Compendium of Highway Safety Questionnaire Items

NHTSA · 1980 · ROSA P / United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This document, titled *Compendium of Highway Safety Questionnaire Items*, was prepared for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in September 1980. It serves as a reference resource for survey planners, compiling questionnaire items and associated results from state and national surveys conducted between 1976 and 1980. The compendium is organized by specific highway safety issues, including the 55 MPH speed limit, safety belts and airbags, drinking and driving, public information and education, and safety helmets. For each topic, items are categorized by drivers' attitudes, behaviors, and knowledge. The document explicitly notes that the collection is not exhaustive and that items vary in quality and suitability across different survey modes, such as telephone, mail, and personal interviews. The provided text focuses extensively on the 55 MPH speed limit, presenting data from various states including Alabama, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania, as well as national samples. The surveys utilized diverse methodologies, with sample sizes ranging from 400 to over 10,000 respondents. The questions probe public opinion on the retention of the 55 MPH limit, perceived advantages and disadvantages, compliance rates, and beliefs regarding fuel conservation and safety. For instance, national telephone surveys from 1978 and 1979 asked respondents about their favorability toward maintaining the limit and their reasons for supporting or opposing it. The findings reveal significant variation in public perception and behavior. Regarding attitudes, national surveys indicated that while a majority favored keeping the limit in 1978 (55.7% strongly in favor), this support dropped in 1979 (57.5% strongly in favor, but with higher opposition). Respondents frequently cited safety and fuel savings as primary reasons for supporting the limit, with 87% of a 1978 national sample agreeing it saves lives and 80% agreeing it reduces accident frequency. Conversely, common objections included increased travel time and the belief that highways were designed for higher speeds. Behavioral data showed widespread non-compliance; for example, a 1977 California survey found that 88% of respondents admitted to driving over 55 MPH, and a 1978 Alabama survey indicated that only 4% of drivers obeyed the limit "most of the time." Additionally, respondents often perceived that few other drivers complied, with a 1977 California survey showing 36% believed "fewer than half" of drivers observed the limit. The significance of this compendium lies in its utility for standardizing highway safety research and enabling comparisons across geographic areas and time periods. By aggregating these items, NHTSA facilitates the tracking of public sentiment and behavioral trends related to critical safety issues. The data highlights a disconnect between the stated goals of the 55 MPH limit—safety and fuel conservation—and actual driver compliance, suggesting that enforcement and public perception of risk were key factors influencing behavior. The document underscores the importance of consistent measurement tools in evaluating the effectiveness of highway safety policies and public education campaigns.

Key finding

The document is a compilation of survey instruments and historical data rather than a single study with a unified principal result.

Methodology

dataset

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (48 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• seat belt use

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Empirical Findings: observational prevalence