Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Accident Analysis and Prevention

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aap

Inuence of trafc enforcement on the attitudes and behavior of drivers

Predrag Stanojevic a , Dragan Jovanovic b, , Timo Lajunen c,d
a
Polytechnic School of Vocational Studies, Zvecan, Serbia
b
Faculty of Technical Sciences, Department of Transport, Novi Sad, Serbia
c
Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
d
Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Traditionally, trafc enforcement has been an important means of improving trafc safety. Many studies
Received 16 April 2012 have provided evidence of connections between the level of police enforcement and both driving behavior
Received in revised form and the number of trafc accidents. In Northern Kosovo, there has been little, if any, trafc enforcement
14 December 2012
during the last 13 years. This situation has created a very rare research opportunity it is now possible to
Accepted 17 December 2012
directly study the inuence of trafc enforcement on the attitudes and behavior of drivers by comparing
two regions, one with trafc enforcement and one without it (Serbia vs. Northern Kosovo). The sample
Keywords:
in the present study consisted of 424 drivers (204 from Serbia and 220 from Northern Kosovo). Ques-
Enforcement
Behavior
tionnaires included items about the behaviors of the drivers (e.g., speeding, seat belt, drunk driving) and
Attitudes their attitudes. We also conducted eld observations of driving behavior. The results indicated that the
Accidents lack of enforcement affects almost every type of behavior that we examined. Compared with drivers in
Serbia, drivers in Northern Kosovo drive faster, exceed speed limits more frequently, use seat belts less
frequently, drive after exceeding the legal limit for alcohol more often, commit aggressive and ordinary
violations more frequently and are generally involved in more risky situations.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Trafc accidents are a leading cause of death in many countries.
It is a well-established fact that the vast majority of all trafc acci-
dents are caused by various types of human factors (Lewin, 1982;
Rumar, 1985). Trafc law violations are usually recognized as an
important component of the set of human factors that contributes
to an increased risk of causing an accident. Previous research has
established the links between risky driving behaviors and accident
liability (e.g., Parker et al., 1995; Taylor et al., 2000). The most sig-
nicant behavioral problems that are associated with accidents are
also the ones that have the most serious consequences: speeding,
drunk driving and failing to wear seat belts (Peden et al., 2004;
Schick, 2007).
Traditionally, trafc enforcement has appeared to be an impor-
tant means of improving trafc safety. It has been suggested that
adequate police enforcement that encourages full respect for and
adherence to trafc laws and regulations could decrease the num-
ber of accidents by as much as 50% (ETSC, 1999). In the Trafc
Safety Handbook, Elvik et al. (1997) estimate that full compli-
ance with speed regulations, avoiding driving while intoxicated
Corresponding author. Tel.: +381 21 4852494; fax: +381 21 450644.
E-mail address: draganj@uns.ac.rs (D. Jovanovic).
and always using protective devices (e.g., seatbelts) could result
in avoiding as many as 38% of fatalities and 17% of other traf-
c injuries. Evans (1991) has estimated that the number of trafc
fatalities in the United States could be reduced by approximately
40% if drunk driving alone was eliminated. Estimates based on sta-
tistical analyses of data from empirical studies suggest that these
gures are much lower; a 10% reduction in trafc fatalities is at
the upper end of the range of possible improvements. However,
some well-implemented and sustained enforcement efforts have
led to signicant safety gains resulting to an improvement of 25%
(according to Zaidel, 2002).
The trafc laws and regulations that dene socially accept-
able road user behavior are important elements in developing a
secure road environment and when applied, they are generally con-
sidered one of the most effective ways of improving road users
behaviors (Zaal, 1994). Police enforcement has proven effective in
reducing both the mean speeds and the variance in speed on var-
ious roadways (Holland and Conner, 1996; Vaa, 1997; De Waard
and Rooijers, 1994). In their recent literature review, Elliott and
Broughton (2005) concluded that increasing the level of police con-
trol results in both a decrease in average road speed (approximately
3 mph) and a decrease in the percentage of drivers who exceed the
speed limit (by between 3% and 64%). Recent research conrms
that enforcement has effects on speeding. Walter et al. (2011) sum-
marized the achieved effects of intensifying enforcement over a

0001-4575/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.12.019
30 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938
period of four weeks. The speed of vehicles decreased systemati-
cally during the implementation of enforcement along a road and
in surrounding areas, and some of the effects could still be observed
two weeks after the enforcement campaign ended. In a study of the
choice of driving speed on roads in rural areas, Ryeng (2011) found
that increasing the amount of police enforcement resulted in speed
reductions, whereas stricter sanctions affected a drivers choice of
speed only marginally.
In addition to speeding, previous research shows that police
enforcement has a signicant effect on driving while intoxicated.
Wechsler et al. (2003) showed that the occurrence of driving while
intoxicated differed signicantly according to both the policy envi-
ronments at local and regional levels and the degree to which those
policies were enforced. Elliott and Broughton (2005) analyzed the
results of eleven studies about driving under the inuence of alco-
hol and found that enforcement had resulted in a large reduction in
the incidence of drunk driving offenses. A study in Greece (Yannis
et al., 2008) showed that an increase in the number of police con-
trols led to a reduction in the number of incidents of driving while
under the inuence of alcohol. The authors also illustrated this
change of behavior with data that were obtained from the SARTRE
2 and 3 surveys: the number of drunk driving infringements was
reduced by approximately 50%, and the positive attitudes toward
controlling alcohol usage increased by 10.2%. The report of the
ESCAPE (2003) consortium concluded that the countries that have
long traditions of enforcing drunk driving laws, low legally permit-
ted blood alcohol concentrations, and a relatively high objective
risk of detection and enforcement that is supported by the mass
media have the lowest numbers of cases of driving under the inu-
ence of alcohol.
It is known that the best results regarding seat belt usage are
obtained by means of establishing laws on the mandatory use of
seat belts that make failing to use one a punishable offense. For
example, in Finland and Germany, measures to the enforce seat
belt laws and legal sanctions for increasing the level of seat belt
use occurred many years after the laws that required the mandatory
use of seat belts had been enacted. The effect of law enforcement on
seat belt usage in both countries was drastic; the rates of seat belt
usage increased from 40% to 90% (Valtonen, 1991; Heinrich, 1991).
In his report on the effects of implementing legislation that requires
drivers and front seat passengers to use seat belts in Saudi Arabia in
the year 2000, Bendak (2005) reported a large increase in the num-
ber of drivers who wore seat belts. Prior to the introduction of new
legislation, only 2.9% of drivers reported wearing seat belts and,
during the course of the study, this number increased by 60%. How-
ever, it should be noted that the highest usage rates are typically
achieved immediately following the introduction of new legisla-
tion. This is followed by a steady decline in usage after the rst few
months, but usage does not generally fall to pre-legislation levels
(Williams and Wells, 2004). This effect is most often seen when
the new legislation is not complemented by increases in police
enforcement and by mass media publicity campaigns. In Canada,
seat belt usage was measured at 75% immediately after the intro-
duction of mandatory seat belt laws, and it dropped to 50% six
months later (Robertson, 1978). A similar situation was reported
in Germany (Heinrich, 1991), in which the rates of wearing seat
belts increased dramatically with the introduction of the manda-
tory use legislation, then declined in the subsequent absence of law
enforcement. The observed decline in usage rates was most pro-
nounced during the rst 12 months after the new legislation had
been introduced. These results indicate that the best improvements
in seat belt usage levels are not achieved merely by changing the
law. It is equally important to show drivers that compliance with
the law is an important aspect of safety-oriented road user behav-
ior by making non-compliance (failing to use seat belts) punishable
(Mkinen et al., 1991).
The level of police enforcement, driving behavior and the num-
ber of trafc accidents have been investigated in several studies.
However, the results of these studies seem to be mixed; some stud-
ies have shown some effects of trafc enforcement, whereas others
did not nd any signicant relation between enforcement and traf-
c accidents and behavior. Weiss and Freels (1996) showed that
increasing the amount of trafc enforcement had no effect on trafc
accidents. Similarly, Tarko (2008) found that increased amount of
police enforcement had only a minor effect on speed. A statistically
signicant reduction in number of trafc accidents was reported
in a study conducted in Israel (Hakkert et al., 2001). It should be
noted that the increased enforcement applied in this study covered
700 km of interurban roads and lasted a year.
The conicting results about enforcement, behavior and acci-
dents may be due to several methodological differences. First, the
data regarding the degree to which trafc enforcement affects driv-
ing behavior, the number of trafc accidents and the number of
fatalities vary widely. Second, many studies have not presented
the degree to which enforcement was increased. This lack of data
makes it difcult to interpret the real effects of enforcement and
makes dening the optimal level of enforcement impossible. Third,
the research literature seems to suggest that the effects of increas-
ing the amount of trafc law enforcement can only be achieved
within restricted areas that are in the foci of enforcement experi-
ments, but not at a national level (e.g., Elvik, 2001; Goldenbeld et al.,
1999; Zaal, 1994).
The effects of enforcement are usually very short-lived. Road
users tend to modify their behavior only in enforcement areas or in
areas in which they anticipate the risk of being punished. In their
review of a large number of speed enforcement studies, stvik and
Elvik (1991) concluded that unless the intensication of enforce-
ment more than tripled the initial enforcement levels, it had little
or no effect on the subjective risk of getting caught. Therefore, one
of the main problems with intensifying enforcement could be the
lack of police manpower that is sufcient to cover the entire net-
work of roads, and as a result, drivers judge the risk of punishment
to be small. For example, trafc rules are observed very closely in
the immediate vicinity of a surveillance unit; even speeds that are
below the posted limit may decrease in these circumstances. How-
ever, as soon as drivers have passed the surveillance site, they begin
increasing their speeds again. Thus, surveillance effects last short
time, whether they are measured in time or space (Goldenbeld et al.,
1999; Oei, 1998; Zaal, 1994). Based on review of a large number of
studies, Elliott and Broughton (2005) argued that the halo effect of
police presence on driving speeds may last as little as 1 h or as long
as 8 weeks after the police activity has ceased. Some studies seem
to indicate an association between larger temporal halo effects and
longer periods of police presence. However, Elliott and Broughton
concluded that even when police presence lasts for long periods
of time, the temporal halo effect can only be expected to last for
a limited period of time. This suggests that sustained enforcement
efforts are needed to inuence drivers behavior.
The aforementioned researchers have argued that the intensi-
cation of trafc enforcement affects risky driving behavior and the
number of accidents. The question about enforcement and behav-
ior can be addressed also in opposite way: what would happen
if no trafc enforcement at all were present within a given area.
To our knowledge, only two studies have measured the effects of
trafc enforcement on trafc safety in a situation in which there
was no police enforcement whatsoever. During 1978, the Nashville
trafc police force had intensied enforcement activity for two
months, but the members of it subsequently went on a short-
term slow-down strike. Carr et al. (1980) report the results from
that natural experiment. Examination of trafc accident data that
were collected throughout these periods found that there were no
changes in either the frequency of accidents that were reported
 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938
or in the distribution of accident types involving property dam-
age, personal injury, or fatalities. Hence, temporary lapses in trafc
enforcement do not seem to have documented detrimental effects.
However, in February of 1976, the Finnish police went on strike
for approximately two weeks, during which police enforcement
was completely suspended. Summala and Roine (1980) conducted
a small observation study during the strike and found that there
was only a slight increase in the mean speed, but the percentage
of gross speed violations (>10 km/h) increased by 50 to 100%, and
the standard deviation of the recorded speeds increased by approx-
imately 20%, which suggests that the risk of trafc accidents was
also elevated.
After the NATO intervention in the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia in 1999 that resulted in the establishment of the inter-
national protectorate of Kosovo and Metohija, special conditions
were created in which government institutions do not have their
normal functions. Northern Kosovo refers to a territory in the north-
ern part of the disputed region of Kosovo, with an ethnic Serb
majority that functions independently from the remainder of the
region, which has an ethnic Albanian majority. Northern Kosovo has
a direct border with Central Serbia. Serbian institutions, as part of
political, health care, cultural and educational system of Serbia still
operate in the region of Northern Kosovo in the same degree as in
Serbia. Law enforcement is carried out by International forces and
Kosovo Police. In Northern Kosovo, trafc enforcement has essen-
tially been absent for the last 13 years. This situation created a very
rare opportunity to conduct research about the inuence of trafc
enforcement on the attitudes and behavior of drivers by comparing
the behavior and attitudes of drivers in two regions, one of which
has trafc enforcement, and one of which does not. In the current
study, we compared drivers from Northern Kosovo (where trafc
laws are not enforced) with drivers from Serbia (where trafc law
enforcement has been implemented).
It is worth noting that the situation in Northern Kosovo differs
from the aforementioned situation in Nashville (Tennessee) and
Finland in which the police force went on strike. In both Finland and
Nashville, the special conditions with lacking trafc law enforce-
ment lasted for relatively short periods of time and, thus, could
not have effect on drivers values and trafc culture. In Northern
Kosovo, however, the long-term absence of law enforcement may
truly change the manner in which people drive, and even their
attitudes toward road safety.
The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects
of (lacking) trafc enforcement on driver behavior by comparing
non-enforcement region (Northern Kosovo) to a region in which
enforcement is applied (Serbia).
2. Methods
2.1. Sample
The data for this study were collected by mail. The names
and addresses of 600 individuals (300 from Serbia and 300 from
Northern Kosovo) with valid driving licenses were obtained from
a registry of owners of motor vehicles. A set of research mate-
rials that contained the questionnaires and a cover letter that
explained the purpose and objectives of the research was sent
to each member of the aforementioned sample group. We also
included a prepaid envelope that could be used to return the com-
pleted questionnaires. We received 424 completed questionnaires
(204 from individuals who were living in Serbia and 220 from indi-
viduals who were living in Northern Kosovo). The demographic
characteristics of the sample can be found in Table 1. The partici-
pants were instructed to read all of the questions carefully and to
reply each item honestly. The participants were also ensured that
31
Table 1
Demographic variables.
Northern Kosovo Serbia
Response rate 73.3% 68%
Gender
Male (%) 148 (67.3) 130 (63.7)
Female (%) 72 (32.7) 74 (36.3)
Mean age (S.D.) 35.13 (10.47) 33.92 (10.85)
Mean driving experience in years (S.D.) 12.72 (8.73) 11.32 (9.51)
Mean annual mileage in km (S.D.) 12,987 (15,432) 8663 (15,909)
Number of accidents
Range 05 07
Mean (S.D.) 0.40 (0.84) 0.26 (0.80)
their answers would remain anonymous and condential and that
any data that they provided would be used exclusively for scientic
purposes.
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Perceptions of trafc enforcement
We rst examined each drivers perception of trafc enforce-
ment. Respondents were asked questions about their perception of
the possibility to be punished by police due to committing trafc
violations while driving (speeding, failing to wear a seat belt and
drunk driving). Respondents answered by rating the frequency that
each item applied to them on a ve-point Likert scale that ranged
from 0 to 4 (0 = never; 4 = almost always).
2.2.2. Driver behavior
Driving behavior was measured in three ways. First, 27 items
from the SARTRE 3 project (2004) were used to survey the drivers
about their speeding habits, use of seat belts, and alcohol consump-
tion before driving. The set of items that were used and the possible
responses for each item are shown in Table 2.
Second, we used Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) (Lawton
et al., 1997; Parker et al., 1998) to measure each drivers frequency
of violations, lapses and errors while driving. This questionnaire
consisted of a total of 27 items. Three of these items were designed
to measure aggressive violations ((N. Kos. sample) = 0.54; (Ser.
sample) = 0.58) (e.g., sounding the horn to indicate annoyance), 8
items were used to measure general violations ((N. Kos. sam-
ple) = 0.74; (Ser. sample) = 0.76) (e.g., pulling so far into a junction
or intersection that the driver with right of way must stop and let
the respondent pass), 8 items were used to measure omissions ((N.
Kos. sample) = 0.72; (Ser. sample) = 0.77) (e.g., underestimating
the speed of an oncoming vehicle when overtaking another vehicle)
and 8 items were used to measure errors ((N. Kos. sample) = 0.74;
(Ser. sample) = 0.70) (e.g., forgetfulness about where in a parking
lot a car had been left). Respondents were asked to indicate how
often they themselves committed each of the violations and made
each of the errors when driving. Responses were recorded on a six-
point Likert scale that ranged from 0 to 5 (0 = never; 5 = almost all
the time). Cronbachs for aggressive violations was small (0.54
and 0.58), but could be acceptable given the small number of items
that assessed aggressive violations.
Third, we conducted eld observations of driving behavior
(speeding, using of seat belts and headlights on daytime). Trained
observers (one per observation point) recorded if drivers were
using a seatbelt in built-up or non built-up areas. We observed the
cars in places where drivers had to slow down because of trafc
signs, so there was enough time to observe and record if driver
was using a seat belt. Driving speeds and headlight use were mea-
sured simultaneously by two observers, seated in the same car on
roadside. One observer used radar to measure driving speed on
roads with speed limits of 60 km/h and 80 km/h. The other observer
32 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938

Table 2
SARTRE Project items that were used in the present study.

Variable name Symbol Description

Drivers perceptions of their own speeding behavior and driving safety

Question 6 Speed 1a Compared to other drivers, do you think your driving is. . .dangerous?
Question 8 Speed 2b Compared with other drivers, do you generally drive. . .than average speed?

Perceptions of other drivers speeding behavior

Question 7 Speed 3c How often do you think other drivers break speed limits?

Self-reported speeding behavior

Question 9b Speed 4c How often do you drive faster than the speed limit on main roads between towns?
Question 9c Speed 5c How often do you drive faster than the speed limit on country roads?
Question 9d Speed 6c How often do you drive faster than the speed limit in built-up areas?

Reported behaviors related to speed

Question 13c Speed 7c How often do you drive through a trafc light that is yellow?
Question 13d Speed 8c How often do you overtake when you think you can barely manage it?

Attitudes toward enforcement and countermeasures

Question 10b Speed 9d Compared to the present limits, what do you think the speed limit on main roads between towns should be?
Question 10c Speed 10d Compared to the present limits, what do you think the speed limit on country roads should be?
d
Question 10d Speed 11 Compared to the present limits, what do you think the speed limit in built-up areas should be?
e
Question 31a Speed 12 How much would you be in favor of afxing speed-limiting devices to cars that prevented the drivers of them from
exceeding the speed limit?
Question 31c Speed 13e How much would you be in favor of using a black box to record behavior from a driver that the police could then use
as evidence to prove speeding/dangerous driving?
Question 34b Speed 14e How much would you be in favor of the use of automated cameras in the surveillance of speed excesses?

Seat belt use in different environments

Question 15b Belts 1c How often do you wear a seat belt when making a journey on main roads between towns?
Question 15c Belts 2c How often do you wear a seat belt when making a journey on country roads?
Question 15d Belts 3c How often do you wear a seat belt when making a journey in a built-up area?

Attitudes toward wearing seat belts

Question 17a Belts 4e If you drive carefully, seat belts are not really necessary.
Question 17b Belts 5e In most accidents, seat belts reduce the risk of serious injury to both drivers and passengers.
Question 17c Belts 6e When I am not wearing my seat belt, I feel less comfortable; I feel as though something is missing.
Question 17d Belts 7e There is a risk of being trapped by a seat belt in the event of an emergency.

Drinking behavior and drunk driving behavior

Question 19 Alcohol 1f In general how many days per week do you drink alcoholic beverages?
Question 20 Alcohol 2f How many days per week do you drive after drinking even a small amount of alcohol?
Question 21 Alcohol 3f Over the last week, how many days did you drive, when you may have been over the legal limit for drinking and
driving?

Opinions about alcohol legislation and countermeasures

Question 22 Alcohol 4g Do you think that drivers should be allowed to drink?
Question 28e Alcohol 5e How much would you be in favor of not allowing new drivers to drink any alcohol before driving?
Question 30d Alcohol 6e Would you nd it useful to have a device on your car, like an alcohol-meter, that could be used to determine whether
you had been drinking and that could prevent you from driving if you were over the legal blood alcohol limit?
a
Possible responses for these questions were much more, a bit more, about the same, a bit less and a lot less.
b
Possible responses for these questions were much faster, a little faster, about average, a little slower and much slower.
c
Possible responses for these questions were never, rarely, sometimes, often, very often and always.
d
Possible responses for these questions were lower, same, higher and no limit.
e
Possible responses for these questions were very, fairly, not much and not at all.
f
Possible responses for these questions were every day, 5 to 6, 3 to 4, 1 or 2, <1 and never.
g
Possible responses for these questions were no alcohol at all, less alcohol than at present, as much alcohol as at present, more alcohol than at present and as much as
they want.

recorded if passing vehicles had lights switched on. The observation
whether the drivers had switched on the headlights was performed
because headlight use is mandatory by law in both regions. These
data were used as an additional indicator of adherence to traf-
c laws. All measuring and observations were conducted during
daylight (08.0017.00).
2.2.3. Drivers attitudes
Drivers attitudes were measured using a questionnaire that
consisted of 18 items. Their responses were given on a 5-point
scale from completely false (1) to completely true (5). We used this
questionnaire to test the following attitudes: the attitude toward
violation of trafc regulations (6 items, (N. Kos. sample) = 0.71;
(Ser. sample) = 0.79) (e.g., There are many trafc rules which
cannot be obeyed in order to keep up the trafc ow, or Some-
times it is necessary to bend the rules to keep trafc going), the
attitude toward speed (7 items, (N. Kos. sample) = 0.84; (Ser.
sample) = 0.86) (e.g., If you have good skills, speeding is OK, or
Driving 5 or 10 miles above the speed limit is OK because every-
one does it) and the attitude toward drinking and driving (5 items,
(N. Kos. sample) = 0.77; (Ser. sample) = 0.74) (e.g., People can
drive safely even when they are under the inuence of alcohol, or
Ride with a person you know has been drinking too much alco-
hol). The attitude scales were based on questionnaire developed
by Ulleberg and Rundmo (2003) and Iversen and Rundmo (2004).
2.2.4. Demographic variables
Respondents answered questions about their age, sex, involve-
ment in risky situations (situations in which they had nearly had
accidents) over the previous 3 months, accident involvement dur-
ing the previous 3 years, the number of years that they had been
licensed to drive and estimated their annual mileage.
 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938
Table 3
Numbers and percentages of drivers who perceived the risk of being punished (fre-
quently or almost always) for specic trafc violation and mean score of possibility
of being punished by police.
Northern Kosovo Serbia
n % Mean n %
Speeding 4 1.81 0.16 44 21.56
Alcohol 3 1.36 0.13 24 11.76
Seat belts 3 1.36 0.12 94 46.08
3. Results
3.1. Perception of trafc enforcement
Table 3 shows the numbers and percentages of drivers who
responded that they believed there was a possibility they would
be frequently or almost always punished for committing driving
violations (speeding, driving under the inuence alcohol and not
wearing seat belts). The arithmetic averages of all of the responses
(04 averaged) in the regions that were compared are also shown
in Table 3.
In the territory of Northern Kosovo, where there has not been
any trafc enforcement over a long period of time, the perception
of trafc enforcement is approximately equal to zero, which is evi-
dent from the mean values of all of the responses. Several of the
respondents who reported that there was a possibility that those
who committed trafc violations would be punished frequently or
very often can be drivers who frequently travel to Serbia. These
drivers may have given these kinds of responses because they were
answering the questionnaire in reference to their perceptions of
trafc enforcement in Serbia.
3.2. Comparison of the self-reported behavior and attitudes of the
drivers
First, respondents were asked several questions regarding
speeding, seat belt usage and alcohol consumption prior to driving
that had been taken from the SARTRE 3 project (SARTRE, 2004). The
levels of signicance of the differences in the percentages of drives
that reported various behaviors and perceptions were examined
using z-tests (two-tailed test) (Montgomery and Runger, 1994). The
results of this analysis are shown in Table 4.
Signicant difference between the self-reported responses of
drivers from Northern Kosovo and Serbia regarding questions about
speeding can only be seen for one question. The drivers from North-
ern Kosovo feel that the speed limit should be higher on roads
between cities (Speed 9) to a lesser extent than drivers from Serbia.
The greatest differences among the sample populations that we
studied can be observed in the responses to questions regarding
seat belt usage. The drivers from Northern Kosovo reported a sig-
nicantly lower level of seat belt usage in various environments
in comparison to drivers from Serbia (Belts 1, Belts 2 and Belts
3). Furthermore, major differences in the opinions of these two
groups of drivers can be observed, particularly regarding whether
seat belts are necessary in cases of careful driving. More than 50% of
the drivers from Northern Kosovo who we surveyed feel that seat
belts are not really necessary as long as one drives carefully (Belts
4). Also, drivers from Serbia reported to greater extent that they
feel less comfortable and something is missing if they do not that
wear seat belts than drivers from Northern Kosovo (Belts 6). Finaly,
drivers from Northern Kosovo are more convinsed that there is a
risk of being trapped by seat belt in case of emergency (Belts 7).
Although it is evident that drivers from Northern Kosovo and
Serbia consume approximately equal amounts of alcohol each week
(Alcohol 1), the drivers from Northern Kosovo reported that they
33
drove after exceeding the legal limit for alcohol (Alcohol 3) more
often than drivers from Serbia. However, there were no differences
in responses at question if drivers should be allowed to drink or
attitudes toward various counter measures.
t-Test statistics were used to compare data from Northern
Mean Kosovo and Serbia regarding committing violations while driving
1.91 that was obtained from answers to the DBQ, attitudes toward traf-
1.32 c safety, and self-reported involvement in both trafc accidents
1.96 and risky situations. The results of this are shown in Table 5.
The t-test results showed that drivers in Northern Kosovo com-
mitted signicantly more aggressive and ordinary violations than
drivers in Serbia did and their attitudes toward trafc rules viola-
tions and speed were worse than those of Serbian drivers. Drivers
from Northern Kosovo reported more involvement in risky situa-
tions, but no signicant differences in the number of self-reported
trafc accidents were reported between drivers from Northern
Kosovo and other drivers.
In addition to analyzing the self-reported behavior of the drivers
who we surveyed, we conducted some observations of driving
behavior in the eld. We used radar to measure the speeds of vehi-
cles that were traveling on roads with speed limit of 60 km/h and
80 km/h. We also observed the use of seat belt and low beam lights
during the day in these vehicles.
The driving speeds that were measured by radar varied between
Serbian drivers and drivers from Northern Kosovo. In the zone that
had a speed limit of 60 km/h, the average speed in Northern Kosovo
was 3.4 km/h higher than average speed in Serbia, and the number
of drivers who exceeded the speed limit was 10% higher. In the
zone in which the speed limit was 80 km/h, the differences were
even larger. Average speed in Northern Kosovo was approximately
4.8 km/h higher than average speed in Serbia, and the number of
drivers who exceeded the speed limit was 11% higher. We found
surprisingly large differences in seat belt usage between drivers
from Northern Kosovo and drivers from Serbia. Only 6% of the
drivers wore seat belts in an urban area in Northern Kosovo, com-
pared with 51% of the drivers in a similar setting in Serbia. Outside
of urban areas in Northern Kosovo, 24% of the drivers wore seat
belts, whereas 60% of the drivers in Serbia wore them. We mea-
sured the use of lights during the day as an additional indicator of
adherence to trafc laws. The results of this measure were similar
to the results of our observations of seat belt use. Only a small num-
ber of drivers in Northern Kosovo (approximately 17%) switched on
their lights during the day compared with the large percentage of
drivers in Serbia who did so (90%).
4. Discussion
The main aim of this study was to determine the extent to which
the presence or absence of trafc enforcement affects the behavior
and attitudes of drivers. A comparison was made between regions
in which trafc laws were enforced and regions in which these laws
were not enforced. In the following sections, we will consider the
results that we obtained regarding differences in driver behavior
and attitudes (toward speeding, seat belt usage and alcohol con-
sumption prior to driving), the commission of trafc violations and
driver involvement in risky situations and trafc accidents.
4.1. Speed
Although there were no differences in self-reported behaviors
between Northern Kosovo and Serbia regarding driving faster than
the speed limit, the eld measurements of driving speed that were
taken by radar on main roads between towns with limits of 60 km/h
and 80 km/h showed that the average speeds of drivers in North-
ern Kosovo were 3.4 km/h and 4.8 km/h faster than that of drivers
34 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938

Table 4
Responses to the SARTRE Project items that were used in the study.

Nort. Kosovo Serbia z-test N.K. vs. Ser.

Drivers perceptions of their own safety and speeding behavior

Speed 1 Compared to other drivers, do you think your driving is. . .dangerousa 6.4 8.3 0.75
Speed 2 Compared with other drivers, do you generally drive. . .than average speedb 30.9 24.5 1.47

Perceptions of other drivers speeding behavior

Speed 3 How often do you think other drivers break speed limitsc 79.6 79.9 0.08

Self-reported speeding behavior

Speed 4 How often do you drive faster than the speed limit on main roads between townsc 27.3 23.5 0.90
Speed 5 How often do you drive faster than the speed limit on country roadsc 15.9 10.8 1.54
Speed 6 How often do you drive faster than the speed limit in built-up areasc 9.1 8.8 0.11

Reported behaviors that are related to speed

Speed 7 How often do you drive through a trafc light that is yellowc 15.9 14.7 0.34
Speed 8 How often do you overtake when you think you can barely manage itc 5.0 3.9 0.55

Attitudes toward enforcement and countermeasures

Speed 9 Compared to the present limits, what do you think the speed limit on main roads between towns 30 41.7 2.51*
should bed
Speed 10 Compared to the present limits, what do you think the speed limit on country roads should bed 12.7 14.2 0.45
Speed 11 Compared to the present limits, what do you think the speed limit in built-up areas should bed 8.2 11.8 1.24
Speed 12 How much would you be in favor of afxing speed-limiting devices to cars that prevented the 72.7 80.4 1.87
drivers of them from exceeding the speed limite
Speed 13 How much would you be in favor of using a black box to record behavior from a driver that the 77.7 81.9 1.07
police could then use as evidence to prove speeding/dangerous drivinge
Speed 14 How much would you be in favor of the use of automated cameras in the surveillance of speed 75.5 80.3 1.19
excessese

Seat belt use in different environments

Belts 1 How often do you wear a seat belt when making a journey on main roads between townsf 22.7 83.8 12.58***
Belts 2 How often do you wear a seat belt when making a journey on country roadsf 7.3 64.2 12.30***
Belts 3 How often do you wear a seat belt when making a journey in a built-up areaf 7.3 68.6 13.08***

Attitudes toward seat belt wearing

Belts 4 If you drive carefully, seat belts are not really necessarye 51.8 29.9 4.58***
Belts 5 In most accidents, seat belts reduce the risk of serious injury to both drivers and passengerse 93.6 91.2 0.93
Belts 6 When I am not wearing my seat belt, I feel less comfortable; I feel as though something is missinge 38.2 51.5 2.75**
Belts 7 There is a risk of being trapped by a seat belt in the event of an emergencye 44.6 26.5 3.88***

Drinking behavior and drunk driving behavior

Alcohol 1 In general how many days per week do you drink alcoholic beveragesg 44.5 38.8 1.18
Alcohol 2 How many days per week do you drive after drinking even a small amount of alcoholg 32.3 24.0 1.90
Alcohol 3 Over the last week, how many days did you drive, when you may have been over the legal limit for 17.7 7.8 3.03**
drinking and drivingg

Opinions about alcohol legislation and countermeasures

Alcohol 4 Do you think that drivers should be allowed to drinkh 55.9 61.8 1.23
Alcohol 5 How much would you be in favor of not allowing new drivers to drink any alcohol before drivinge 80.0 85.3 1.44
Alcohol 6 - Would you nd it useful to have a device on your car, like an alcohol-meter, that could be used to 71.4 77.5 1.44
determine whether you had been drinking and that could prevent you from driving if you were over the
legal blood alcohol limite
a
Percentage of drivers who marked much more or a bit more
b
Percentage of drivers who marked much faster or a little faster
c
Percentage of drivers who marked often, very often or always
d
Percentage of drivers who marked higher
e
Percentage of drivers who marked very or fairly
f
Percentage of drivers who marked always
g
Percentage of drivers who marked one day or more
h
Percentage of drivers who marked no alcohol at all
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

in Serbia, respectively, and the number of drivers who were violat-
ing the speed limit increased by 10% and 11%, respectively, on the
roads with the two different speed limit. Taking into account the
estimates that a 1 km/h increase in the average speed of trafc leads
to an approximately 3% increase in the number of accidents (e.g.,
Baruya, 1998; Finch et al., 1994), we can assume that the lack of traf-
c enforcement has serious consequences. Interestingly, greater
differences between the two driver groups concerned were found
when measuring the speed in the eld than in self-reports. Since
the surveys were conducted equally in Serbia and North Kosovo,
this difference cannot be due to social desirability bias. Instead,
it is more likely that many drivers in Northern Kosovo are not
fully aware of the degree to which they violate the speed limits.
Drivers in Northern Kosovo may think that in most cases they are
not actually violating speed limits when driving at speeds which
they perceive safe. Hence, drivers in North Kosovo are not aware of
the speed limits simply because the speed limits are not enforced
and, thus, being aware of the speed limit is not important.
The reported speeding-related behaviors are very similar
among drivers in Northern Kosovo and Serbia, which suggests
that the root causes of speeding problems are the same. Most
importantly, this study conrmed that drivers do not believe that
speeding is associated with danger when it comes to their own
driving habits, i.e., drivers claimed that they drove faster than other
 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938 35

Table 5
Independent t-tests for differences in violations while driving, attitudes toward trafc safety and involvement in accidents and risky situations in the two groups of drivers.

Mean Std. deviation t df p

N. Kosovo Serbia N. Kosovo Serbia

DBQ
Aggressive violations 6.65 5.56 2.44 1.85 5.137 422 .000
Ordinary violations 14.10 13.01 4.50 3.80 2.684 422 .008
Errors 13.62 13.41 4.50 3.80 .492 422 .623
Lapses 13.74 13.44 3.98 3.78 .795 422 .427

Attitudes
Attitude toward violation of trafc laws and regulations 14.60 13.04 4.46 4.20 3.69 422 .000
Attitude toward speed 17.88 15.48 6.21 5.42 4.23 422 .000
Attitude toward drinking and driving 7.76 7.56 3.50 2.73 .65 422 .514

Risky situations 1.08 .64 2.70 1.17 2.147 422 .032

Trafc accidents .40 .26 .84 .80 1.702 422 .090

drivers signicantly more often than they claimed that they drove
more dangerously, which demonstrates that many drivers believe
that they are better drivers than the average driver. Furthermore,
they believe that other drivers exceed the speed limit frequently,
which may be one of the factors that inuence general driver
behavior regarding speeding. In addition, drivers in both groups
reported exceeding the speed limit on fast roads to a greater extent
than on slower roads. Interestingly, many respondents expressed
some agreement with the introduction of specic measures against
speeding violations, such as having speed-limiting devices tted
to cars, using black boxes to record the speed of a vehicle that
could then be used in proceedings against an offender, and the use
of speed cameras.
Although there is a driver consensus about measures against
speeding, the results of the present study showed that drivers in
Northern Kosovo reported negative attitudes about speeding more
often than the drivers from Serbia, in the sense that drivers in
Northern Kosovo believed that it is okay to drive faster than the
speed limit as long as the driver is skilled and the road condi-
tions allow it. This indicates that a longer period without trafc law
enforcement has led to changes in the attitudes toward speeding
in addition to the obvious changes in fast driving. Speeding-
related behaviors are widespread, deeply entrenched and generally
socially condoned (Croft, 1993). In addition, the media sometimes
treat speeding and the commission of speeding offenses erro-
neously by arguing that drivers are unjustly punished and that
the police should devote themselves to more important problems
(Slack and Massey, 2005; Day, 2004; Parsons, 2003, according to
Poulter and McKenna, 2007). Many studies have shown that most
people think that they have driving skills that are superior to
those of other drivers, and they believe that they should be able to
speed because they do it safely (Walton and Bathurst, 1998; Elliott,
2001). It has also been found that the speed of other drivers can
be an important factor in speed choice (Connolly and berg, 1993;
Haglund and berg, 2000) and that some drivers can also speed due
to the inuence of habit (De Pelsmacker and Janssens, 2007).
In Northern Kosovo where the current study was conducted,
there is no punishment for committing a speeding violation, and
thus there are no feed-back mechanisms (punishments and/or
rewards) which would enforce the norm that speeding, not using
seat belt, or drinking and driving is wrong and deserves to be
punished. Thus, both driver behavior and attitudes are more
susceptible to the inuence of the above described situational
and driver related factors than trafc code. Speeding-related
attitudes and behavior can be explained also by using the Theory
of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), which had already been applied
on prediction of speeding behavior (e.g. berg, 1997; Parker
et al., 1992; Stradling and Parker, 1997; Wallen Warner and
Aberg, 2006). According to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB),
peoples attitudes toward behavior, their subjective norms, and
their perceived behavioral control determine their intention to
perform the behavior. Thus, the situation that has been created in
Northern Kosovo is likely to affect the formation of different norms
that determine attitudes toward speeding. Furthermore, speeding
behavior is inuenced by some of the more negative attitudes, and
these attitudes, in conjunction with a lack of perceived control
of behavior, possibly result in a situation in which drivers in the
territory of Northern Kosovo drive faster and violate the speed limit
more frequently than drivers in other areas. It should be noted,
however, that in this study the TPB was not empirically used.
Like many others, the present study found that the enforcement
of trafc laws can have a strong effect on driver behavior, but it
should be noted that different types of law enforcement also result
in different results. Many studies have showed the clear advan-
tages of automated enforcement. The meta-analysis conducted by
Elvik et al. (1997) shows that the automatic enforcement of speed-
ing laws resulted as 19% decrease in the number of accidents and
a 17% reduction in the number of people injured in car accidents.
Moreover, speed cameras have been shown to have a greater effect
in urban areas (28% decrease) than in rural areas (4% decrease).
Newstead and Cameron (2003) investigated the effects of a speed
camera program on the number of trafc accidents in Queensland
during a 4-year period. According to their data, the total number
of trafc accidents decreased by 29%, and the number of serious
accidents (those that had fatal outcomes or that resulted in injuries
requiring hospital and medical treatment) decreased by approxi-
mately 36%.
In the studies about the outcomes of various kinds of speed limit
enforcement, the perceived risk of being caught has been identi-
ed (Shinar and Mcknight, 1985) as the essential factor inuencing
the speed choice. The installation of automated speed enforce-
ment devices is regarded as the most effective means of increasing
apprehension rates and deterring speeding behavior. Combining
this form of enforcement with traditional methods can signicantly
reduce speeding behavior and can therefore lead to reductions in
both the number and severity of trafc accidents caused by speed-
ing.
4.2. Seat belts
The greatest differences between drivers in Northern Kosovo
and drivers in Serbia in terms of the behaviors investigated were
the differences in seat belt use. Namely, the drivers from North-
ern Kosovo reported using seat belts to a lesser extent than Serbian
drivers on the main roads between towns, country roads and in
built-up areas. Even eld observations in Northern Kosovo and
Serbia conrmed that there were large differences in seat belt
use between the regions compared. However, the general attitude
36 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938
toward seat belt usage is positive; i.e., the vast majority of drivers
agree that wearing a seat belt reduces the risk of serious injury to
a driver or a passenger in most trafc accidents. However, posi-
tive attitudes, beliefs and intentions about wearing seat belts do
not strongly predict whether drivers will actually wear seat belts
at all times (Chliaoutakis et al., 2000; Loo, 1984). This is probably
due to the fact that a large number of drivers underestimate the
necessity of seat belt use when driving carefully, and they overes-
timate the seat belt-related risk of becoming trapped in a vehicle
in an emergency situation, which is evident from the results that
were obtained in the present study. The concerns listed above may
only be some of the reasons that drivers choose not to wear seat
belts. One of the most important factors inuencing drivers deci-
sion to use a seat belt is the habit (Begg and Langley, 2000; Calisir
and Lehto, 2002; Simsekoglu and Lajunen, 2008). Mkinen and
Hagenzieker (1991) suggested that once a habit of using a seat belt
has been established, it is relatively easy to continue to use one rel-
atively frequently. In the present study, the habit of using seat belt
was measured with a question if the drivers felt less comfortable
or something is missing when not wearing a seat belt. We found
that drivers in Northern Kosovo had lesser prominent habit of using
a seat belt then Serbian drivers.
The results of the current study indicate that the enforcement
of trafc laws plays an important role in forming the habit of using
a seat belt. However, it is worth of noting that when it comes to
seat belt use, trafc enforcement can only be effective to a certain
extent. For example, studies of seat belt usage among sample pop-
ulations from the United States and Canada show that it is difcult
to raise the usage rate beyond 80%. Jonah and Grant (1985) suggest
that an 80% usage rate is the maximum level that can be achieved
by trafc enforcement alone, and it is necessary to employ edu-
cation and media campaigns that support the trafc enforcement
strategy to break this 80% barrier. The high percentages of drivers
who reported that they both underestimated the necessity of using
a seat belt and overestimated the risk of becoming trapped in their
vehicle in emergency situations show that there is room for edu-
cational and information campaigns to improve the understanding
of the signicant benets of seat belt usage among drivers.
4.3. Drunk driving
The results indicate that trafc law enforcement has an impor-
tant role in modulating drunk driving behavior. Drivers from
Northern Kosovo have reported driving after exceeding the legal
limit for alcohol more frequently than drivers in Serbia.
However, there was no difference between drivers in Northern
Kosovo and Serbia in terms of their attitudes toward drunk driving.
This was conrmed by the fact that drivers in Northern Kosovo
expressed strong support to various measures that would prevent
driving while under the inuence of alcohol, which was either at
the same or at an even greater level than among drivers in Serbia.
Unlike the case of speeding, trafc enforcement does not play an
important role in dening attitudes toward drunk driving. There
are several reasons for this. First, the society in general condemns
drinking and driving (Homel et al., 1988; Loxley et al., 1990) while
speeding is a much more socially accepted behavior. Second, there
are clear material and psychological gains to speeding (arriving
at the nal destination sooner and a sense of progress), whereas
drivers who are driving under the inuence of alcohol are most
often either returning home or looking for another place for
entertainment and, thus, not in hurry. Third, the risks of drunk
driving and speeding are perceived differently; drivers consider
speeding to be less dangerous than driving under the inuence of
alcohol, so they are less likely to drive while intoxicated (SARTRE,
2004). In short, drivers have much more ways of justifying their
own speeding behaviors than drinking and driving, especially in
light of their perception that speeding is not dangerous.
However, it is important that enforcement does play a signi-
cant role in the incidence of drunk driving. In the case of Northern
Kosovo, it is evident that drivers drive under the inuence of alcohol
more often than they otherwise might do because they are aware of
the absence of law enforcement, and thus know that their offense
will go unpunished. The differences between attitudes toward and
frequency of drunk driving can be explained in terms of the role
of trafc enforcement. For example, if certain drivers both like to
drink and believe that a certain amount of alcohol (e.g., 23 glasses
of wine or 23 bottles of beer) does not affect their driving skills,
then in the absence of law enforcement, they are likely to consume
alcohol and drive. If enforcement is present, however, these drivers
will always have a reason to refrain from driving while under the
inuence of alcohol. Therefore, without enforcement, there is no
reason for them to refrain from driving while intoxicated (according
to Shinar, 2007).
One of the largest problems regarding drunk driving is that most
of the models that we currently have for explaining, predicting, and
changing driver behavior are difcult to apply in the case of drunk
driving. For example, if we consider driver behavior in terms of the
TPB, the behavior of a driver may be rational and reasonable before
he or she begins consuming alcohol but may change when the per-
son gets intoxicated. Because alcohol has a detrimental effect on our
decision-making capabilities, once a driver who had been rational
when sober becomes drunk, he or she may easily change his or
her plans to be more consistent with his or her subjective feelings
as they are right after the last drink and just before sitting down
at the wheel of the car (Shinar, 2007). It is therefore not surpris-
ing that the implementation of legislative measures that prohibit
drunk driving is generally accepted as the most effective means
of preventing such behaviors. In a recent report, the WHO (Peden
et al., 2004) states that . . .the only consistently effective strategy
for dealing with the problem of excess alcohol is to increase the
perceived risk of being caught. Such a perception is considered a
better deterrent than the severity or swiftness of the penalty.
While education and information campaigns should be used to
support legal measures targeted at preventing drunk driving, they
should not be implemented independently from the implementa-
tion of the legal measures for suppressing drunk driving violations.
It has been found that their combined use has much stronger and
longer-term effects than the use of either single deterrent (Elliott,
1993).
4.4. Driving violations, risky situations and trafc accidents
DBQ based on a four-factor survey structure (errors, lapses,
aggressive and ordinary violations) has been widely used in a large
number of international studies (De Winter and Dodou, 2010) and
the DBQ can be considered as one of the most used and valid
instruments for measuring aberrant driving (Lajunen and zkan,
2011). The results obtained through the use of this survey showed
that drivers from Northern Kosovo committed both ordinary and
aggressive violations more often than drivers in Serbia. However,
there were no differences between these two groups in terms
of either errors or lapses while driving, which shows that both
groups of drivers possess similar capabilities and that drivers in
both groups have similar tendencies toward making mistakes. This
is an expected result, because trafc rule enforcement should not
improve driver performance (or skills) but behavior (driving style),
and because the key component in safe driving style is the respect
for rules. In addition to the previous results (speed, failing to wear
a seat belt, and driving under the inuence of alcohol), the ndings
of this analysis once again conrm the fact that drivers in North-
ern Kosovo take advantage of the situation in which there is a lack
 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938
of trafc law enforcement and, thus, they willingly violate trafc
rules.
Drivers in Northern Kosovo also reported having been in a
greater number of risky situations on the road (near misses
in which an accident almost occurred) compared to drivers in
Serbia. The difference in the number of self-reported trafc acci-
dents between drivers in Northern Kosovo and Serbia was in the
expected direction but did not reach statistical signicance because
of small sample size. While near misses are relatively frequent, acci-
dents are rare occurrences which do not follow normal distribution
and, therefore, require large samples to gain statistically signicant
results.
5. Limitations
This study has some limitations. First, the vast majority of
the results were obtained based on self-reported behavior. This
method of collecting data may lead to the possibility of collecting
data that are distorted due to receiving socially desirable answers
from the respondents. Although the subjects were ensured of the
anonymity and condentiality of their data and the same data col-
lection method was applied in both populations, they may still
have been wary to fully disclose personal information. Second, this
study was focused on the existence/absence of supervision in two
geographical areas and, thus, was not aimed at investigating all
possible factors related to risky driving. While Northern Kosovo
and Serbia are very similar in terms of such factors as culture, eth-
nical background, and institutions (e.g. education, administration)
but opposite in terms of police supervision on the roads, there still
might be some unidentied factors inuencing driver behavior and
possibly causing the differences between these two regions. Tak-
ing into account the similarities and differences between these two
regions, it can be hypothesize that trafc enforcement is a factor
which most inuences the differences in the behavior and attitudes
of the drivers.
6. Conclusion
In the present study, the comparisons based on self-reported
behavior and eld observations indicated that drivers in North-
ern Kosovo engage in signicantly riskier driving behaviors than
drivers in Serbia. Also, drivers in Northern Kosovo drive faster,
exceed speed limits more frequently, use seat belts less frequently,
drive after exceeding the legal limit for alcohol more often, commit
both aggressive and ordinary violations more frequently and are
more involved in risky situations. The lack of enforcement seems
to inuence the formation of attitudes toward speeding and the
violation of trafc regulations too.
Several types of risky driver behaviors were included into the
present study as dependent variables. These behaviors have differ-
ent causes and are based on different psychological mechanisms,
and therefore require different control mechanisms. Differences in
etiology of these behaviors must be taken into account in imple-
mentation of the measures that are designed to change the behavior
and attitudes of the drivers. Drivers seemed to support in great
degree the application of newer technologies in enforcement traf-
c laws (e.g. speed cameras, speed limitation devices and devices
to prevent driving while under the inuence of alcohol). Thus, it
is likely that these devices would be well received and result in
signicant improvement in trafc safety in Northern Kosovo.
References
berg, L., 1997. The role of perceived risk of detection. In: Rothengatter, T., Car-
bonell Vaya, E. (Eds.), Trafc and Transport Psychology: Theory and Application.
Elsevier, Oxford, UK, pp. 395401.
37
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organisational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes 50, 179211.
Baruya, B., 1998. Speed-accident relationships on European roads. In: Proceedings of
the Conference Road Safety in Europe, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany, September
2123, 1998, VTI Konferens No. 10A, Part 10, pp. 117.
Begg, D.J., Langley, D.J., 2000. Seat-belt use and related behavior among young adults.
Journal of Safety Research 31, 211220.
Bendak, S., 2005. Seat belt utilisation in Saudi Arabia and its impact on road accident
injuries. Accident Analysis and Prevention 37 (2), 367371.
Calisir, F., Lehto, M.R., 2002. Young drivers decision making and safety belt use.
Accident Analysis and Prevention 34, 793805.
Carr, A.F., Schnelle, J.F., Kirchner, R.E., 1980. Police crackdowns and slowdowns:
a naturalistic evaluation of changes in police trafc. Behavioral Assessment 2,
3341.
Chliaoutakis, E.J., Gnardellis, C., Drakou, I., Darviri, C., Sboukis, V., 2000. Modelling
the factors related to the seatbelt use by the young drivers of Athens. Accident
Analysis and Prevention 32, 815825.
Connolly, T., berg, L., 1993. Some contagion models of speeding. Accident Analysis
and Prevention 25 (1), 5766.
Croft, P.G., 1993. Speed management in New South Wales. In: Fildes, B.N., Lee, S.J.
(Eds.), The Speed Review: Appendix of Speed Workshop Papers. Monash Uni-
versity Accident Research Centre, Clayton, Victoria.
Day, E., 2004. Prosecute motorway lane hogs, RAC says. http://www.telegraph.
co.uk/news/
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 and Prevention 39, 615.
De Waard, D., Rooijers, T., 1994. An experimental study to evaluate the effectiveness
of different methods and intensities of law enforcement on driving speed on
motorways. Accident Analysis and Prevention 26 (6), 751765.
De Winter, J.C.F., Dodou, D., 2010. The driver behaviour questionnaire as a predictor
of accidents: a meta-analysis. Journal of Safety Research 41 (6), 463470.
Elliott, B., 1993. Road Safety Mass Media Campaigns: A Meta Analysis. Report CR
118. Federal Ofce of Road Safety, Canberra.
Elliott B.J., 2001. The Application of the Theorists Workshop Model of Behaviour
Change to Motorists Speeding Behaviour in Western Australia. Ofce of Road
Safety, Department of Transport, Western Australia.
Elliott, M., Broughton, J., 2005. How Methods and Levels of Policing Affect Road
Casualty Rates. TRL Report TRL637. TRL Limited, Wokingham.
Elvik, R., 2001. Cost-Benet Analysis of Police Enforcement. Report ESCAPE Project,
Working Paper, VTT, Helsinki.
Elvik, R., Mysen, A.B., Vaa, T., 1997. Trakksikkerhetshndbok (Trafc Safety Hand-
book). Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo.
ESCAPE Consortium, 2003. Trafc enforcement in Europe: effects, measures, needs
and future. The Escape Project Final Report, Contract No.: RO-98-RS.3047, 4th
RTD Framework Programme.
European Transport Safety Council, 1999. Police Enforcement Strategies to Reduce
Trafc Casualties in Europe. ETSC, Brussels.
Evans, L., 1991. Trafc Safety and the Driver. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Finch, D.J., Kompfner, P., Lockwood, C.R., Maycock, G., 1994. Speed, Speed Limits and
Accidents. TRL Report 58. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
Goldenbeld, C., Jayet, M.C., Fuller, R., Mkinen, T., 1999. Enforcement of trafc laws.
Review of the literature on enforcement of trafc rules in the framework of
GADGET Work Package 5. SWOV, INRETS, TCD, VTT, Leidschendam, Netherlands.
Haglund, M., berg, L., 2000. Speed choice in relation to speed limit and inuences
from other drivers. Transportation Research Part F 3, 3951.
Hakkert, A.S., Gitelman, V., Cohen, A., Doveh, E., Umansky, T., 2001. The evalu-
ation of effects on driver behaviour and accidents of concentrated general
enforcement on interurban roads in Israel. Accident Analysis and Prevention 33,
4363.
Heinrich, H., 1991. Strategies to increase the use of restraint systems: report about
Germany. In: Proceedings of the Conference Strategic Highway Research Pro-
gram and Trafc Safety on Two Continents, Gothenburg, pp. 113119.
Holland, C.A., Conner, M.T., 1996. Exceeding the speed limit: an evaluation of the
effectiveness of a police intervention. Accident Analysis and Prevention 28 (5),
587597.
Homel, R., Carseldine, D., Kearns, I., 1988. Drink-driving countermeasures in
Australia. Alcohol, Drugs and Driving 4 (2), 113144.
Iversen, H., Rundmo, T., 2004. Attitudes towards trafc safety, driving behaviour
and accident involvement among the Norwegian public. Ergonomics 47 (4),
555572.
Jonah, B.A., Grant, B.A., 1985. Long-term effectiveness of selective trafc enforce-
ment programs for increasing seat belt use. Journal of Applied Psychology 70,
257263.
Lajunen, T., zkan, T., 2011. Self-report instruments and methods. In: Porter, B.E.
(Ed.), Handbook of Trafc Psychology. Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 4359.
Lawton, R., Parker, D., Manstead, A.S.R., Stradling, S.G., 1997. The role of affect in
predicting social behaviours: the case of road trafc violations. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology 27, 12581276.
Lewin, I., 1982. Driver training: a perceptual-motor skill approach. Ergonomics 25,
917924.
Loo, R., 1984. Correlates of reported attitude towards and use of seat belts. Accident
Analysis and Prevention 16 (5/6), 417421.
Loxley, W., Saunders, B., Blaze-Temple, D., Binns, C., 1990. Drinking and driving
in Western Australia: perceptions of practices, priorities and preventives. Aus-
tralian Journal of Social Issues 25 (2), 120136.
38 P. Stanojevic et al. / Accident Analysis and Prevention 52 (2013) 2938
Mkinen, T., Hagenzieker, M., 1991. Strategies to increase the use of restraint sys-
tems. In: Proceedings of the Conference Strategic Highway Research Program
and Trafc Safety on Two Continents, Gothenburg, pp. 6167.
Mkinen, T., Wittink, R.D., Hagenzieker, M.P., 1991. The Use of Seat Belts and Con-
tributing Factors: An International Comparison. Report No. R-91-30. SWOV
Institute for Road Safety Research, Leidschendam, Netherlands, p. 57.
Montgomery, D.C., Runger, G.C., 1994. Applied Probability and Statistics for Engi-
neers. Wiley, New York.
Newstead, S., Cameron, M., 2003. Evaluation of the Crash Effects of the Queens-
land Speed Camera Program. Report 204. Monash University Accident Research
Centre, Melbourne.
Oei, H., 1998. The Effect of Enforcement on Speed Behaviour: A Literature Study.
MASTER Deliverable 3. SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, Leidschendam,
Netherlands.
stvik, E., Elvik, R., 1991. The effects of speed enforcement on individual road user
behavior and accidents. In: Koornstra, M.J., Christensen, J. (Eds.), Enforcement
and Rewarding: Strategies and Effects. SWOV, Leidschendam, Netherlands, pp.
5659.
Parker, D., Lajunen, T., Stradling, S., 1998. Attitudinal predictors of aggressive driving
violations. Transportation Research Part F 1, 1124.
Parker, D., Manstead, A.S.R., Stradling, S.G., Reason, J.T., Baxter, J.S., 1992. Intention
to commit driving violations: an application of the theory of planned behaviour.
Journal of Applied Psychology 77, 94101.
Parker, D., Reason, J.T., Manstead, A.S.R., Stradling, S., 1995. Driving errors, driving
violations and accident involvement. Ergonomics 39, 10361048.
Parsons, T., 2003. Why trafc cops play silly burglars. http://mirror.co.uk/
news/tonyparsons/tm column date=14072003-name index.html
Peden, M., Scureld, R., Sleet, D., Mohan, D., Hyder, A.A., Jarawan, E., Mathers, C., 2004.
World Report on Road Trafc Injury Prevention. World Health Organization,
Geneva.
Poulter, R.D., McKenna, P.F., 2007. Is speeding a real antisocial behavior? A com-
parison with other antisocial behaviors. Accident Analysis and Prevention 39,
384389.
Robertson, L.S., 1978. The seat belt use law in Ontario: effects on actual use. Canadian
Journal of Public Health 69, 154157.
Rumar, K., 1985. The role of perceptual and cognitive lters in observed behaviour.
In: Evans, L., Schwing, R.C. (Eds.), Human Behavior and Trafc Safety. Plenum
Press, New York, pp. 151165.
Ryeng, O.E., 2011. The effect of sanctions and police enforcement on drivers choice
of speed. Accident Analysis and Prevention 45, 446454.
SARTRE Consortium, 2004. European drivers and road risk. Part 1. Report on principal
results. Part 2: Report on in-depth analyses. INRETS, Arcueil.
Schick, S., 2007. Accident Related Factors. Project No. 027763. Deliverable 3.1, WP3
Type of Factors. European TRACE Project.
Shinar, D., 2007. Trafc Safety and Human Behavior. Elsevier, Oxford, UK.
Shinar, D., Mcknight, A.J., 1985. The effects of enforcement and public information
on compliance. In: Evans, L., Schwing, R.C. (Eds.), Human Behavior and Trafc
Safety. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 385419.
Simsekoglu, ., Lajunen, T., 2008. Why Turks do not use seat belts? An interview
study. Accident Analysis and Prevention 40, 470478.
Slack, J., Massey, R., 2005. Soft Target motoristshalf of all court cases are driving
offences. Daily Mail.
Stradling, S.G., Parker, D., 1997. Extending the theory of planned behaviour: the
role of personal norm, instrumental beliefs and affective beliefs in predict-
ing driving violations. In: Rothengatter, T., Carbonell Vaya, E. (Eds.), Trafc
and Transport Psychology: Theory and Application. Elsevier, Oxford, UK,
pp. 367374.
Summala, H., Roine, M., 1980. Exceptional conditions of police enforcement during
the police strike. Accident Analysis and Prevention 12, 179184.
Tarko, A., 2008. Can enforcement and education affect speed on county roads? Paper
presented at Transportation Research Board 87th Annual Meeting, January 2008.
Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Taylor, M.C., Lynam, D.A., Baruya, A., 2000. The Effect of Drivers Speed on the Fre-
quency of Road Accidents. TRL Report TRL421. TRL Limited, Wokingham.
Ulleberg, P., Rundmo, T., 2003. Personality, attitudes and risk perception as pre-
dictors of risky driving behavior among young drivers. Safety Science 41,
427443.
Vaa, T., 1997. Increased police enforcement: effects on speed. Accident Analysis and
Prevention 29 (3), 373385.
Valtonen, J., 1991. Safety belt usage in Finland and in the other nordic countries. In:
Proceedings of the Conference Strategic Highway Research Program and Trafc
Safety on Two Continents, Gothenburg, pp. 8996.
Wallen Warner, H., Aberg, L., 2006. Drivers decision to speed: a study inspired
by the theory of planned behavior. Transportation Research Part F 9,
427433.
Walter, L., Broughton, J., Knowles, J., 2011. The effects of increased police
enforcement along a route in London. Accident Analysis and Prevention 43,
12191227.
Walton, D., Bathurst, J., 1998. An exploration of the perceptions of the average
drivers speed compared to perceived driver safety and driving skills. Accident
Analysis and Prevention 30 (6), 821830.
Wechsler, H., Eun Lee, J., Nelson, T.F., Lee, H., 2003. Drinking and driving among
college students: the inuence of alcohol-control policies. American Journal of
Preventive Medicine 25 (3), 212218.
Weiss, A., Freels, S., 1996. The effects of aggressive policing: the Dayton trafc
enforcement experiment. American Journal of Police 15, 4564.
Williams, A.F., Wells, J.K., 2004. The role of enforcement programs in increasing seat
belt use. Journal of Safety Research 35, 175180.
Yannis, G., Papadimitriou, E., Antoniou, C., 2008. Impact of enforcement on trafc
accidents and fatalities: a multivariate multilevel analysis. Safety Science 46,
738750.
Zaal D., 1994. Trafc Law Enforcement: A Review of the Literature. Report No. 53.
Monash University, Accident Research Centre, Clayton, Victoria.
Zaidel, D., 2002. The impact of enforcement on accidents. Deliverable 3
(Work Package 2) of the ESCAPE project. Contract N: RO-98-RS.3047.
http://www.vtt./rte/projects/escape/escape d3.pdf