1998-2000 State Shoulder Belt Use Survey Results

NHTSA · 2001 · ROSA P / National Center for Statistics and Analysis (U.S.)

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 research note from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) presents statewide estimates of front seat outboard passenger shoulder belt use for the years 1998, 1999, and 2000. The report compiles data submitted by 48 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico to assess compliance with the Department of Transportation’s 1999 Performance Plan goal of achieving an 85 percent use rate by the end of 2000. The study aims to track trends in occupant protection and evaluate the impact of legislative changes, specifically the adoption of standard enforcement seat belt laws. The data were derived from observational surveys conducted by individual states following the Uniform Criteria for State Observational Surveys of Seat Belt Use (23 CFR Part 1340). These criteria mandated probability-based sampling of actual vehicle observations on roadways, excluding secondary sources like police reports or telephone surveys. Surveys focused on front seat outboard passengers in all passenger motor vehicles, including automobiles, pickup trucks, vans, minivans, and sport utility vehicles. To ensure representativeness, observational sites were selected from geographic areas containing at least 85 percent of the state’s population, covering all daylight hours and days of the week. The survey design required a relative precision of +/- 5 percent to guarantee statistical reliability. The results indicate significant variation in belt use rates across jurisdictions. In 2000, only four jurisdictions met the 85 percent goal: California (88.9 percent), Puerto Rico (87.0 percent), New Mexico (86.6 percent), and Maryland (85.0 percent). The lowest reported rate was 47.7 percent in North Dakota. Notable increases occurred in states that introduced standard enforcement laws in 2000, including Michigan (rising from 70.1 to 83.5 percent), Alabama (from 57.9 to 70.6 percent), and New Jersey (from 63.3 to 74.2 percent). Alabama recorded the largest cumulative increase from 1998 to 2000, while Mississippi experienced the largest decline, dropping from 58 percent in 1998 to 50.4 percent in 2000. Nationally, the overall shoulder belt use rate in 2000 was 71 percent. The data further revealed that use rates were significantly higher in states with standard enforcement laws (77 percent) compared to those without (64 percent). With the exception of Washington, all states reporting use rates of 80 percent or higher in 2000 had standard enforcement laws in effect. The findings underscore the correlation between standard enforcement seat belt laws and higher compliance rates. The report highlights that legislative enforcement is a critical factor in achieving high shoulder belt usage, as evidenced by the substantial gains in states that adopted such laws in 2000. The data provide a baseline for evaluating the effectiveness of occupant protection incentive grant programs and inform future safety initiatives aimed at increasing belt use nationwide.

Key finding

Shoulder belt use averaged 77% in states with standard (primary) enforcement seat belt laws versus 64% in states without, and the three states with the largest 1999-2000 gains had each newly adopted such a law.

Methodology

survey

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 (8 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
• incidence prevalence
• child passenger safety

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