enforcement in Western Australia:
Supplementary Report Number 277. Melbourne: MUARC.
Cameron, M. H., Newstead, S. V., Diamantopoulou, K., & Oxley, P. (2003). The interaction between speed
camera enforcement and speed-related mass media publicity in Victoria, Australia. In Proceedings of the
47th Annual Proceedings Association For The Advancement of Automotive Medicine, Lisbon, Portugal.
Carsten, O. M. J. (2012). Is intelligent speed adaptation ready for deployment? Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 48, 1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2012.05.012
Carsten, O. M. J., & Tate, F. N. (2005). Intelligent speed adaptation: accident savings and costbenefit
analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(3), 407-416. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2004.02.007.
Carver, A. (2011). Safe Speed Interest Group: Promoting Safe Walking and Cycling by Reducing Traffic
Speed. Submisson to the National Road Safety Strategy 2011-2020. Melbourne: Victoria Walks.
Cauchi, S. (2013, Feburary 14). No dumb luck: Metro claims safety success., The Age. Retrieved from
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/no-dumb-luck-metro-claims-safety-success-20130214-2eelt.html.
Cedersund, H. A., & Forward, S. (2007). How Do Drivers Evaluate Fine for Different Traffic Offences? A
Literature Study. Sweden: Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI).
Cestac, J., Paran, F., & Delhomme, P. (2014). Drive as I say, not as I drive: Influence of injunctive and
descriptive norms on speeding intentions among young drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic
Psychology and Behaviour, 23, 44-56. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2013.12.006.
Chamberlain, E. & Solomon, R. (2002). The case for a 0.05% criminal law blood alcohol concertration limit
for driving. Injury Prevention, 8(Suppl III), iii1-iii17.
Champness, P., Sheehan, M., & Folkman, L. M. (2005). Time and distance halo effects of an overtly
deployed mobile speed camera. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and
Education Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.
Chorlton, K., & Conner, M. (2012). Can enforced behaviour change attitudes: Exploring the influence of
Intelligent Speed Adaptation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 48, 49-56. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.06.007.
Chorlton, K., Hess, S., Jamson, S., & Wardman, M. (2012). Deal or no deal: Can incentives encourage
widespread adoption of intelligent speed adaptation devices? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 48, 73-82.
doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.02.019.
Christie, R. (2001). The Effectiveness of Driver Training as a Road Safety Measure: A Review of the
Literature. Melbourne: RACV.
Coesel, N., & Rietfeld, P. (1998). Time to tame our speed? Costs, benefits and acceptance of lower speed
limits. Paper presented at the Conference Road Safety Europe, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany.
Cugnet, S., Miller, H., Anceaux, F., & Naveteur, J. (2013). How do time pressured drivers estimate speed
and time? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 55, 211-218. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.040.
Compton, R.P., Blomberg, R.D., Moskowitz, H., Burns, M., Peck, R.C., & Fiorentino, D. (2002). Crash risk of
alcohol-impaired driving. In Proceedings of Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety 16th International
Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic
Safety (ICADTS), Stockholm, Sweden.
Comte, S. L. (2000). New systems: new behaviour? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour, 3(2), 95-111. doi: 10.1016/S1369-8478(00)00019-X.
Conway, M., & Dub, L. (2002). Humor in persuasion on threatening topics: Effectiveness is a function of
auidence sex role orientation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(7), 863-873. doi:
10.1177/014616720202800701.
Corben, B., D'Elia, A., & Healy, D. (2006). Estimating pedestrain fatal crash risk. Paper presented at the
Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland.
Costabile, J., Wall, J., Vecovski, V., & Bailey, R. (2014). The rapid deployment of an effective road safety
countermeasure through a smart phone application the story of speed advisor. Paper presented at the
Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Melbourne, Victoria.
Cruzado, I., & Donnell, E. T. (2010). Factors affecting driver speed choice along two-lane rural highway
transition zone. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 136, 755-764.
DElia, A., Newstead, S., & Cameron, M. H. (2007). Overall impact of speed-related initiatives and factors on
crash outcomes. Paper presented at the Association of the Advancement of Automotive Medicine,
October 2007, Melbourne, Victoria.
De Pauw, E., Daniels, S., Thierie, M., & Brijs, T. (2014). Safety effects of reducing the speed limit from 90
km/h to 70 km/h. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 62, 426-431. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.05.003.
De Pelsmacker, P., & Janssens, W. (2007). The effect of norms, attitudes and habits on speeding behavior:
Scale development and model building and estimation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39(1), 6-15. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2006.05.011.
Debnath, A. K., Blackman, R. A., & Haworth, N. L. (2012). A review of the effectiveness of speed control
measures in roadwork zones. Paper presented at the Occupational Safety in Transport Conference, Gold
Coast, Australia.
Debnath, A. K., Blackman, R. A., & Haworth, N. L. (2013). Understanding worker perceptions of common
incidents at roadworks in Queensland. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research,
Policing, & Education Conference, Brisbane, Australia.
Debnath, A. K., Blackman, R. A., & Haworth, N. L. (2014). A Tobit model for analyzing speed limit
compliance in work zones. Safety Science, 70, 367-377.
Debnath, A. K., Haworth, N. L., Rakotonirainy, A., Graves, G., & Jeffreys, I. (2013). Driver perceptions of the
benefits of reducing their driving speed on safety, emissions, and 2 stress and road rage. Paper
presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing & Education Conference, Brisbane,
Australia.
Decina, L. E., Thomas, L., Srinivasan, R., & Staplin, L. (2007). Automated Enforcement: A Compendium of
Worldwide Evaluations of Results. Washington D.C.: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Delaney, A., Diamantopoulou, K., & Cameron, M. H. (2003). MUARCS Speed Enforcement Research:
Principles Learnt and Implications for Practice. Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Delaney, A., Diamantopoulou, K., & Cameron, M. H. (2006). Strategic principles of drink-driving enforcement
(Report No. 249). Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Delaney, A., Lough, B., Whelan, M., & Cameron, M. (2004). A review of mass media campaigns in road
safety. Victoria, Australia: Monash University.
Delaney, A., Ward, H., & Cameron, M. (2005). The history and development of speed camera use Report
No. 242 Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Delhomme, P., De Dobbeleer, W., Forward, S., & Simes, A. (2009). Manual for Designing, Implementing,
and Evaluating Road Safety Communication Campaigns. Brussels: Directorate-General for Energy and
Transport, European Commission.
Delhomme, P., Grenier, K. & Kreel, V. (2008a). Replication and extension: The effect of the commitment to
comply with speed limits in rehabilitation training courses for traffic regulation offenders in France.
Transportation Research Part F, 11, 192-206.
Delhomme, P., Kreel, V. & Ragot, I. (2008b). The effect of the commitment to observe speed limits during
rehabilitation training courses for traffic regulation offenders in France. European Review of Applied
Psychology, 58, 31-42.
Department of Transport, Northern Territory Government (2015). Open speed trial review. Retrieved from,
http://www.transport.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/49192/Open-Speed-Trial-Review-SummaryReport-August-2015.pdf
Department of Health. (2015). Tobacco key facts and figures. Retrieved 6th March, 2015,
fromhttp://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/tobacco-kff
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development. (2015). Surveys of community attitudes to road
safety. Retrieved November 10, 2015, from
https://infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/community_attitudes_survey/index.aspx
Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development. (2014). Road Safety. Retrieved September 22,
2014, from https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/.
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure. (2014). Fact sheet. Alcohol and Drugs in road crashes
in South Australia. Retrived March 26, 2015, from
http://dpti.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/112324/DOCS_AND_FILES-8836450-v1Alcohol_and_Drugs.pdf.
Department of the Premier and Cabinet. (2014). Queenslanders respond to anti-smoking campaign [Press
release]. Retrieved from http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2014/7/8/queenslanders-respond-toantismoking-campaign.
Department of Transport and Main Roads. (2009). 2009 Queensland road safety awards normation.
Roadwork safety: Making safety around roadworks everyones responsibility. Queensland: Department of
Tranpsort and Main Roads.
Department of Transport and Main Roads. (2011). School zone speeding. Retrieved 5th March 2015, from
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/searchresults.aspx?query=infringement%20notice&collection=&scope=tmr.qld.gov.au&start_rank=41.
Department of Transport and Main Roads. (2014a). About speeding. Retrieved 12th March, 2015, from
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Driver-guide/Speeding/About-speeding.aspx
Department of Transport and Main Roads. (2014b). RSPAT Survey. Report B: Fatigue, school transport
safety, occupant restraint, heavy vehicles, cycling.
Department of Transport and Main Roads. (2014c). School Transport safety campaigns. Retrieved 5th March,
2015, from http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Safety-campaigns/School-transport-safety-campaigns.aspx.
Department of Transport and Main Roads. (2014d). Speed limit review. Retrieved October 22, 2014, from
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/speedlimitreview.
Devlin, A., Hoareau, E., Logan, D. B., Corba, B., & Oxley, J. (2010). Towards zero pedestrain trauma:
Literature review and serious casualty analysis. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety
Research, Policing and Education Conference, Canberra.
Diamantopoulou, K., & Cameron, M. H. (2002). An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Overt and Covert
Speed Enforcement Achieved Through Mobile Radar Operations (pp. xiv + 42). Victoria, Australia:
Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Diamantopoulou, K., Cameron, M. H., & Shtifelman, M. (1998). Evaluation of Moving Mode Radar for Speed
Enforcement in Victoria, 1995-1997. Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Diamantopoulou, K., & Corben, B. (2001). The Impact of Speed Camera Technology on Speed Limit
Compliance in Multi-Lane Tunnels. Victoria: Report to LMT.
Dinh, D. D., & Kubota, H. (2013). Drivers' perceptions regarding speeding and driving on urban residential
streets with a 30 km/h speed limit. IATSS Research, 37(1), 30-38. doi: 10.1016/j.iatssr.2012.12.001.
Doll, R., & Hill, A. B. (1952). A study of the aetiology of carcinoma of the lung. The British Medical Journal,
2(4797), 1271-1286. doi: 10.2307/25394568.
Donovan, R. J., Fielder, L. J., Ouschan, R., & Ewing, M. (2011b). Self-regulation of motor vehicle advertising:
Is it working in Australia? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(3), 631-636. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.003.
Donovan, R. J., & Henley, N. C. (1997). Negative outcomes, threats and threat appeals: Widening the
conceptual framework for the study of fear and other emotions in social marketing communications.
Social Marketing Quarterly, Fall, 56-67.
Donovan, R. J., & Henley, N. C. (2003). Social Marketing: Principles and Practice. IP Communications: East
Hawthorn, Victoria.
Donovan, R. J., Jalleh, G., & Henley, N. C. (1999). Executing effective road safety advertising: Are big
budgets necessary? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 13(3), 243-252.
Donovan, R. J., Fielder, L., & Ouschan, R. (2011a). Do motor vehicle advertisements that promote vehicle
performance attributes also promote undesirable driving behaviour? Journal of Public Affairs, 11(1), 2534.
Doyle, N., & Addison, M. (2006). Safety around roadwords. Its a two-way street. Looking after roadwork
safety Main roads experience. Presented at the Australian Tranpsort Research Forum, Gold Coast,
Australia.
Dumas, D. (2012, November 19). Metros tongue-in-check transport safety animated video goes viral on
social media., The Age. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au/national/metros-tongueincheektransport-safety-animated-video-goes-viral-on-social-media-20121118-29kbn.html.
Durkin, S., Brennan, E., & Wakefield, M. (2012). Mass media campaigns to promote smoking cessation
among adults: an integrative review. Tobacco Control, 21(2), 127-138. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011050345.
Dutschke, J. K., & Woolley, J. E. (2009). Simulation of rural travel times to quantify the impact of lower speed
limits. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing, Education Conference,
Sydney, New South Wales.
Dyson, C. B., Taylor, M. A. P., Woolley, J. E., & Zito, R. (2001). Lower urban speed limits: Trading off safety,
mobility and environmental impact. Paper presented at the Australian Transport Research Forum (ATRF),
Hobart, Tasmania.
Ebel, B. E., Koepsell, T. D., Bennett, E. E., & Rivara, F. P. (2003). Use of child booster seats in motor
vehicles following a community campaign. Journal of American Medical Association, 289(7), 879-884.
Egan, V. (2012). Dumb ways to die, smart ways to do viral. Retrieved October 22, 2014, from
https://econsultancy.com/blog/11204-dumb-ways-to-die-smart-ways-to-do-viral#i.1s5v1ab3m8e5n1.
Elder, R. W., Shults, R. A., Sleet, D. A., Nichols, J. L., Thompson, R. S., & Rajab, W. (2004). Effectiveness of
mass media campaigns for reducing drinking and driving and alcohol-involved crashes: A systematic
review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 27(1), 57-65. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.03.002.
Elliott, B. (1992). Achieving High Levels of Compliance with Road Safety Laws: A Review of Road User
Behaviour Modification. Report No. 6. Brisbane: Travel Safe Committee of Queensland.
Elliott, B. (1993). Road Safety Mass Media Campaigns: A Meta-Analysis: Elliott & Shanahan Research,
Federal Office of Road Safety.
Elliot, B. (2001a). The application of the Theorists Workshop Model of Behaviour Change to motorists
speeding behaviour in Western Australia, unpublished report, Western Australia, Office of Road safety,
Department of Transport.
Elliott, B. (2001b). Why retain speed tolerances? Paper presented at the National Speed and Road Safety
Conference, Adelaide.
Elliott, B. (2003a). Background for LTSA review of administrative penalties in New Zealand: An analysis of
deterrnece theory and risk. Land Transport Safety Authority, Wellington, New Zealand.
Elliott, B. (2003b). The psychology of fear appeals re-visited. Paper presented at the Australasian Road
Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Sydney, New South Wales.
Elliott, B. (2008). Can we rely on Deterrence Theory to motivate safe road user behaviour? Paper presented
at Joint ACRS-Travelsafe National Conference, Brisbane.
Elliott, M. A. & Armitage, C. J. (2006). Effects of implementation intentions on the self-reported frequency of
drivers compliance with speed limits. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12(2), 108-117.
Elliott, M. A., Armitage, C. J., & Baughan, C. J. (2005). Exploring the beliefs underpinning drivers intentions
to comply with speed limits. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 8(6),
459-479. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2005.08.002.
Elliott, M. A., & Thomson, J. A. (2010). The social cognitive determinates of offending drivers speeding
behaviour. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1595-1605.
Elliott, M. A., Thomson, J. A., Robertson, K., Stephenson, C., & Wicks, J. (2013). Evidence that changes in
social cognitions predict changes in self-reported driver behavior: Causal analyses of two-wave panel
data. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 905-916.
Ellison, A. B., & Greaves, S. P. (2010). Driver characteristics and speeding behaviour. Paper presented at
the Australasian Transport Research Forum, Canberra, ACT.
Ellison, A. B., Greaves, S. P., & Daniels, R. (2013). Speeding behaviour in school zones. Paper presented at
the Australasian College of Road Safety Conference, Melbourne, Victoria.
Elvik, R. (2010a). A restatement of the case for speed limits. Transport Policy, 17(3), 196-204. doi:
10.1016/j.tranpol.2009.12.006.
Elvik, R. (2010b). Why some road safety problems are more difficult to solve than others. Accident Analysis
& Prevention, 42(4), 1089-1096. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.12.020.
Elvik, R., Christensen, P., & Amundsen, A. (2004). Speed and road accidents: An evaluation of the power
model. Institude of Transport Economics, Norwegian Centre for Transport Research. Oslo, Norway.
Farmer, P. J. (1975). The Edmonton study: A pilot project to demonstrate the effectiveness of a public
information campaigning on the the subject of drinking and driving. In S. Israelstram & S. Lambert (Eds.),
Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety (pp. 831-843). Toronto: Addiction Research Foundation.
Faulks, I. J. (2011). Road safety advertising and social marketing. Journal of the Australasian College of
Road Safety, 22(4), 34-40.
Fell, J. C., & Voas, R. B. (2006). Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD): The First 25 Years. Traffic Injury
Prevention, 7(3), 195-212. doi: 10.1080/15389580600727705.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. . Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Fildes, B. N., Langford, J., Andrea, D., & Scully, J. (2005). Balance Between Harm Reduction and Mobility in
Setting Speed Limits: A Feasibility Study: AP-R272/05: Austrroads.
Fillmore, M. T., Blackburn, J. S., & Harrison, E. L. R. (2008). Acute disinhibiting effects of alcohol as a factor
in risky driving behavior. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 95, 97-106.
Filtness, A. J., Sheenhan, M., Fleiter, J., Armstrong, K., & Freeman, J. (2015). Options for rehabilitation in
Interlock programs. Austroads Publication No. AP-R484-15. Austroads: Sydney.
Fitts, M. S., Palk, G. R., & Lennon, A. J. (2013). Why do Indigenous Australians drink and drive? A qualitative
exploration of self-reported influences on drink driving behaviours of Indigenous peoples from remote
communities. In Proceedings of the 23rd Canadian Multidisciplinary Road Safety Conference, Montreal,
Canada.
Fitzgibbon, M., Gans, K. M., Evans, D. W., Viswanath, K., Johnson-Taylor, W. L., Krebs-Smith,
S. M. Yaroch, A. L. (2007). Communicating Healthy Eating: Lessons Learned and Future Directions.
Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 39(Supp. 2), S63-S71. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2006.08.017.
Fleiter, J. J. (2013). Keynote address: Optimising Speed Enforcement: Enhancing Safety, Efficiency, and
Deterrence, Trafinz Conference Safety & Efficiency -The challenges of delivering both Rotorua, 5
September, 2013.
Fleiter, J. J., Lennon, A., & Watson, B. C. (2007). Choosing not to speed: A qualitative exploration of
differences in perceptions about speed limit compliance and related issues. Paper presented at the
Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Melbourne, Victoria.
Fleiter, J. J., Lennon, A., & Watson, B. C. (2010). How do other people influence your driving speed?
Exploring the who and the how of social influences on speeding from a qualitative perspective.
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 13(1), 49-62. doi:
10.1016/j.trf.2009.10.002.
Fleiter, J. J., Lewis, I. M., & Watson, B. C. (2013). Promoting a more positive traffic safety culture in
Australia : lessons learnt and future directions. Paper presented at the Australasian College of Road
Safety Conference, 6-8 November, Adelaide, South Australia.
Fleiter, J. J., & Watson, B. C. (2006). The speed paradox: the misalignment between driver attitudes and
speeding behaviour. Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety, 17(2), 23-30.
Fleiter, J. J., & Watson, B. C. (2012). Automated speed enforcement in Australia: Recent examples of the
influence of public opinion on program sustainability. Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety,
43(3), 59-66.
Fleiter, J. J., Watson, B. C., & Lennon, A. (2013). Effective punishment experiences a novel approach to
conceptualising behavioural punishers and reinforcers in a road safety context. In N. Castro (Ed.),
Psychology of Punishment: New Research (pp. 1-30): Nova.
Fleiter, J. J., Watson, B. C., Lennon, A., King, M. J., & Shi, K. (2009). Speeding in Australia and China: A
comparison of the influence of legal sanctions and enforcement practices on car drivers. Paper presented
at the Australasian Road Safety Research Policing Education Conference, Sydney.
Fleiter, J. J., Watson, B. C., Lennon, A., & Lewis, I. M. (2006). Significant others, who are they? Examining
normative influences on speeding. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research Policing
Education Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland.
Floyd, D. L., Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (2000). A meta-analysis of research on protection
motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(2), 407-429.
Fylan, F., Hempel, S., Grunfeld, B., Conner, M., & Lawton, R. (2006). Effective interventions for speeding
motorists (Road Safety Research Report No. 66). London: Department of Transporto.
Forward, S. (2006). The intention to commit driving violations - A qualitative study. Transportation Research
Part F, 9, 412-426.
Freedman, M., De Leonardis, D., Polson, A., Levi, S., & Burkhardt, E. (2007). Field Test of the Impact of
Setting and Enforcing Rational Speed Limits Final Report for Gulfport, Mississippi--Demonstration
Community. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Freijy, T., & Kothe, E. J. (2013). Dissonance-based interventions for health behaviour change: A systematic
review. British Journal of Health Psychology, 18(2), 310-337. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12035.
Fuller, R., Bates, H., Gormley, M., Hannigan, B. S., S., Broughton, P., Kinnear, N., & O'Dolan, C. (2008). The
Conditions for Inappropriate High Speed: A Review of the Research Literature from 1995 to 2006.
London, United Kingdom: Department for Transport.
Garrard, J. (2008a). Safe speeds for all road users: Promoting safe walking and cycling by addressing traffic
speeds in Australias urban environment. Paper presented at the SafeRoads 2008 Conference,
Melbourne.
Garrard, J. (2008b). Safe speed: Promoting safe walking and cycling by reducing traffic speed. Safe Speed
Interest Group - The National Heart Foundation, Melbourne.
Garvill, J., Marell, A., & Westin, K. (2003). Factors influencing drivers decision to install an electronic speed
checker in the car. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 6(1), 37-43. doi:
10.1016/S1369-8478(02)00045-1.
Gavin, A., Walker, E., Murdoch, C., Graham, A., Fernandes, R., & Job, R. F. S. (2010). Is a focus on low
level speeding justified? Objective determination of the relative contributions of low and high level
speeding to the road toll. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety, Research, Policing and
Education Conference, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory.
Gehlert, T., Schulze, C., & Schlag, B. (2012). Evaluation of different types of dynamic speed display signs.
10.1016/j.trf.2012.07.004.
Geller, E. S., Kalsher, M. J., Rudd, J. R. & Lehman, G. R. (1989). Promoting safety belt use on a university
campus: An integration of commitment and incentive strategies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
19(1), 3-19.
Ghadiri, S. M. R., Prasetijo, J., Sadullah, A. F., Hoseinpour, M., & Sahranavard, S. (2013). Intelligent speed
adaptation: Preliminary results of on-road study in Penang, Malaysia. IATSS Research, 36(2), 106-114.
doi: 10.1016/j.iatssr.2012.08.001.
Glantz, S. A., & Parmley, W. W. (1991). Passive smoking and heart disease. Epidemiology, physiology, and
biochemistry. Circulation, 83(1), 1-12. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.83.1.1
Glendon, I. A. (2007). Driving violations observed: An Australian study. Ergonomics, 50(8), 1159-1182. doi:
10.1080/00140130701318624.
Glendon, I. A., & Sutton, D. C. (2005). Obsevring motorway driving violations. In D. A. Hennessy & D. L.
Wiesenthal (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Road User Behavior and Traffic Safety. New York: Nova
Science Publishers.
Glendon, I. A., & Walker, B. L. (2013). Can anti-speeding messages based on protection motivation theory
influence reported speeding intentions? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 57, 67-79. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2013.04.004.
Global Road Safety Partnership. (2008). Speed Management: A Road Safety Manual for Decision-Makers
and Practitioners. Geneva: Global Road Safety Partnership.
Godin, G., Conner, M., & Sheeran, P. (2005). Bridging the intention-behaviour 'gap': The role of moral norm.
The British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 497-512.
Goldenbeld, C., Twisk, D. A. M., & Houwing, S. (2008). Effects of persuasive communication and group
discussions on acceptability of anti-speeding policies for male and female drivers. Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 11(3), 207-220. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2007.11.001.
Goldenbeld, C., & van Schagen, I. (2007). The credibility of speed limits on 80km/h rural roads: The effects
of road and person(ality) characteristics. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39(6), 1121-1130. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2007.02.012.
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of
effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119.
Graham, P. (2013). New conversations about speed. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety
Research, Policing & Education Conference, Brisbane, Queensland.
Graham, A., & Sparkes, A. (2011). Casusalty reductions in NSW associated with the 40km/h school zone
initative. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing & Education Conference,
Canberra, Australian Capital Territory.
Graves, G., & Jeffreys, I. (2012). RACQ EcoDrive Research Study, Final Report. Brisbane: RACQ.
Haglund, M., & berg, L. (2000). Speed choice in relation to speed limit and influences from other drivers.
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 3(1), 39-51. doi: 10.1016/S13698478(00)00014-0.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does Gamification Work? A Literature Review of Empirical
Studies on Gamification. In proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, Hawaii, USA.
Hammond, E. C., & Horn, D. (1988). Smoking and death ratesreport on forty-four months of follow-up of
187,783 men. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 38(1), 28-58. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.38.1.28.
Harr, N., Foster, S., & ONeill, N. (2005). Self-enhancement, crash-risk optimism and the impact of safety
advertisements on young drivers. British Journal of Psychology, 96, 215-230.
Harrison, W. (2001, August 2001). What works in speed enforcement. Paper presented at the NRMA
Insurance National Speed and Road Safety Conference, Adelaide, Australia.
Harrison, W., Fitzgerald, E. S., Pronk, N. J., & Fildes, B. N. (1998). An Investigation of Characteristics
Associated with Driving Speed. Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Harwood, C. J. (2001). Trial of a speeding feedback sign - an attempt to influence speeding behaviour.
Paper presented at the National Speed and Road Safety Conference, Adelaide, South Australia.
Hatfield, J., & Job, R. F. S. (2006). Beliefs and Attitudes about Speeding and its Countermeasures.
Canberra: Australian Transport Safety Bureau.
Haworth, N. L., Ungers, B., Vulcan, P., & Corben, B. (2001). Evaluation of a 50 km/h Default Urban Speed
Limit for Australia. Melbourne: National Road Transport Commission.
Hennessy, D. A., Hemingway, J., & Howard, S. R. (2008). The effects of media portrayals of dangerous
driving on young drivers' performance New Transportation Research Progress (pp. 143-156).
Hoareau, E., Newstead, S., & Cameron, M. (2006). An evaluation of the default 50km/h speed limit in
Victoria (Report No. 261). Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Hoareau, E., Newstead, S., Oxley, P., & Cameron, M. (2002). An evaluation of 50km/h speed limits in South
East Queensland (Report No. 264). Melboune: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Hoekstra, T., & Wegman, F. (2011). Improving the effectiveness of road safety campaigns: Current and new
practices. IATSS Research, 34(2), 80-86. doi: 10.1016/j.iatssr.2011.01.003.
Homel, R. (1990). Crime on the roads: Drinking and Driving. In: Australian Institute of Criminology
Conference. Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.
Homel, R., Carseldine, D., & Kearns, I. (1988). Drink driving countermeasures in Australia. Alcohol, Drugs
and Driving, 4(2), 113-144.
Hornik, R. C., & Kelly, B. (2007). Communication and diet: An overview of experience and principles. Journal
of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 39(Supp. 2), S5-S12. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2006.08.020.
Horswill, M. S., & McKenna, F. P. (1999). The effect of perceived control on risk taking. Journal ofApplied
Social Psychology, 29(2), 377-391. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb01392.x
Horvath, C., Lewis, I. M., & Watson, B. C. (2012). The beliefs which motivate young male and female drivers
to speed: A comparison of low and high intenders. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45, 334-341. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2011.07.023.
Hseish J-K, Hsieh, Y-C., & Tang, Y-C. (2012). Exploring the disseminating behaviors of eWOM marketing:
persuasion in online video. Electronic Commerce Research, 12, 201-224.
Hultkrantz, L., & Lindberg, G. (2011). Pay-as-you-speed: An economic field experiment. Journal of Transport
Economics and Policy, 45(3), 415-436.
Hultkrantz, L., Nilsson, J. E., & Arvidsson, S. (2012). Voluntary internalization of speeding externalities with
vehicle insurance. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(6), 926-937. doi:
10.1016/j.tra.2012.02.011.
Hurley, S. F., & Matthews, J. P. (2008). Cost-effectiveness of the Australian National Tobacco Campaign.
Tobacco Control, 17(6), 379-384. doi: 10.1136/tc.2008.025213.
Ipsos-Eureka Social Research Institute. (2010). The Ipsos-Eureka Road Safety Review. Sydney: Ipsos
Australia.
Ipsos Social Research Institute. (2013). Driver Attitudes to Speed Enforcement: Austroads Publication No.
AP-R433-13.
Islam, M. T., El-Basyouny, K., & Ibrahim, S. E. (2014). The impact of lowered residential speed limits on
vehicle speed behavior. Safety Science, 62, 483-494. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.10.006.
ITS International. (2011). Speed reduction measures - carrot or stick? Retrieved from
http://www.itsinternational.com/categories/enforcement/features/speed-reduction-measures-carrot-orstick/.
James, B., & Brog, W. (2001). Increased walking trips through TravelSmart individualised marketing. World
Transport Policy and Practice, 7(4), 61-66.
Jamson, S. (2006). Would those who need ISA, use it? Investigating the relationship between drivers speed
choice and their use of a voluntary ISA system. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour, 9(3), 195-206. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2005.11.002.
Jimnez, F., Liang, Y., & Aparicio, F. (2012). Adapting ISA system warnings to enhance user acceptance.
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 48, 37-48. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.017
Job, R. F. S. (1988). Effective and ineffective use of fear in health promotion campaigns. American Journal
of Public Health, 78(2), 163-167.
Job, R. F. S., Prabhakar, T., & Lee, S. H. V. (1997). The long term benefits of random breath testing in NSW
(Australia): Deterrence and social disapproval of drink-driving. Paper presented at the 14th International
Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, France: CERMT.
Job, R. F. S., Sakashita, C., Mooren, L., & Grzebieta, R. (2012). Community Perceptions and Beliefs
Regarding Low-level Speeding and Suggested Solutions. . Paper presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting
of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
Johnston, I. R., Muir, C., & Howard, E. W. (2014). Eliminating serious injury and death from road transport: A
crisis of complacency. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.
Jurewicz, C., Phillips, C., Tziotis, M., & Turner, B. (2014). Model national guidelines for setting speed limits at
high-risk locations. Austroads Publication No. AP-R455-14. Sydney: Austroads.
Kalla, R., Brandt, T., Rettinger, N., Spiegel, F., Strupp, M., & Spiegel, R. (2010). Evaluation of a communitybased intervention to enhance road safety. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 38(4),
306-315. doi: 10.1080/10852352.2010.509022.
Kaye, S. A., White, M. J., & Lewis, I. M. (2013). Individual differences in drivers cognitive processing of road
safety messages. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 50, 272-281.
Kaye, S. A., White, M. J., & Lewis, I. M. (2015). A qualitative exploration of road safety advertising and a
motor vehicle advertisement: The effect of 'mixed cues'. Journal of the Australasian College of Road
Safety, 26, 12-24.
Keall, M. D., Povey, L. J., & Frith, W. J. (2001). The relative effectiveness of a hidden versus a visible speed
camera programme. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 33(2), 277-284. doi: 10.1016/S00014575(00)00042-7.
Keall, M. D., Povey, L. J., & Frith, W. J. (2002). Further results from a trial comparing a hidden speed camera
programme with visible camera operation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 34(6), 773-777. doi:
10.1016/S0001-4575(01)00077-X.
Kemp, M. (2014, October 12). Heart Foundation wants speed limit cut to 30km/h to get people riding bicycles
and walking, The Advertiser. Retrieved from http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/heartfoundation-wants-speed-limit-cut-to-30kmh-to-get-people-riding-bicycles-and-walking/story-fni6uo1m1227088139934?nk=6aa7f406696f9b161fc8d9d8ee7fcf57.
Kloeden, C. N. (2012). Vehicle speeds on Queensland roads - November 2011. Centre for Automotive
Safety Research: The University of Adelaide.
Kloeden, C. N., McLean, A. J., & Glonek, G. (2002). Reanalysis of Travelling Speed and the Risk of Crash
Involvement in Adelaide South Australia. Canberra: Department of Transport and Regional Services,
Australian Transport Safety Bureau.
Kloeden, C. N., McLean, A. J., Moore, V. M., & Ponte, G. (1997). Travelling Speed and the Risk of Crash
Involvement: Volume 1 - Findings. Adelaide: NHMRC Road Accident Research Unit, The University of
Adelaide.
Knight, L., & Mackay, N. (2014). Too high, too low, or too many changes? Undertaking the Queensland
state-wide speed limit review. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and
Education Conference, Melbourne.
Krafft, M., Kullgren, A., Lie, A., & Tingvall, C. (2006). The use of seat belts in cars with smart seat belt
reminders. Results of an observational study. Traffic Injury Prevention, 7(2), 125-129. doi:
10.1080/15389580500509278.
Lahausse, J. A., van Nes, N., Fildes, B. N., & Keall, M. D. (2010). Attitudes towards current and lowered
speed limits in Australia. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42(6), 2108-2116. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2010.06.024.
Lahrmann, H., Agerholm, N., Tradisauskas, N., Berthelsen, K. K., & Harms, L. (2012). Pay as You Speed,
ISA with incentives for not speeding: Results and interpretation of speed data. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 48, 17-28. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.03.015.
Lahrmann, H., Agerholm, N., Tradisauskas, N., Nss, T., Juhl, J., & Harms, L. (2012). Pay as You Speed,
ISA with incentives for not speeding: A case of test driver recruitment. Accident Analysis & Prevention,
48, 10-16. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.03.014.
Lai, F., & Carsten, O. (2012). What benefit does Intelligent Speed Adaptation deliver: A close examination of
its effect on vehicle speeds. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 48, 4-9. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.01.002.
Lai, F., Carsten, O., & Tate, F. (2012). How much benefit does Intelligent Speed Adaptation deliver: An
analysis of its potential contribution to safety and environment. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 48, 63-72.
doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.04.011.
Lai, F., Hjlmdahl, M., Chorlton, K., & Wiklund, M. (2010). The long-term effect of intelligent speed
adaptation on driver behaviour. Applied Ergonomics, 41(2), 179-186. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.03.003.
Langford, J. (2011). Identifying measures to promote the benefits of safer speeds: Curtin University of
Technology; Monash University.
Larue, G. S., Malik, H., Rakotonirainy, A., Demmel, S. (2014). Fuel consumption and gas emissions of an
automatic transmission vehicle following simple eco-driving instructions on urban roads. IET Intelligent
Transport Systems, 8(7), 590-597.
Leaf, W. A., & Preusser, D. F. (1999). Literature Review on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries
Among Selected Racial/Ethnic Groups. Washington, D.C.: National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.
Lee, P. N., Chamberlain, J., & Alderson, M. R. (1986). Relationship of passive smoking to risk of lung cancer
and other smoking-associated diseases. British Journal of Cancer, 54(1), 97-105.
Leggett, M. (1997). Using police enforcement to prevent road crashes: The randomised scheduled
mangement system. In R. Homel (Ed.), Policing for Prevention: Reducing Crime, Public Intoxication and
Injury (Vol. Crime Prevention Studies, Volume 7). Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press.
Lewis, I., Ho, B., Watson, B., White, K. M., & Elliott, B. (2014). Testing the persuasiveness of anti -speeding
advertising concepts developed as part of the TAC/CARRS-Q Australian Research Council Linkage
project. Brief Report of the projects final study: Background, methods, results, and recommendations.
Unpublished report prepared for the Transport Accident Commission of Victoria.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & Tay, R. (2007). Examining the effectiveness of physical threats in road safety
advertising: The role of the third-person effect, gender, and age. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic
Psychology and Behaviour, 10(1), 48-60. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2006.05.001.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., Tay, R., & White, K. M. (2007). The role of fear appeals in improving driver
safety: A review of the effectiveness of fear-arousing (threat) appeals in road safety advertising.
International Journal of Behavioral and Consultation Therapy, 3(2), 203-222.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (2008a). An examination of message-relevant affect in road
safety messages: Should road safety advertisements aim to make us feel good or bad? Transportation
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (2008b). Predicting future speeding behaviour: The appeal of
positive emotional appeals for high risk road users. Paper presented at the National Conference of the
Australasian College of Road Safety and the Travelsafe Committee of the Queensland Parliament,
Brisbane, Queensland.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (2009). What do we really know about designing and evaluating
road safety advertising?: Current knowledge and future challenges. Paper presented at the Australasian
Road Safety Research Policing and Education Conference: Smarter, Safer Directions, Sydney, New
South Wales.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (2010). Response efficacy: The key to minimizing rejection and
maximizing acceptance of emotion-based anti-speeding messages. Accident Analysis & Prevention,
42(2), 459-467. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.09.008.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (2013a). Extending the explanatory utility of the EPPM beyond
fear-based persuasion. Health Communication, 28(1), 84-98. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2013.743430.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., & White, K. M. (in press). The step approach to message design and testing
(SatMDT): A conceptual framework to aid road safety message development and evaluation. Accident
Analysis and Prevention.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., White, K. M., & Elliott, B. (2013b). The beliefs which influence young males to
speed and strategies to slow them down: Informing the content of antispeeding messages. Psychology
and Marketing, 30(9), 826-841. doi: 10.1002/mar.20648.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., White, K. M., Elliott, B., Thompson, J., & Cockfield, S. (2012). How males and
females define speeding and how theyd feel getting caught for it: Some implications for anti-speeding
message development. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and
Education Conference,, Wellington, New Zealand.
Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., White, K. M., & Tay, R. (2007). Promoting public health messages: Should we
move beyond fear-evoking appeals in road safety? Qualitative Health Research, 17(1), 61-74.
Lister, C., Vance, D., Royne, M., Hanson, C., & Barnes, M. (2013). Laugh model: Restructuring the
framework of public health in social media. Paper presented at the National Conference on Health
Communication, Marketing & Media, Atlanta, Georgia.
Living Streets (2012). Streets ahead: Living streets strategic plan 2012-17. Retrieved 9th June, 2015 from
http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/sites/default/files/content/library/Reports/Living%20Streets20organisational%2
0strategy%202012-17.pdf.
Lonero, L. P., & Clinton, K. M. (1998). Changing road user behaviour: What works, what doesnt.
Toronto: PDE Publications.
Lonero, L. P., & Mayhew, D. (2010). Large-Scale Evaluation of Driver Education Review of the Literature on
Driver Education Evaluation 2010 Update. Washington, D.C.: National Highway Traffic Safety Authority.
Ludwig, T. D., Buchholz, C. Clarke, S. W. (2005). Using social marketing to increase the use of helmets
among bicyclists. Journal of American College Health, 54(1), 51-58.
Luoma, J., Rajamki, R., & Malmivuo, M. (2012). Effects of reduced threshold of automated speed
enforcement on speed and safety. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour,
15, 243-248. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2012.01.002.
Lydon, M., Woolley, J. E., Small, M., Harrison, J., Balley, T., & Searson, D. (2015). Review of the national
road safety strategy. Austroads Publication No. AP-R477-15. Sydney: Austroads.
Mannering, F. (2009). An empirical analysis of driver perceptions of the relationship between speed limits
and safety. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12(2), 99-106. doi:
10.1016/j.trf.2008.08.004.
Manning, M. (2009). The effects of subjective norms on behaviour in the theory of planned behaviour: A
meta-analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(4), 649-705. doi: 10.1348/014466608x393136.
Marell, A., & Westin, K. (1999). Intelligent transportation system and traffic safety drivers perception and
acceptance of electronic speed checkers. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 7(2
3), 131-147. doi: 10.1016/S0968-090X(99)00016-9.
May, M., Tranter, P. J., & Warn, J. R. (2008). Towards a holistic framework for road safety in Australia.
Journal of Transport Geography, 16(6), 395-405. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.04.004.
May, M., Tranter, P. J., & Warn, J. R. (2011). Progressing road safety through deep change and
transformational leadership. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1423-1430. doi:
10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.07.002.
McDermott, F. T., & Hough, D. E. (1979). Reduction in road fatalities and injuries after legislation for
compulsory wearing of seat belts: Experience in Victoria and the rest of Australia. British Journal of
Surgery, 66(7), 518-521. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800660721.
McIntosh, L., & Smith, G. (2004). The National SaferRoads Project: placing road safety on the political map.
Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Perth,
Western Australia.
McKenna, F. P. (2005). Why do drivers break the speed limit? Paper presented at the Behavioural Research
in Road Safety 15th Seminar, London.
McKenna, F. P. (2007). The perceived legitimacy of intervention: A key feature for road safety. AAA
Foundation for Traffic Safety. Retrieved from http://www.aaafoundation.org/pdf/McKenna.pdf.
McLean, A. J. (2012). Reflections on speed control from a public health perspective. Journal of the
Australasian College of Road Safety, 23(3), 51-59.
McLean, A. J., & Anderson, R. W. G. (2008). Metrication of the urban speed limit and pedestrian fatalities.
Paper presented at Australasian Road Safety Research Policing Education Conference, Adelaide.
McLean, A. J., Anderson, R. W., Farmer, M. J. B., Lee, B. H., & Brooks, C. G. (1994). Vehicle Travel Speeds
and the Incidence of Fatal Pedestrian Collisions (Volume 1). Canberra: Federal Office of Road Safety.
Mekemson, C., Glik, D., Titus, K., Myerson, A., Shaivitz, A., Ang., A., & Mtichell, S. (2004). Tobacco use in
popular movies during thr past decade. Tobacco Control, 13, 400-402.
Merrikhpour, M., Donmez, B., & Battista, V. (2014). A field operational trial evaluating a feedbackreward
system on speeding and tailgating behaviors. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour, 27(Part A), 56-68. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2014.09.002.
Milne, P. W. (1985). Fitting and wearing of seat belts in Australia. The history of a successfull
countermeasure. Canberra.
Ministry of Social Development (2010). The Social report. Retrieved 13th of November, 2015, from
http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/safety/road-casualities.html
Ministry of Transport. (2013). Public attitudes to road safety: Results of the 2013 survey. Wellington, New
Zealand: Ministry of Transport.
Ministry of Transport. (2015). Motor vehicle crashes in New Zealand 2014. Retrieved 26th of October, 2015,
from http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/roadcrashstatistics/motorvehiclecrashesinnewzealand/motorvehicle-crashes-in-new-zealand-2014/
Molin, E. J. E., & Brookhuis, K. A. (2007). Modelling acceptability of the intelligent speed adapter.
10.1016/j.trf.2006.06.008.
Molin, E. J. E., & Van Den Bos, G. (2014). Car drivers' preferences for ISA policy measures. European
Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 14(2), 143-158.
Mller, M., & Haustein, S. (2014). Peer influence on speeding behaviour among male drivers aged 18 and
28. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 64, 92-99. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.11.009
Mooren, L., Grzebieta, R., & Job, R. F. S. (2013). Speed - the biggest and most contested road killer. Paper
presented at the Australasian College of Road Safety Conference, Adelaide, South Australia.
Moses, A. (2012, November 29). Aussie viral video, Dumb Ways to Die, lives on., The Age. Retrieved from
http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/aussie-viral-video-dumb-ways-to-die-lives-on20121129-2ahm0.html.
Mumbrella. (2014). One year on: The full list of Dumb Ways to Die awards. Retrieved October 22, 2014, from
http://mumbrella.com.au/one-year-full-list-dumb-ways-die-awards-190033.
Murray, C., & Lewis, I. M. (2011). Is there an App for that?: Social media uses for road safety. Paper
presented at the ACRS National Conference, Melbourne, Victoria.
National Road Safety Committee. (2013). Safer Journeys Action Plan 2013-2015. Wellington: New Zealand
Government.
NSW Centre for Road Safety (2015), Transport for New South Wales, Top 100 Roads for Review:
http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/index.cgi?fuseaction=top100review.default; accessed 3
November, 2015.
Newnam, S., Lewis, I. M., & Warmerdam, A. (2014). Modifying behaviour to reduce over-speeding in workrelated drivers: An objective approach. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 64, 23-29. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2013.10.032
Newstead, S. (2009). Evaluation of the Crash Effects of the Queensland Mobile Speed Camera Program in
the Year 2007. Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Newstead, S., Bobevski, I., Hosking, S., & Cameron, M. H. (2004). Evaluation of the Queensland Road
Safety Initiatives Package. Victoria: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Newstead, S., & Cameron, M. (2003). Evaluation of the crash effects of the Queensland speed camera
program. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education
Conference, Sydney, Australia.
Newstead, S., Cameron, M. H., & Leggett, M. (1999). Evaluation of the Queensland Random Road Watch
Program. Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Nilsson, G. (2004). Traffic safety dimensions and the power model to describe the effect of speed on safety Bulletin 221: Lund Institute of Technology Lund, Sweden.
Nitzsche, E., & Tscharaktschiew, S. (2013). Efficiency of speed limits in cities: A spatial computable general
equilibrium assessment. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 56, 23-48. doi:
10.1016/j.tra.2013.08.004.
Nimmer, J. G. & Geller, E. S. (1988). Motivating safety belt use at a community hospital: An effective
integration of incentive and commitment strategies. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16(3),
381-394.
OECD Transport Research Centre - International Transport Forum. (2008). TOWARDS ZERO: Ambitious
Road Safety Targets and the Safe System Approach.
Peer, E. (2011). The time-saving bias, speed choices and driving behavior. Transportation Research Part F:
Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(6), 543-554. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2011.06.004.
Penning, R., Veldstra, J. L., Daamen, A. P., Olivier, B., & Verster, J. C. (2010). Drugs of abuse, driving, and
traffic safety. Current Drug Abuse Reviews, 3, 23-32.
Petridou, E., & Moustaki, M. (2000). Human factors in the causation of road traffic crashes. European
Journal of Epidemiology, 16, 819-826. doi: 10.1023/A:1007649804201
Petroulias, T. (2014). Community Attitudes to Road Safety 2013 Survey Report. Canberra: Department of
Infrastructure and Transport.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
Advances in experimenal social psychology (pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.
Phillips, R. O., Ulleberg, P., & Vaa, T. (2011). Meta-analysis of the effect of road safety campaigns on
accidents. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(3), 1204-1218. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.01.002.
Pilkington, P., & Sanjay, K. (2005). Effectiveness of speed cameras in preventing road traffic collisions and
related casualites: Systematic review. British Medical Journal, 330(7487), 331. doi:
10.1136/bmj.38324.646574.AE.
Prabhakar, T., Lee, S. H. V., & Job, R. F. S. (1993). Factors involved in the long term benefits of random
breath testing in NSW.
Prince, R. (2012). The role of social media in social marketing campaigns today. Paper presented at the
Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.
Prochaska, J. O. (1979). Systems of psychotherapy: A transtheoretical analysis. Homewood, IL: Dorsy
Press.
Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications
to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, 47(9), 1102-1114.
Pyta, V., & Pratt, K. (2013). Peninsular saferspeeds project: Final analysis. ARRB Group Ltd.
Queensland Government. (2014a). Speed and red light cameras. Retrieved 3rd June, 2015, from
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/fines/speed/cameras/.
Queensland Government. (2014b). Quit campaign. Retrieved 6th March, 2015, from
http://www.health.qld.gov.au/atod/prevention/quit_campaign.asp.
Queensland Police Service. (2014). History 1980-2000. Retrieved 31st March, 2015 from
https://www.police.qld.gov.au/aboutUs/history/8000.htm.
Queensland Police Service. (2015). Back to school: 40km/h zones return. Retrieved 5th March 2015, from
http://mypolice.qld.gov.au/blog/2015/01/22/back-school-40kmh-zones-return/ .
Quinn, V., Meenaghan, T., & Brannick, T. (1992). Fear appeals: Segmentation is the way to go. International
Journal of Advertising, 11, 333-366.
Radalj, T., & Sultana, S. (2009). Driver Speed Behaviours on Western Australian Road Network 2000, 2003,
2004, 2005, 2007 and 2008. Perth: Main Roads Western Australia.
Radalj, T., & Sultana, S. (2015a). Trends in driver speed behaviours on Perth metropolitan road network
2000 to 2014. Perth: Main Roads Western Australia.
Radalj, T., & Sultana, S. (2015b). Trends in driver speed behaviours on rural road network 2000 to 2014.
Perth: Main Roads Western Australia.
Reagan, I. J., & Bliss, J. P. (2013). Perceived mental workload, trust, and acceptance resulting from
exposure to advisory and incentive based intelligent speed adaptation systems. Transportation Research
Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 21, 14-29. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2013.07.005.
Reagan, I. J., Bliss, J. P., Van Houten, R., & Hilton, B. W. (2013). The effects of external motivation and realtime automated feedback on speeding behavior in a naturalistic setting. Human Factors, 55(1), 218-230.
Redshaw, S. (2008). In the company of cars: Driving as a social and cultural practice. Retrieved from
http://www.academia.edu/3579475/In_the_Company_of_Cars_driving_as_a_social_and_cultural_practice
Redshaw, S. (2011). Dangerous safety: Extreme articulations in car advertising and implications for safety
campaigns. Journal of Australasian College of Road Safety, 22(4), 57-63.
Regan, M. A., Stephan, K., Mitsopoulos, E., Triggs, T. J., Young, K. L., & Tomasevic, N. (2005). The effect
on driver workload, attitudes and acceptability of in-vehicle Intelligent Transport Systems: Selected results
from the TAC SafeCar project. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety, Policing and Education
Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.
Regan, M. A., Young, K. L., Triggs, T. J., Tomasevic, N., Mitsopoulos, E., Tierney, P., . . . Stephan, K.
(2006). Impact on driving performance of intelligent speed adaptation, following distance warning and
seatbelt reminder systems: Key findings from the TAC SafeCar project. IEE Proceedings: Intelligent
Transport Systems, 153(1), 51-62.
Regan, M. A., Young, K., Triggs, T., Tomasevic, N., Mitsopoulos, E., Tierney, P., ... Tingvall, C. (2007).
Effects on driving performance of in-vehicle intelligent transport systems: Final results of the Australian
TAC SafeCar project. Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety, 18(1), 23-30.
Richard, C.M., Campbel, J.L., Lichty, M.G., Brown, J.L., Chrysler, S., Lee, J.D., Reagle, G. (2012).
Motivations for speeding, Volume I: Summary report (Report No. DOT HS 811 658). Washington, DC:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Richard, C.M., Campbel, J.L., Lichty, M.G., Brown, J.L., Chrysler, S., Lee, J.D., Reagle, G. (2012).
Motivations for Speeding, Volume II: Findings Report (Report No. DOT HS 811 818). Washington, DC:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Riemsma, R. P., Pattenden, J., Bridle, C., Sowden, A. J., Mather, L., Watt, I. S., & Walker, A. (2003).
Systematic review of the effectiveness of stage based interventions to promote smoking cessation. BMJ,
326, 1175. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1175.
Robinson, D., & Singh, R. (2006). Contributory factors to road accidents Road Casulaties: Great Britain
2006. London: Department for Transport.
Rockhampton Regional Council. (2014). Community Road Safety Grant promotes 50km speed limit.
Retrieved October 8, 2014, from
http://www.rockhamptonregion.qld.gov.au/About_Council/News_and_Announcements/Latest_News/Com
munity_Road_Safety_Grant_promotes_50km_speed_limit
Romano, E., & Voas, R.B. (2011). Drug and alcohol involvement in four types of fatal crashes, Journal of
Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 72,567576.
Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). The health belief model and preventive health behaviour. Health Education
Behavior, 2(4), 354-386.
Rowden, P., Lewis, I. M., Watson, B. C., Fleiter, J. J., Schramm, A. J., & Gauld, C. (2013). Research
Services to Investigate Potential Incentives Schemes for Motorists. Final Report to Queensland Transport
and Main Roads. Brisbane: CARRS-Q.
Ryeng, E. O. (2012). The effect of sanctions and police enforcement on drivers choice of speed. Accident
Analysis and Prevention, 45, 446- 454.
Sandberg, W., Schoenecker, T., Sebastian, K., & Soler, D. (2008). Long-term effectiveness of dynamic
speed monitoring display (DSMD) signs for speed management at speed limit transitions. Paper
presented at the 15th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems and ITS America Annual Meeting
2008.
Schoenbachler, D. D., & Whittler, T. E. (1996). Adolescent processing of social and physical threat
communications. Journal of Advertising, 25(4), 37-54.
Schollo, M., & Borland, R. (2004). Taxation reform as a component of tobacco control policy in Australia.
Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Schramm, A. J., Rakotonirainy, A., Smith, S. S., Lewis, I. M., Soole, D. W., Watson, B. C., & Troutbeck, R. J.
(2012). Effects of Speeding and Headway Related Variable Message Signs on Driver Behaviour and
Attitudes. Brisbane, Queensland: Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads.
Schroeter, R., Oxtoby, J., & Johnson, D. (2014). AR and gamification concepts to reduce driver boredom and
risk taking behaviours. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Automotive User
Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (Automotive'UI 14), Seattle, WA, USA.
Sheehan, M., Siskind, V., Turner, R., Veitch, C., OConnor, T., Steinhardt, D., Sticher, G. (2008). Rural
and remote road safety project final report (CARRS-Q Monograph 4). Brisbane, Australia: QUT,
CARRS-Q.
Sheehan, M., Steinhardt, D., & Schonfeld, C. (2006). A Content Analysis of Australian Motor Vehicle
Advertising. Melbourne: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Sibley, C. G., & Harr, N. (2009). The impact of different styles of traffic safety advertisement on young
drivers explicit and implicit self-enhancement biases. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology
and Behaviour, 12(2), 159-167. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2008.11.001.
Silcock, D., Smith, K., Knox, D., & Beuret, K. (2000). What limits speed? Factors that affect how fast we
drive: AA Foundation for Road Safety Research.
Slater, M. D. (1999). Intergrating application of media effects, persuasion, and behavior change theories to
communication campaigns: A stages-of-change framework. Health Communication, 11(4), 335-354. doi:
10.1207/S15327027HC1104_2.
Snyder, L. B. (2007). Health communication campaigns and their impact on behavior. Journal of Nutrition
Education and Behavior, 39(Supp. 2), S32-S40. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2006.09.004.
Son, H. D., Fontaine, M. D., & Park, B. (2009). Long-term speed compliance and safety impacts of rational
speed limits. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 135(8), 536-544.
Soole, D. (2012). The relationship between drivers' perceptions toward police speed enforcement and selfreported speeding behaviour. Queensland University of Technology.
Soole, D., & Lewis, I. (2010). The role and effectiveness of pledges in road safety: An annotated
bibliography. Unpublished paper. Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety-Queensland (CARRSQ), Queensland, Australia.
Soole, D. W., Watson, B. C., & Fleiter, J. J. (2013). Effects of average speed enforcement on speed
compliance and crashes: a review of the literature. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 54, 46-56.
Spiegel, R., Kalla, R., Spiegel, F., Brandt, T., & Strupp, M. (2010). Motivating Motorists to Voluntarily Slow
Down. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 38(4), 332-340. doi:
10.1080/10852352.2010.509024.
Stafford, M. C., & Warr, M. (1993). A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Journal of
Research in Crime & Delinquency, 30(2), 123-135. doi: 10.1177/0022427893030002001.
Stigson, H., Hagberg, J., Kullgren, A., & Krafft, M. (2014). A One Year Pay-as-You-Speed Trial With
Economic Incentives for Not Speeding. Traffic Injury Prevention, 15(6), 612-618.
Stone, J., Aronson, E., Crain, A. L., Winslow, M. P., & Fried, C. B. (1994). Inducing hypocrisy as a means of
encouraging young adults to use condoms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(1), 116-128.
doi: 10.1177/0146167294201012.
Stradling, S. (2007). Car driver speed choice in Scotland. Ergonomics, 50(8), 1196-1208
Stradling, S., Campbell, M., Allan, I. A., Gorell, R. S. J., Hill, J. P., Winter, M. G., & Hope, S. (2003). The
Speeding Driver: Who, How and Why? Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Social Research.
Streff, F. M., Kalsher, M. J. & Geller, E. S. (1993). Developing efficient workplace safety programs:
Observations of response covariation. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management,13(2), 3-14.
Styles, T., Imberger, K., & Cairney, P. (2009). Development of a best practice intervention model for
recidivist speeding offenders. Austroads Publication No. AP-T134-09. Sydney, Australia.
Sutton, S. R. (1992). Shock tactics and the myth of the inverted U. British Journal of Addiction, 87, 517-519.
Swan, W. (2010). Australia to 2050: Future Challenges. Canberra: Department of the Treasury.
Sweedler, B. M., Biecheler, M. B., Laurell, H., Kroj, G., Lerner, M., Mathijssen, M. P. M., . . . Tunbridge, R. J.
(2004). Worldwide Trends in Alcohol and Drug Impaired Driving. Traffic Injury Prevention, 5(3),
175-184. doi: 10.1080/15389580490465175.
Taubman - Ben-Ari, O., Mikulincer, M., & Gillath, O. (2005). From parents to childrensimilarity in parents
and offspring driving styles. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 8(1), 1929. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2004.11.001.
Tapp, A. (2015). Support and compliance with 20mph speed limits in Great Britain. Transportation Research
Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour.
Tay, R. (2002). Exploring the effects of a road safety advertising campaign on the perceptions and intentions
of the target and non-target audiences to drink and drive. Traffic Injury Prevention, 3, 195-200.
Tay , R. (2004). The relationship between public education and enforcement campaigns and their
effectiveness in reducing speed related serious crashes. International Journal of Transport Economics,
31(2), 251-255.
Tay, R. (2005a). The effectiveness of enforcement and publicity campaigns on serious crashes involving
young male drivers: Are drink driving and speeding similar? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(5), 922929. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2005.04.010.
Tay, R. (2005b). Mass media campaigns reduce the incidence of drinking and driving. Evidence-based
Healthcare and Public Health, 9(1), 26-29. doi: 10.1016/j.ehbc.2004.11.013.
Tay, R., & De Barros, A. (2010). Effectiveness of road safety messages on Variable Message Signs. Journal
of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 10(3), 18-23. doi: 10.1016/S15706672(09)60040-4.
Tay , R., & Watson, B. C. (2002). Changing drivers intentions and behaviours using fear-based driver fatigue
advertisements. Health Marketing Quarterly, 19(4), 55-68.
Taylor Nelson Sofres. (2008). Little Pinkie Campaign Evaluation. Sudney: TNS.
Taylor, R., Najafi, F., & Dobson, A. (2007). Meta-analysis of studies of passive smoking and lung cancer:
effects of study type and continent. International Journal of Epidemiology, 36(5), 1048-1059. doi:
10.1093/ije/dym158.
The Institute of Advanced Motorists. (2014). 20mph Survey: Drivers' Opinions of 20mph Speed Limits.
London: The Institute of Advanced Motorists.
Thomas, L. J., Srinivasan, R., Decina, L. E., & Staplin, L. (2008). Safety effects of automated speed
enforcement programs: Critical review of international literature. Transportation Research Record,
2078(1), 117-126. doi: 10.3141/2078-16.
Toy, S., Tapp, A., Musselwhite, C., & Davis, A. (2014). Can social marketing make 20mph the new norm?
Journal of Transport & Health, 1(3), 165-173. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2014.05.003.
Transport Accident Commision. (2011a). Rename Speed. Retrieved 24th March, 2015, from
http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/road-safety/tac-campaigns/speed/rename-speed
Transport Accident Commission. (2011b). TAC seatbelt campaign wins national award [Press release].
Retrieved from http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/about-the-tac/media-room/news-and-events/2011-mediareleases/tac-seatbelt-campaign-wins-national-award.
Transport for NSW. (2013). Behavioural risk factors in NSW crashes and casualities 2000-2012. Retrieved
12th March, 2015, from ttp://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/statistics/crashbehaviouralfactors.html.
Transport for NSW. (2014). Annual NSW Speed Camera Performance Review. NSW Centre for Road
Safety. Retrieved 26th October, 2015, from http://roadsafety.transport.nsw.gov.au/downloads/2014-speedcamera-review.pdf
Transport Safety Victoria. (2014). 2013 Annual Incident Statistics. Heavy Rail. Melbourne, Victoria: Transport
Safety Victoria.
Tranter, P. J., & Lowes, M. D. (2006). Communicating urban values through motorsport events: the case of
Australias high performance cities. In T. Gibson & M. D. Lowes (Eds.), Urban Communication:
Production, Text, Context (pp. 165-176). New York: Roman and Littlefield.
Turner, S., Bosher, S., & Collier, M. (2014). Acceptance of safer speeds. Paper presented at the AITPM
Conference, Adelaide, South Australia.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive
Psychology, 5, 207-232.
Vaa, T., Assum, T., & Elvik, R. Driver support systems: Estimating road safety effects at varying levels of
implementation (Research Report No. 1304/2014). Institude of Transport Economics Norwegian Centre
for Transport Research.
van der Pas, J. W. G. M., Kessels, J., Veroude, B. D. G., & van Wee, B. (2014). Intelligent speed assistance
for serious speeders: The results of the Dutch Speedlock trial. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 72, 78-94.
doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2014.05.031.
van der Pas, J. W. G. M., Kessels, J., Vlassenroot, S. H., & van Wee, B. (2014). The pros and cons of
Intelligent Speed Adaptation as a restrictive measure for serious speed offenders. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 67, 158-174. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2014.07.001.
van der Pas, J. W. G. M., Marchau, V. A. W. J., Walker, W. E., van Wee, G. P., & Vlassenroot, S. H. (2012).
ISA implementation and uncertainty: A literature review and expert elicitation study. Accident Analysis &
Prevention, 48, 83-96. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.11.021.
Van Houten, R., & Nau, P. (1983). Feedback interventions and driving speed: A parametric and comparative
analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 16, 253-281.
Van Houten, R., Nau, P., & Marini, Z. (1980). An analysis of public posting in reducing speeding behavior on
an urban highway. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 383-395.
van Lamoen, N. K (2014). The impacts of a reduced speed enforcement tolerance threshold on road safety
outcomes, Australasian Road Safety Research Policing Conference, Melbourne.
Vrhelyi, A., & Mkinen, T. (2001). The effects of in-car speed limiters: field studies. Transportation
Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 9(3), 191-211. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0968090X(00)00025-5.
VicRoads. (2013). 2011-2012 Victorian speed limit review. Melbourne. Victoria: VicRoads.
Victorian Auditor-General's Office. (2011). Victorian Auditor-Generals Report: Road Safety Camera
Program.
Villagers win battle to keep speed camera after Minister intervenes. (2011). Sydney Morning Herald.
Retrieved from http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/villagers-win-battle-to-keep-speed-camera-afterminister-intervenes-20110801-1i87x.html
Vingilis, E., & Coultes, B. (1990). Mass communications and drinking-driving. Theories, practices and results.
Alcohol, Drugs and Driving, 6(2), 61-81.
Vingilis, E., Roseborough, J. E. W., Wiesenthal, D. L., Vingilis-Jaremko, L., Nuzzo, V., Fischer, P., & Mann,
R. E. (2015). Experimental examination of the effects of televised motor vehicle commericals on riskpositive attitudes, emotions and risky driving inclinations. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 75,
86-92.
Vlassenroot, S. H., Broekx, S., Mol, J. D., Panis, L. I., Brijs, T., & Wets, G. (2007). Driving with intelligent
speed adaptation: Final results of the Belgian ISA-trial. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and
Practice, 41(3), 267-279. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2006.05.009.
Volkswagen. (2010). The Speed Camera Lottery (The Fun Theory). Retrieved October 6, 2014, from
http://www.thefuntheory.com/speed-camera-lottery-0.
Wakefield, M., Freeman, J., & Donovan, R. (2003). Recall and response of smokers and recent quitters to
the Australian National Tobacco Campaign. Tobacco Control, 12(suppl 2), ii15-ii22. doi:
10.1136/tc.12.suppl_2.ii15.
Wakefield, M. A., Loken, B., & Hornik, R. C. (2010). Use of mass media campaigns to change health
behaviour. The Lancet, 376(9748), 1261-1271. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60809-4
Walker, E., Bryant, P., Barnes, B., Johnson, B., & Murdoch, C. (2009). Quantitative study of attitudes,
motivations and beliefs related to speeding and speed enforcement. Paper presented at the Australasian
Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Sydney, Australia.
Walter, L., & Broughton, J. (2011). Effectiveness of speed indicator devices: An observational study in South
London. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(4), 1355-1358. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.02.008.
Walton, D., & McKeown, P. C. (2001). Drivers biased perceptions of speed and safety campaign messages.
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 33(5), 629-640. doi: 10.1016/S0001-4575(00)00076-2.
Ward, N., Linkenbach, J., Keller, S. N., & Otto, J. (2010). White paper on Traffic Safety Culture. Montana:
Western Transportation Institute, College of Engineering, Montana State University.
Ward, N., Otto, J., Swinford, S., & Borkowski, J. (2015). Measuring Minnesotas traffic safety culture.
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
Warn, J., Tranter, P. J., & Kingham, S. (2004). Fast and furious 3: illegal street racing, sensation seeking and
risky driving behaviours in New Zealand. Paper presented at the 27th Australasian Transport Research
Forum, Adelaide, South Australia.
Warner, H. W., & berg, L. (2008). Drivers beliefs about exceeding the speed limits. Transportation
Warner, H. W., zkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2010). Drivers propensity to have different types of intelligent
speed adaptation installed in their cars. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and
Behaviour, 13(3), 206-214. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2010.04.005.
Watson, B. C., & Soole, D. W. (2013). Traffic Safety Culture in Australia: Contrasting Community Perceptions
to Drink Driving & Speeding. Paper presented at the Presentation at the Transportation Research Board Panel Session 311: Traffic Safety Culture (TSC): Are We On The Same Page? . Washington.
Watson, B. C., Watson, A., Siskind, V., Fleiter, J., & Soole, D. (2015). Profiling high-range speeding
offenders: Investigating criminal history, personal characteristics, traffic offences, and crash history.
Accident Analysis & Prevention, 74(0), 87-96. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2014.10.013.
Waters, G. (2014). The New Zealand alcohol interlock program. A review of the first year as a sentencing
option for high risk drink drivers. Retrieved 10th November, 2015, from
http://www.aa.co.nz/assets/about/Research-Foundation/impairment/NZ-alcohol interlock-program
report.pdf?m=1406498206%22%20class=%22type:%7Bpdf%7D%20size:%7B1.5%2MB%7D%20file
Waylen, A., & McKenna, F. P. (2002). Cradle Attitudes - Grave Consequences: The Development of Gender
Differences in Risky Attitudes and Behaviour in Road Use. Basingstoke, England: AA Foundation for
Road Safety Research.
Westcott, B. (2014). Three people caught speeding in ACT schools every term day in 2014. The Canberra
Times. Retrieved 3rd March, 2015, from http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/three-people-caughtspeeding-in-act-schools-every-term-day-in-2014-20141220-128ae4.html.
Weenig, W. H., & Midden, C. J. H. (1997). Mass media information campaigns and knowledge gap effects.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 945-958.
Weller, G., Schlag, B., Friedel, T., & Rammin, C. (2008). Behaviourally relevant road categorisation: A step
towards self-explaining rural roads. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 40(4), 1581-1588. doi:
10.1016/j.aap.2008.04.009.
White, C. (1990). Research on smoking and lung cancer: a landmark in the history of chronic disease
epidemiology. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 63(1), 29-46.
White, V., Tan, N., Wakefield, M., & Hill, D. (2003). Do adult focused anti-smoking campaigns have an
impact on adolescents? The case of the Australian National Tobacco Campaign. Tobacco Control,
12(suppl 2), ii23-ii29. doi: 10.1136/tc.12.suppl_2.ii23.
Wilde, G. J. S. (1993). Effects of mass media communications on health and safety habits: An overview of
issues and evidence. Addiction, 88(7), 983-996.
Williams, A., Wells, J., & Farmer, C. (2002). Effectiveness of Ford's belt reminder system in increasing seat
belt use. Injury Prevention, 8(4), 293-296. doi: 10.1136/ip.8.4.293.
Williams, A. F., Kyrychenko, S. Y., & Retting, R. A. (2006). Characteristics of speeders. Journal of Safety
Research, 37(3), 227-232. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2006.04.001.
Wilson, C., Willis, C., Hendrikz, J. K., Le Brocque, R., & Bellamy, N. (2010). Speed Cameras for the
Prevention of Road Traffic Injuries and Deaths. Cochrane Database of Systematic Review(Issue 11). doi:
10.1002/14651858.CD004607.pub4.
Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model.
Communication Monographs, 59(4), 329-349. doi: 10.1080/03637759209376276
Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A Meta-Analysis of Fear Appeals: Implications for Effective Public Health
Campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27(5), 591-615. doi: 10.1177/109019810002700506.
Woolley, J. E., & Dyson, C. B. (2003). Further insights in to an urban area with lower speed limits: the Unley
case study. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education
Conference, Sydney, New South Wales.
Woolley, J. E., Dyson, C. B., Taylor, M. A. P., Zito, R., & Stazic, B. (2002). Impacts of lower speed limits in
South Australia. IATSS Research, 26(2), 6-17.
World Health Organization. (2005). Milestones in international road safety: World health day 2004 and
beyond. Geneva, Switzerland.
World Health Organization. (2013). Global Status Report on Road Safety 2013: Supporting a Decade of
Action. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Wrapson, W., Harre, N., & Murrell, P. (2006). Reductions in driver speed using posted feedback of speeding
information: Social comparison or implied surveillance? Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38, 11191126.
Wundersitz, L. N., Hutchinson, T. P., & Woolley, J. E. (2010). Best Practice in Rod Safety Mass Media
Campaigns: A Literature Review. Adelaide, South Australia: Center for Automotive Safety Research.
Wynder, E. L. (1988). Tobacco and Health: A Review of the History and Suggestions for Public Health
Policy. Public Health Reports (1974-), 103(1), 8-18. doi: 10.2307/4628396.
Young, D., Borland, R., Siahpush, M., Hastings, G., Fong, G. T., Cummings, K. M., (2007). Australian
smokers support stronger regulatory controls on tobacco: findings from the ITC Four-Country Survey.
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 31(2), 164-169. doi: 10.1111/j.17536405.2007.00035.x.
Young, K., Newstead, S., Fridman, M., & Truong, J. (2014). A trail of a reduced maximum speed for trucks
on the Princess Highway between Melbourne and Geelong. Paper presented at the Australasian Road
Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference, Melbourne, Victoria.
Young, K. L., Regan, M. A., Triggs, T. J., Jontof-Hutter, K., & Newstead, S. (2010). Intelligent speed
adaptationEffects and acceptance by young inexperienced drivers. Accident
Analysis &
Prevention, 42(3), 935-943. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.10.013.
Young, K., Stephan, K., Newstead, S., Rudin-Brown, C., Tomasevic, N., & Lenn, M. (2013). Repeat
Speeders Trial - Final Evaluation Report: Monash University Accident Research Centre.
Databases and key search terms

A.1
Databases
Journal databases:
Web of Science (includes a collection of both science and social science databases such as, Science
Direct)
PyscINFO
Pubmed
Australian Transport Index
Webspirs
Transportation Research Information Database
Transport Database (via OvidSP).
Other:
Google Scholar and Google

Websites for key road safety organisations, police and transport authorities and speed camera technology
manufacturers were searched
Road safety and smoking campaigns conducted in Australian states and territories, New Zealand, and
international jurisdictions
e-databases (e.g., CiteSeer)

In-text citations.
Documents:
Transport Research International Documentation (TRID) database

Published government reports from Australia, New Zealand and internationally
Publications of significant road safety and transport centres including the ARRB library, The Centre for
Automotive Safety Research, (CASR), Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC), Centre
for Accident Research and Road Safety - Queensland (CARRS-Q), Institute for Road Safety Research,
The Netherlands (SWOV), (Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI), Transport
Research Laboratory (TRL), University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) and
French Institute of Science and Technology for Transport, Development and Networks (IFSTTAR)
Highway Safety Manual (US)

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety documents (US)
US Federal Highway Administration documents (FHWA)
US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration documents (NHTSA)
European Transport Safety Council documents (ETSC)
Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety documents (UK).
Conference proceedings:
Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference (ARSRPE)

Australasian College of Road Safety (ACRS) Conference
Relevant research findings were identified by searching:
Transport Research International Documentation (TRID) database

published government reports from Australia, New Zealand and internationally
publications of significant road safety and transport centres including the ARRB library, The Centre for
Automotive Safety Research, (CASR), Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC), Centre
for Accident Research and Road Safety - Queensland (CARRS-Q), Institute for Road Safety Research,
The Netherlands (SWOV), (Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI), Transport
Research Laboratory (TRL), University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) and
French Institute of Science and Technology for Transport, Development and Networks (IFSTTAR)
Highway Safety Manual (US)

AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety documents (US)
US Federal Highway Administration documents (FHWA)
US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration documents (NHTSA)
European Transport Safety Council documents (ETSC)
Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety documents (UK)
International Transport Forum, which includes recognised road safety organisations
Conference proceedings (e.g. Australasian Road Safety Research, Policing and Education Conference
(ARSRPE); Australasian College of Road Safety (ACRS) Conference; as well as other national and
international road safety related conferences)
Road safety campaigns conducted in Australian states and territories, New Zealand, and international
jurisdictions
Road safety journals

Behaviour change/psychology journals
Advertising/marketing journals
Intelligent Transport Systems journals
e-databases (e.g., CiteSeer)
citations from obtained studies.
A.2
Search terms
Norms; Normative; Attitud*

Community; Public; Soci*
Education*; Media; Adverti*; Commercial*; Viral; Marketing; Campaign*; Commercial*; Viral*; Incidental
audience; Dissonance; Hypocrisy
Incentive; Offender management; Rehabilitat*; Behavio?r change

Intelligent (to capture: Intelligent transportation systems, intelligent speed adaption); ITS; ISA; Active
accelerator pedal; Technolog*; Telematic*; VMS; Variable message; Vehicle activated; Advanced cruise
control; ACC; Mobile *phone; Cell *phone; Application; RFID; Gamif*
Engineering; Speed limit* (to capture: Realistic speed limit, variable speed limit, open/unrestricted speed
limit); 85th percentile; Buffer zone*; Self-enforcing; Self-explaining; Perceptual countermeasure*; Blackspot; JIMBY/YIMBY/NIMBY/NOTE
Enforcement tolerance*; Enforcement threshold*

Speed*; Road safety
Smoking an historical overview of legislation and

campaigns
Country
Legislation
Anti-smoking campaigns
Australia (National)
1901: Australian Government started to tax tobacco products.

1973: Health warnings introduced on cigarette packets.
1976: Tobacco advertising banned (radio and TV).
1986: Smoking banned on buses where passengers are present.
1987: Smoking banned on domestic flights (1996 banned on international flights).
1990: Tobacco advertising banned (newspapers and magazines).
1995: Tobacco sponsorship phased out.
1997: Ban tobacco product sales to anyone under 18.
2012: Tobacco products must remain out of sight in retail outlets.
2013: Enforcement of Tobacco Plain Packaging legislation.
1980s to mid-1990s: Quit. For Life Campaigns

1995: Health warnings on cigarette packets
1997-2000: National Tobacco Campaign
2006-2007: National Tobacco Youth Campaign
2009-2013: National Tobacco Campaign
New Zealand
Acts:
Health Promotion Agency Campaigns:
Smoke-free Environment Act 1990

Smoke-free Environment Amendment Act 2003
Smoke-free Environments (Control and Enforcement) Amendment Bill 2011
1974: Health warnings introduced on cigarette packets.
1988: Ban tobacco product sales to anyone under 16. Smoking banned on
domestic flights.
1997: Ban tobacco product sales to anyone under 18. Ban individual cigarette
sales (must be sold in packs of 20 or more).
2004: Smoking banned in building, school grounds, eating and drinking areas.
Tobacco product displays restricted in retail outlets. Smoking Kills sign must be
displayed in retail outlets near tobacco products.
2008: Regulations on graphic pictorial health warnings.
2012: Tobacco products must remain out of sight in retail outlets.
1995-1999: Smokefree Rally

1996-1998: Smokefree Fashion Awards
2003: Smokefree workplaces
2004: Smokefree legislation
2004: Smokefree Homes
2005-2006: World Smokefree Day
2006: Cars
2009-2011: Face the Facts
2014: Stop Before You Start
2014-2015: Smokefree Cars and Homes
Quitline Media Campaigns:
2008: Text2Quit; Christmas Campaign; Health Warnings
2009: Pregnancy Campaign
Country
Legislation
2011: Dont Give Up, Quit

2012: The New You; Five Times More Likely
2012-2013: Chad Chambers Quitting Journey
2013: Matariki; The Moment I Knew; Did You Know?; The Last
Dance
2014-2015: Crayons
Australia (Individual State/ Territory)
Queensland
NSW
ACT
2002: restriction of smoking in enclosed workplaces and public areas

2005: smoking banned within four metres of non-residential building entrance, 10
metres childrens playground, within sporting stadiums, and between the flags at
the state beaches.
2005-2006: smoking banned in enclosed liquor licensed premises
2006: smoking banned in outdoor eating and drinking areas.
2010: smoking banned in pedestrian malls and public transport stops. Smoking
banned in vehicles carrying children under 16 years of age.
2015: smoking banned at hospitals, health fatalities, and schools.
Queensland Government Campaigns:
2007: Smoking bans in enclosed liquor licensed premises.

2009: Smoking banned in vehicles carrying children under 16 years of age.
2013: smoking banned within 10 meters of playground equipment, public
swimming pools, sporting fields, public transport stops, within four meters of a nonresidential building.
Cancer Institute NSW Campaigns:
2014: If you Smoke, Youre Futures Not Pretty; All by Myself
Sponge
Echo
What will you Quit for
Whats Worse
Stairway to Emphysema
If Smoking was a Friend
iCanQuit
Health Warnings
Get Off Cigarettes
Excuses: Quitting is Hard, Not
Quitting is Harder
Everybody Knows
Emphysema
Cigarettes Are Eating You
Alive
Change is in the Air
Bronchoscopy
Best Intentions
Anthony (developed by the
Department of Health United
Kingdom)
Mutations

2010: Smoking banned in outdoor eating and drinking areas.
Country
Legislation
Victoria
2001: Smoking banned in shopping centres.

2006: Smoking banned in enclosed workplaces and public transport stops.
2009: Smoking bans in school zones.
Quit Victoria Campaigns:

2001: You Should Have Been There (produced with Cancer
Council South Australia)
2002: Recall
2005: Bubblewrap
2007: Carotid
2008: Separation; Smokefree car and home; Mouth cancer
2010: Never Give up Giving up; Ronaldo (originally produced by
the Massachusetts Department of Public Health)
2011: Meet Mick
2012: The Wait
2013: Last Dance
2014: Re-make of Sponge; Triggers
Tasmania
2001: Smoking bans in enclosed workplaces.

2011-2012: Smoking bans in outdoor areas including, eating and drinking areas,
sporting venues, and shopping malls.
South Australia
2004: Smoking banned in all enclosed public places, workplaces, and shared
areas.
2007: Smoking bans in enclosed liquor licensed premises. Smoking banned in
vehicles carrying children under 16 years of age.
2012: Smoking bans in schools/ playgrounds.
Quit SA Campaigns:
1997: Smoking bans in workplace.

2010: Smoking bans in outdoor places (e.g., patrolled beaches and eating areas).
Smoking banned in vehicles carrying children under 17 years of age.
Cancer Council Western Australia Campaigns:
Western Australia
You Should Have Been There (produced with Quit Victoria)

Cough
Get off Cigarettes
Symptoms
Breathless
2000-2014: Make Smoking history/ Target 15 Campaign

includes a series of advertisements (e.g., Nice People But,
Jenny, and Dont Blow the Years Ahead).
2007: Smokefree Home and Car
2009: Sugar, Sugar; Who Will You Leave Behind?
2014: 16 Cancers
Country
Legislation
Northern Territory
2003: Smoking banned in community and shopping centres, indoor eating and
drinking areas, public transport stops, within two meters of non-residential building,
schools, and enclosed workspaces.
2011: Smoking banned in outdoor eating and drinking areas.
Department of Health NT Campaigns:

2011: Smoking Bars, Smoking Displays, and Smoking Total Ban
(support introduction of legislation)
Cancer Council NT Campaign:
2012: Think about who else youre hurting
Miwatj (Aboriginal) Health Organisation Campaigns:
Bolypingu
Cough n rap
Drink driving an historical overview of legislation and

campaigns
Legislation
Drink Driving Campaigns
Other
(e.g., corresponding enforcement strategies/ drink driving stats)
Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) limit

Victoria
1966: limit of .05g/100ml

1984 (May): zero limit for learner
and first year probationary licence
1987 (March): zero limit for second
year probationary licence
First offence (after October, 2014)

Learner/ probationary:
- BAC (0 to < .05): a fine, may have licence/ permit cancelled,
disqualified from driving for 3 months, minimum 6 months alcohol
interlock period managed by Vic Roads
- BAC (.05 to < .07): as above, but disqualified from driving for 6
months
Full licence:
- BAC (.05 to < .07): a fine, 10 demerit points
All drivers:
- BAC (.07 to < .10): fine, may have licence/ permit cancelled,
disqualified from driving for 6 months, minimum 6 months alcohol
interlock
- BAC (.10 to <.15): fine, may have licence/ permit cancelled,
disqualified from driving for 10-14 months,
- minimum 6 months alcohol interlock
- BAC (.15 or more): need to go to court, fine, may have licence/
permit cancelled, disqualified for minimum of 15 months, minimum
6 months interlock
Legislation
Other
New South Wales
1980 (December): limit of

.05g/100ml
1st February, 2015:

- Introduction of alcohol interlock laws (high range, repeat, other
serious drink driving offences offenders required to fit device to
vehicles)
- First offence: Novice (0 to <.02); low range (.05 to < .08): maximum
$1,100 court imposed fine; disqualification (3mths to 6mths).
- Mid range (.08 to < .15):Maximum $ 2,200 court imposed fine;
9mths maximum goal term; disqualification (6mths to 12mths);
immediate licence suspension
- High range (.15+): maximum $3,300 imposed fine; 18mths
maximum goal time; disqualification (12mths to 3 years); immediate
licence suspension
Queensland
1968: Breathalyser introduced and

BAC .10g/100ml
1974: .08g/100ml
1982 (December): limit of
.05g/100ml
Current drink driving fines (maximum) first time offence:

- Learner, probationary/ provisional licence: 9 months licence
disqualification; up to $1,593.90 fine; 3 months imprisonment
- Full-licence (over .05/ under .10): as above
- Full-licence (over.10/ under .15): 12 months disqualification; up to
$2,277 fine; 6 months imprisonment
- Full-licence (over .15): minimum 6 months licence disqualification;
up to $3,187.80 fine; 9 months imprisonment
24 hour suspension applies where BAS is less than .10
Immediate suspension:
- Low range drink driving offence (earlier charge still pending or
holding a replacement licence)
- Mid to high range drink driving offence
- Fail to provide breath/ blood when requested
- Dangerous driving while under influence
Tasmania
1983 (January): limit of .05g/100ml
Mandatory alcohol interlock program (MAIP) for: Drink-driving offence of

.15+; two of more drink driving offences in 5yrs; driving under the
influence of liquor; failing to provide breath/ blood sample
Legislation
Western Australia
1988 (September): limit of

.05g/100ml
Australian Capital
Territory
1991 (January): limit of .05g/100ml
South Australia
1991 (July): limit of .05g/100ml
Other
First offence:
Novice drivers:
- 0 to <.02: $100 infringement; $150 to $300 court penalty; 3 points
- .02 to <.05: $150 to $300 court penalty; 3mths disq.
All drivers:
- .05 to < .06: $250 infringement; $500 maximum count penalty; 3
demerit points
- .06 to < .07: as above, except 4 demerit points
- .07 to < .08: as above, except 5 demerit points
- .08 to < .09: $500 to $1,500 fine; 6mths disq.
- .09 to < .11: $550 to $1500; 7mths disq.
- .11 to < .13: $650 to $1500; 8mths disq.
- .13 to <.15: $750 to $1500; 9mths disq.
- >.15: $900 to $2500; 10mths disq.
Alcohol interlock drivers who commit a serious drink driving offence.

Fines (first offence):
- Category 1 (.05-.079): $563 expiation fee; 4 demerit points
- Category 2 (.08 - .149): court imposed penalty; 5 demerit points;
immediate 6mths loss of licence
- Category 3 (.15+): court imposed penalty; 6 demerit points;
immediate 12mths loss of licence; interlock at end of
disqualification period.
Refusing/ failing to comply with direction of police in relation to alcotest
or breath analysis: court imposed penalty; 6 demerit points; immediate
loss of licence for 12mths; interlock at end of disqualification period.
Legislation
Other
Northern Territory
Alcohol Ignition Lock (AIL) program April, 2009

Drink driver program Low (.05 to .08): if court ordered; Medium (.08
to .15): unit 1; High (.15+) and refusing to give a breath sample: units
1 and 2.
First offence:
- Low range: fine
- Medium range: minimum 6 months licence disqualification; fine
- High range: lose licence for 12mths or serve 18mths suspension
and 12mths with interlock.
New Zealand

1993: limit of .03g/100ml for drivers
under 20
2011 (August): zero BAC for drivers
under 20
2014 (December): 05g/100ml for full
licence drivers
Convicted by the courts for driving offences involving alcohol, you will
receive a 3mth alcohol interlock disqualification.
First offence (full licence):
- .08+: up to 3mths in prison; up to $4500 fine; 6mths or more
disqualification or suspension of licence
- .16+: the court may impose an alcohol interlock disqualification with
an accompanying three months disqualification period as an
alternative to penalties
- Under 20 years: .03+; up to three months in prison; up to $2250
fine; up to three months or more disqualification or suspension of
licence.
Random Breath Testing

Victoria
1976 (July)
1977-1988: Car-based tests
1989: Introduction of highly visible,
bus-based RBT stations.
1993 (November): increase RBT in
country, Victoria (Victoria police and
TAC)
TAC campaigns (December 1989 to 1992):

Slogan: If you drink, then drive, youre a
bloody idiot
Advertisements (media budget: 70% TV,
14% press; 7% radio; 5% outdoor; 2%
sky channel; 2% cinema):
Lost family (December, 1989)
Girlfriend (December, 1989)
Booze Bus (September, 1990)
Friends (August, 1991)
Joey (November, 1992)
Style of drink-driving advertising:
December 1989-1998: Emotive and
Enforcement
1977: 19,006 roadside tests undertaken

1986: 314,0000 roadside tests
Percentage of drivers and riders killed with BAC of .05 or more (where
BAC is known):
1981: 38%; 1982: 37%; 1983: 37%; 1984: 33%; 1985: 38%; 1986: 38%;
1987: 38%; 1988: 38%; 1989: 32%; 1990: 30%; 1991: 29%; 1992: 21%;
1993: 28%; 1994: 26%; 1995: 22%; 1996: 24%.
Legislation
Other
Later TAC campaigns:

1993 (September): Glasses
1993 (December): Country random
breath testing
1994 (September): Flashback
1994 (December): Silent night
1995 (November): Prison
1997 (October): Covert
1997: 1000 Booze Buses
1998 (February): John and Jessica,
Double Whammy
1998 (September): Waiting game, Back
streets
2000 (March): The Pub
2000 (August): Stop
2000 (December): Never
2001 (December): See the light, Blue
squares
2003: Little bit worried
2004 (November): Netball, Insurance,
Boat, Unemployed
2006 (September): You will get caught,
its just a matter of when
2011 (December): Bloody idiots
Northern Territory
1980 (February)
Indigenous road safety:

2007: Drink driving (Sandridge Band)
2007: Dont drink and drive
2007/08: Kimberly road safety
advertising: drink driving
2009: Kimberly road safety advertising:
drink driving - shame
2012: Dont drink and drive: North
Tanami Band (video)
BAC is known):
1981: 71%; 1982: 57%; 1983: 70%; 1984: 55%; 1985: 64%; 1986: 53%;
1987: 45%; 1988: 33%; 1989: 57%; 1990: 69%; 1991: 65%; 1992: 61%;
1993: 77%; 1994: 50%; 1995: 56%; 1996: 78%.
Legislation
Other
Campaign which has been operating each

festive season since 1997 Whos your
sober Bob television/ radio. Ad includes
high profile Territorians. Used famous sport
people to show support at launch.
You Deserve it television, radio,
billboard, and public buses.
South Australia
1981 (October)
Motor Accident Commission (MAC):

2015: Keep the bromance alive
(drinking, speeding, & seat belts).
2014 (November): Grow up
- Just over campaign:
- TV/press: Just as dead, Just as
guilty
- Radio: Just as much carnage, Just
as caught
- Online and venue pub ads
MAC Country ad (TV, press, radio, and
outdoor):
Matemorphosis drink drive (humour)
Australia Capital
Territory
1982 (December)
New South Wales
1982 (December)
BAC is known):
1981: 44%; 1982: 39%; 1983: 32%; 1984: 51%; 1985: 44%; 1986: 48%;
1987: 40%; 1988: 42%; 1989: 37%; 1990: 43%; 1991: 35%; 1992: 36%;
1993: 51%; 1994: 31%; 1995: 27%; 1996: 31%.
BAC is known):
1981: 23%; 1982: 41%; 1983: 57%; 1984: 14%; 1985: 12%; 1986: 13%;
1987: 17%; 1988: 16%; 1989: 25%; 1990: -; 1991: -; 1992: 36%; 1993:
67%; 1994: 29%; 1995: 50%; 1996: 33%.
Number of breath tests:
2014-2015 148, 295 (1% positive)
2012-2013 100,791 (1% positive)
2011-2012 91, 489 (2% positive)
2010-2011 100, 568 (2% positive)
2009-2010 89, 203 (2% positive)
Introduction of RBTs: enforcement
advertisements that showed that RBTs
Increased drink-driving penalties

Compulsory blood tests for drivers involved in a crash when treated at
hospital
Legislation

could not be evaded (launched an
expensive media campaign)
1998: Go to bed Jessica
2009 (ongoing): Youre in our sights
(drinking, speeding, and seat belts).
Better get a lawyer.
Phase 2: lenticular ads above pub
urinals.
2010: R U over it (internet based
campaign; youth friendly radio stations
and professional)
2012 (August): Plan B (humorous/
positive campaign about making positive
choices to get home safely).
Tasmania
1983 (January)
Road Safety Advisory Council (RSAC):

Real Mates campaigns (real mates dont
let mates drink drive, they stop them).
2012 (August): Real Mates I
2013 (September): Real Mates II
2014 (September): Real Mates III This
third ad included a social media
competition mates upload a photo of
how they would stop their mate from
driving after hes been drinking
Western Australia
1980 (November): Random

Stopping program
1988 (October): RBT
2011 (November): Drink Driving Its never

ok television, radio, press, outdoor
advertising (humour approach)
Office of Road Safety:
Towards Zero Road Safety Strategy (two
major mass media phases each year: 1.
Christmas/ New Year period. 2. Dry
session of Northern WA
Mediums: TV, radio, press, outdoor
advertising
TV ads:
Other
1982: 113, 982 road side tests undertaken
1983: 923, 272 road side tests
BAC is known):
1981: 41%; 1982: 40%; 1983: 36%; 1984: 33%; 1985: 33%; 1986: 35%;
1987: 32%; 1988: 31%; 1989: 33%; 1990: 35%; 1991: 33%; 1992: 26%;
1993: 28%; 1994: 23%; 1995: 29%; 1996: 24%.
Relied on word of mouth/ press coverage when introduced RBTs

BAC is known):
1981: 43%; 1982: 29%; 1983: 19%; 1984: 51%; 1985: 37%; 1986: 28%;
1987: 39%; 1988: 31%; 1989: 44%; 1990: 24%; 1991: 21%; 1992: 21%;
1993: 32%; 1994: 38%; 1995: 44%; 1996: 28%.
1985: 200,000 roadside tests undertaken
Less intense publicity compared to NSW and TAS

BAC is known):
1981: 48%; 1982: 51% 1983: 55%; 1984: 40%; 1985: 45%; 1986: 48%;
1987: 47%; 1988: 32%; 1989: 37%; 1990: 33%; 1991: 34%; 1992: 42%;
1993: 36%; 1994: 33%; 1995: 35%; 1996: 34%
Legislation
Other
- Enforcement: You deserve it

- Behavioural: Ok is Not Ok
Radio commercials:
- Enforcement: Big Thirst
- Enforcement: You cant beat it
- Enforcement: You cant pass it
- Behavioural: I had dinner with my
wine
- Behavioural: I only had a few
- Behavioural: I didnt drink as much as
my mates
Outdoor (behavioural): I had dinner with
my wine. I should be ok, I only had a
few. I should be ok, I didnt drink as
much as my mates. I should be ok,
Have none for the road.
Outdoor (press): Were everywhere. If
you drink and drive you deserve to get
caught.
Queensland
1986 (August): Random Stopping

program
1988 (December): RBT
Enough is enough drink driving

2012 (December; previously aired late
2010): Reflections Police presence
(slogan: Think before you drink. Think
twice before you drive).
Television/radio:
- The Boss
- Hannah
- Workshop
- Loser
- A little bit worried
- Nowhere to hide (increase RBTs;
unmarked patrols; repeat offenders
face tougher penalties)
- Drink drive. You lose
Outdoor:
- Only a little bit nervous
Less intense publicity compared to NSW and TAS

BAC is known):
1981: 50%; 1982: 48%; 1983: 47%; 1984: 44%; 1985: 47%; 1986: 45%;
1987: 39%; 1988: 38%; 1989: 34%; 1990: 31%; 1991: 31%; 1992: 33%;
1993: 28%; 1994: 31%; 1995: 33%; 1996: 36%.
Legislation
Other
- Only a little bit unsure

- Only a little bit worried
2013 (December): Join the drive to save
lives
2014 (December): Mates Motel (2 ads; 1
targets guests and 1 targets hosts);
billboards, radio, online advertising, and
interactive website. Shown again ANZAC
weekend, 2015.
New Zealand
1984: Random Breath Stopping

1988: Issue on the spot summonses
1993 (April): CBT
NZ Transport Agency
1996: new TV ads use slogan, if you
drink and drive, youre bloody idiot
2010: Drink-driving Backwards
Legend series Humour:
1995: NZ adopts campaign strategy used by TAC in Victoria. Key

priorities are drink-driving and speeding (greater media exposure)
1996: visibility of CBT operations was increased (introduce booze bus
unit in Northern Police region)
2011 (October): Legend (mates

encouraging mates to not drive after
drinking)
- TV: Legend
- Radio: Legend, Internalising, Ghost
chip, Monique, Puzzle time.
- Outdoor: digital signs (ITM cup
games) and pubs
2014 (November): Local legend (people
in local communities looking out for
fellow locals)
Seat belts an historical overview of legislation and

campaigns
Country
Legislation
Seat belt campaigns
Queensland
1972 (January): Seat belts compulsory
2009: One click could change your future

2012: Better buckle up
2013: Join the drive to save lives campaign included seat belt messages
NSW
1971 (October): Seat belts compulsory
2011: Clip every trip
ACT
Victoria
1970 (December): Seat belts compulsory
Tasmania
1971 (October): Seat belts compulsory
South Australia
1971 (November): Seat belts compulsory
Its easy dead easy
Western Australia
1971 (December): Seat belts compulsory
1999: Restraints campaign

2014: Sashes
Northern Territory
2007: Always wear your seat belt

Pause to reflect
New Zealand
1972 (June): Seat belts compulsory for persons 15 years of age

and older
Australia
1992: Bones
1995: Pinball
1999: What Hurst Most
2010: Belt up or suffer the pain. Seat belt campaign which involved Essendon and
Melbourne Victory football players
Speeding an historical overview of legislation and

campaigns
Legislation
Anti-speeding campaigns
Introduction of 50km/h (residential areas) speed zones

Queensland
1999 (March): 50km/h local street speed limit introduced into builtup areas in south-east QLD
2003 (February): 50km/h speed limit extended to all areas of QLD
Introduction of 50km/h: radio, outdoor, TV used to introduce change and its benefits.
Brochures were also distributed to households
NSW
1997: trial of 50km/h speed limit

2003 (November): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
ACT
2001 (March): commencement of two year trial

2003 (July): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
Victoria
2001 (January): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
Tasmania
2002 (May): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
South Australia
2003 (March): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
Western Australia
2001 (December): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
Northern Territory
2005 (March): 50km/h speed limit
Not available
New Zealand
Not available
Not available
Legislation
Speed cameras (mobile, fixed, combined red light/speed, point-to-point).

Queensland
1997 (May): introduction of speed camera program (mobile

cameras)
2007 (December): fixed cameras
2011 (December): point-to-point cameras
QLD campaigns:
November (2008): Slow down stupid campaign
Advertisements:
Part 1 (2008): Nightmare and three little words

Part 2 (June, 2009): In a flash. Three little words continuing
Part 3 (November, 2009): Faces, Tegan (from the share my story campaign)
Part 4 (November, 2010): It hurts, Nightmare reappearing
Phase 5 (June, 2011): life.
March (2013): The better slow down anti-speeding campaign was re-launched.
November (2013): Join the drive to save lives campaign
Easter (2014): No time for speeding (presents evidence as to why low level
speeding isnt safe)
August (2014): Queensland has no time for speeding (features personal stories)
Additional advertisements shown in QLD:
NSW
1991: Mobile (ceased in December, 2008; reintroduced in 2010)

1997: Fixed
2009: combined speed and red light cameras
2010: Point-to-point
Catherine
Stopping distances
Excuses
No accident
Pram 1, 2 & 3
Blood on the streets
Slow motion
Negatives
Better slow down
Fines and demerit points
RTA campaigns:
June (2007): Speeding: No one thinks big of you
(2009): Police presence (Speeding? Youre in our sights)
(2010): Dont rush campaign
- Phase 1: Multiple choice
- Phase 2: Testimonials
(2014): How sorry will you be?
Legislation
ACT
1999: speed cameras introduced (mobile)

2001: combined speed and red light cameras
2012: point-to-point cameras
Not available
Victoria
1985: introduction of speed cameras (mobile)

1991: widespread use of speed cameras
2000 (April): Fixed camera
2002: red light/ speed camera
2007: point-to-point cameras
2000 (December): introduced intensive enforcement program,
including covert speed cameras to improve speed compliance
TAC:
Tasmania
1993 (March): mobile speed cameras
Speak up against speeding

Breaking the road rules isnt worth the risk (included multiple risky behaviours
including speeding)
South Australia
Not available
2015: Keep the bromance alive (drinking, speeding, & seat belts).
Western Australia
2010: red light speed camera
Office of road safety:
Slogan: Dont fool yourself, speed kills

April (1990): Speed Cameras
April (1990): Beach roads
September (1990): Tracey
August (2011): Wipe Off 5 campaign introduced
February (2008): Pictures of you campaign
July (2010): The Ripple effect campaign
February (2011): Town of speed community campaign
1998: Speed campaign was first launched.

2011 (March): Enjoy the ride
2012 (February): Post it notes
Northern Territory
Fine (01/02/14):
Up to 15km/h: $150 (1 point)
15km/h-30km/h: $300 (3 points)
30km/h-45km/h: $600 (4 points)
More than 45km/h: $1000 (6 points)
Legislation
New Zealand
1993: introduction of speed cameras
1998-2000: trial of covert use speed cameras
1995: Beach road. Theme: urban speeding; all people

1995: Corridor/ Maimed. Theme: victims of speed; all people.
1995: Sorry. Theme: open road speeding; all people
1996: Over & Over. Theme: urban speeding; male drivers, 25-59 years.
1997: Stop. Theme: open road speeding; all drivers, 15-59 years.
1998: Superman. Theme: young driver speeding; male drivers, 18-21 years.
1999: Spot the difference. Theme: urban speeding; male drivers, 15-59 years.
2000: Farm gate. Theme: open road speeding; male drivers, 25-59 years.
2000: Wheelchair. Theme: young driver speeding; male drivers, 17-25 years.
2001: Consequences. Theme: urban speeding; male drivers, 24-49 years.
2002: Ten minutes. Theme: open road speeding; all drivers, 25-49 years.
2002: Todd. Theme: young driver speeding; young drivers, 15-21 years.
2004: Jacqui. Theme: victims of speed, all people
2004: Slow Mo. Theme: physics of speed; all people.
2004: Prepared to kill. Theme: victims of speed; male drivers, 21-41 years.
2005: Understand. Theme: victims of speed; male drivers, 21-41 years.
2005: High rise. Theme: physics of speed; male drivers, 20-40 years.
2006: Same Cop. Theme: open road speeding; male drivers, 25-59 years.
2007: Principals. Theme: victims of speed; all drivers
2007: Landmines. Theme: open road speeding; male drivers, 25-40years.
2009: Robbie. Theme: open road speeding; male drivers, 35-50 years.
2009. Another 10km. Theme: urban speeding; male drivers, 16-29 years.
2010: Mantrol. Theme: young driver speeding; male drivers, 16-29 years.
2012: Flying objects. Theme: physics of speed; all people, 20-49 years.
2013: Drive Social campaign focus on social etiquette (instead of regulations/
enforcement). Addressed all driver behaviour, not just speeding. (shared
responsibility)
2014: Mistakes. Theme: victims of speed; all drivers, 20-49 years.2015: Numbers.
Theme urban speeding; all drivers, 25-49 years.
Overview of example mass media and social marketing

campaigns
Campaign
name,
organisation
and
jurisdiction
Target behaviour /
audience
Delivery
mediums
Type of appeal
/ Education vs.
entertainment
Loss or
gain
framing
Reframing of social
norms
Response efficacy
Use of
technology
Evaluation results
Dumb Ways To
Die Metro
Trains
Victoria.
Unsafe behaviour
around trains, in
particular train
platforms and railway
level crossings (RLC).
Entire population,
particularly those who
use trains and RLC.
Characters with no
discernible race, age
or gender (i.e., jelly
bean people) are used
and there is no specific
reference to location
(Egan, 2012).
Online (song
and
animated film
clip).
Outdoor
(posters and
billboards).
Print.
Humour
(positive).
Entertainmentfocus.
Loss.
No.
No.
Smart-phone
game based
on the video.
Online
forum.
Positive trends for near

misses (-31%) (Cauchi,
2013), fatalities (-50%)
and serious injuries (36.5%) (Transport
Safety Victoria, 2014)
following the campaign.
Winner of multiple media
awards (Mumbrella,
2014).
Campaign
name,
organisation
and
jurisdiction
Target behaviour /
audience
Delivery
mediums
Type of appeal
/ Education vs.
entertainment
Loss or
gain
framing
Reframing of social
norms
Response efficacy
Use of
technology
Evaluation results
Legends (Ghost
Chips) New
Zealand
Transport
Authority
(NZTA) New
Zealand.
Drink driving among

young people,
particularly stopping
friends from drink
driving.
Young people aged
15-24.
Television.
Radio.
Outdoor /
pubs.
Print.
Online.
Humour
(positive).
Mixes education
/ entertainment.
Gain.
Encourages young
people to speak up
and discourage their
friends from driving
after drinking,
suggesting that such
behaviour is
legendary.
Presents the
perceived negatives
associated with not
speaking up,
followed by
modelling of the
appropriate
behaviour (i.e.,
telling the friend to
not drink drive and
crash at the house).
No.
53% free recall with

males 16-29yrs; 99%
free and prompted recall
with the total sample;
and 60% relevance
(Prince, 2012).
Speeding. No
One Thinks Big
Of You
(including
Pinky, Hectic &
Post-It Notes)
RTA New
South Wales.
Speeding.
All drivers, but a
particular focus on
young male drivers
aged 17-24.
Television.
Outdoor.
Print.
Cinema.
Online.
Pride (positive).
Educationfocus.
Loss.
Suggests that
significant others, in
particular peers and
young females, are
not impressed by
speeding or
dangerous driving.
Suggests that real
men drive in a safe
and responsible
manner, hinting that
men who speed and
drive dangerously
are not wellendowed.
No.
Social media
pages (i.e.,
MySpace).
Online
discussion
forums.
Purely online
component
(Hectic).
Independent evaluation
found: (i) high rates of
awareness (97% among
young males and 95%
among the general
population); (ii) high
rates of self-reported
intentions to comply with
speed limits (78%)
among males (Taylor
Nelson Sofres, 2008).
Campaign
name,
organisation
and
jurisdiction
Target behaviour /
audience
Delivery
mediums
Type of appeal
/ Education vs.
entertainment
Loss or
gain
framing
Reframing of social
norms
Response efficacy
Use of
technology
Enjoy The Ride

Office of
Road Safety
Western
Australia.
Safe driving, in
particular speeding.
All drivers.
Television.
Print.
Outdoor.
Online.
Psychological
(positive).
Educationfocus.
Gain.
Encourages
motorists to relax and
enjoy the driving
experience,
highlighting how time
behind the wheel
should be considered
as an opportunity to
slow down (not just in
regards to a drivers
speed, but in their life
more generally)
which can result in
positive benefits for
ones life and health.
Relaxing behind the

wheel and viewing it
as an opportunity to
slow down.
No.
Join The Drive

To Save Lives
TMR
Queensland.
Safe driving, in
All drivers.
Television.
Outdoor.
Print.
Online.
Social
connectedness
(positive).
Educationfocus.
Gain.
Encourages all
community members
to join the
conversation about
road safety in an
attempt to create a
norm that
Queensland has no
time for speeding.
Encourages
personal
participation by
community
members in
identifying and
speaking out about
risky behaviours
(e.g., film and
upload short video
about road safety,
adding personal
comments, safety
tips, and
photographs via
social media).
Social
media.
Online
forums.
Personalised
advertising
on electronic
billboards.
Evaluation results
Campaign
name,
organisation
and
jurisdiction
Target behaviour /
audience
Delivery
mediums
Type of appeal
/ Education vs.
entertainment
Loss or
gain
framing
Reframing of social
norms
Response efficacy
Use of
technology
Drive Social
NZTA New
Zealand.
Safe driving, in
All drivers.
Television.
Outdoor.
Print.
Online.
Radio.
Bus backs.
Social
connectedness
(positive).
Educationfocus.
Gain.
Attempts to alter the

way drivers think
about the road. That
is, drivers are
encouraged to view
the road as a social
space where
politeness and
patience are
expressed (as is the
case in other social
settings), rather than
the intolerance and
impatience that is
typical of impersonal,
non-social
environments. It also
seeks to promote the
idea that our driving
affects others.
Invited all drivers

who typically travel
a particular section
of road to meet in
person so they
were aware of who
they are commonly
driving on the road
with and how it was
everyones
responsibility to try
to keep each other
safe, with a
photograph
commemorating the
meeting.
Drive social
website.
Social
media.
Evaluation results
List of respondent organisations

Pedestrian Council of Australia Ltd
20s Plenty for Us Road Safety Advocacy Group United Kingdom
Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS)
New Zealand Transport Agency
WA Road Safety Commission
Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland
New Zealand Automobile Association
Royal Automobile Association (South Australia)
Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV)
Royal Automobile Club of Queensland (RACQ)
Institute for Road Safety Research, SWOV, The Netherlands
2 Consultants in Road Safety
Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Charles Sturt University
Monash University Accident Research Centre
Transport and Road Safety (TARS) Research Group, UNSW
ARRB Group Ltd
NB: One respondent did not specify their organisation
Road safety expert stakeholder

questionnaire
Stakeholder Questionnaire
Potential interventions for creating, increasing and/or sustaining public
demand for safer speeds
Please specify organisation (optional): _______________________________________________
Please answer the following questions regarding the Campaign Strategy, Aims
and Potential Countermeasures.
1. How feasible is the introduction of the Campaign Strategy in the Australian/New Zealand context?
Extremely
feasible
Not at all
feasible
2. Explain why you believe the Campaign Strategy (or individual Aims/potential countermeasures)
can/cannot be feasibly introduced in the Australian context (including trialling and evaluating the
countermeasures)? Consider costs of the countermeasures and potential barriers and/or facilitators to
implementation.
3. How well would the introduction of the Campaign Strategy fit with existing programs and/or
countermeasures?
Extremely
well
Not at all
4. Explain why you believe the Campaign Strategy would/would not fit well with existing programs and/or
countermeasures? Consider existing infrastructure, technology, legislative issues, jurisdictional differences
etc.
5. What level of support do you believe the Campaign Strategy (or individual Aims/potential
countermeasures within in) would receive from the general community?
Extremely
high levels
of support
Not at all
supported
6. Explain why you believe the Campaign Strategy (or individual Aims/potential countermeasures within in)
would/would not be supported by the general community?
7. How successful do you believe the Campaign Strategy (or individual Aims/potential countermeasures
within in) could be in positively influencing community norms and attitudes about speeding?
Extremely
successful
Not at all
successful
8. Explain why you believe the Campaign Strategy (or individual Aims/potential countermeasures within in)
would/would not be successful in positively influencing community norms about speeding? Consider both
short-term and long-term impacts.
9. Describe the potential benefits of the Campaign Strategy (or individual Aims/potential countermeasures
within in) if it were introduced in the Australian/New Zealand context?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------These next 2 questions do not relate to any of the countermeasures mentioned above. Rather, they ask you
to consider any other ideas that you may have for new countermeasures and your thoughts on how existing
countermeasures could be enhanced or reinvented to capitalise upon gains already made.
10.
Can you suggest any additional countermeasures for creating, increasing and/or sustaining public demand
for safer speeds in the Australian/New Zealand context?
11.
Can you comment on any existing countermeasures that currently aim to increase public demand for safer
speeds that you think could be enhanced/capitalised upon and how this might happen?
Thank you for your time and contributions.

Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety-Queensland, Queensland University of Technology, K Block,
130 Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4509, Australia.
Advertising/ behaviour change

expert stakeholder questionnaire
Stakeholder Questionnaire
Potential interventions for creating, increasing and/or sustaining public demand for safer speeds
Project Background
Increased vehicle speeds are associated with greater risk and severity of traffic crashes and speeding is
regularly cited as a contributing factor in traffic crashes. Despite the risks, speeding remains relatively
prevalent on Australian roads and some drivers perceive the behaviour as being socially acceptable.
The current project seeks to identify evidence-based options for creating, increasing, sustaining
and/or demand for safer speeds within the community.
The aim is to identify interventions that can promote community acceptance of safer driving speeds on the
road. Such interventions are likely to cover a variety of topics and may include influencing community norms
to make speeding socially unacceptable, altering community perceptions about speeding in such a way that
people understand the increased risks associated with speeding, and promoting the need to comply with
posted speed limits.
In an attempt to identify unique and innovative approaches we are seeking ideas and opinions regarding
effective behaviour change programs that have been applied in disciplines other than road safety, which
you believe might be able to be adapted and applied in the road safety context.
What is your main area of work/research/interest? (Please tick one)
Health
Public relations
Behaviour change research
Campaign implementation & evaluation
Advertising
Campaign creation
Policy development
Other
Please specify organisation (optional): _______________________________________________

Knowledge of effective campaigns or interventions (please describe up to 5).
1. Briefly describe any campaigns or interventions you are aware of that have successfully produced change
in community norms, attitudes or behaviour, irrespective of whether they are related to road safety issues.
Please provide as much detail as possible.
Name of the intervention 1
Behaviour targeted
Target audience
Where implemented
Brief description
Evidence of effectiveness
Perceived community support
Evidence of effectiveness/
potential benefits

Behaviour targeted
Target audience
Where implemented
Brief description
potential benefits

Behaviour targeted
Target audience
Where implemented
Brief description
potential benefits

Behaviour targeted
Target audience
Where implemented
Brief description
potential benefits

Behaviour targeted
Target audience
Where implemented
Brief description
potential benefits
Thank you for your time and contributions.

Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety-Queensland, Queensland University of Technology, K Block,
130 Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, 4509, Australia.

AP-R507-16 Public Demand For Safer Speeds

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

AP-R507-16 Public Demand For Safer Speeds

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Research Report

Public Demand for Safer Speeds:

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Judy Fleiter, Ioni Lewis, Sherrie-Anne Kaye, David Soole, Andry

Speeding is a major contributor to road injuries and fatalities and

Austroads is the peak organisation of Australasian road

Austroads commissioned research to identify a range of potential

Austroads purpose is to support our member organisations to

Roads and Maritime Services New South Wales

Department of State Growth Tasmania

Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and

Australian Local Government Association

Roads Corporation Victoria

New Zealand Transport Agency.

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Literature Review and Proposed Campaign Strategy

To enhance community understanding of risk associated with speeding.

Increase demand for safer speeds

To challenge the prevailing descriptive norm that everyone speeds.

Austroads 2016 | page i

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Sustain demand for safer speeds

Austroads 2016 | page ii

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Safe Speeds as part of a Safe System ....................................................................................... 2

Structure of the review ................................................................................................................ 3

Overview of speeding as it relates to road safety............................................................................ 5

Relationship between vehicle speed and crash risk and severity............................................... 5

Prevalence of speeding ............................................................................................................... 6

Factors influencing speeding behaviour ..................................................................................... 7

2.3.1 Personal factors ............................................................................................................. 7

2.4.1 Roadwork zones ........................................................................................................... 13

The role of theory in behaviour change .................................................................................... 20

Case study 1: smoking behaviour ............................................................................................. 23

3.1.1 Evidence-based research............................................................................................. 23

3.2.1 Evidence-based research............................................................................................. 28

3.3.1 Evidence-based research............................................................................................. 34

Interventions previously used for creating, increasing or sustaining demand for

Public education strategies ....................................................................................................... 45

4.1.1 Mass media and advertising campaigns ...................................................................... 45

Speed limit reduction initiatives .................................................................................... 54

Austroads 2016 | page iii

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

4.2.2 Holistic approaches (active transportation and eco driving) ........................................ 56

4.3.1 Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) ................................................................................ 61

Effectiveness of police speed enforcement.................................................................. 64

Considerations for potential countermeasures ............................................................................. 68

Road safety advertising ............................................................................................................. 68

Community-based behaviour change initiatives ....................................................................... 69

Intelligent transportation systems.............................................................................................. 69

5.3.1 Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) ................................................................................ 69

Stakeholder consultations ............................................................................................................... 74

6.1.1 Participants ................................................................................................................... 74

6.2.1 Support for the Campaign Strategy .............................................................................. 75

Considerations for individual jurisdictions .................................................................... 82

Austroads 2016 | page iv

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Timeline of anti-smoking campaigns. ........................................................................................ 27

Austroads 2016 | page v

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

Austroads 2016 | page 1

Public Demand for Safer Speeds: Identification of Interventions for Trial

1.1 Safe Speeds as part of a Safe System