Evaluation of Teen Seat Belt Demonstration Projects in Colorado and Nevada

Nichols, J.; Haire, E.; Solomon, M.; Ellison-Potter, P.; Cosgrove, L. · 2011 · 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 report evaluates the effectiveness of Teen Seat Belt Demonstration Projects implemented in Colorado and Nevada from September 2007 to September 2008. The study addresses the high fatality and injury rates among teen drivers (ages 15–20), who are disproportionately represented in motor vehicle crashes due to inexperience and risk factors such as night driving and passenger transport. The projects aimed to increase seat belt usage among teens aged 16 to 20 through a Special Traffic Enforcement Program (sTEP) model, which combines targeted publicity with high-visibility law enforcement. The experimental design involved four waves of intervention in both states, utilizing a mix of outreach, earned media, paid media campaigns, and enforcement activities. Paid media expenditures totaled $783,510 in Colorado and $489,422 in Nevada, with television serving as the primary medium. Enforcement efforts focused on metropolitan areas and locations near schools, utilizing saturation patrols and overtime incentives. Data collection included observational surveys of seat belt use and public awareness surveys conducted at baseline and after each program wave. The study analyzed changes in awareness, observed use rates, and trends in unbuckled teen fatalities. The results indicated that the programs were successful in increasing teen awareness and seat belt use. In Colorado, teen awareness of seat belt messages increased by 17 percentage points, and awareness of special police enforcement rose by 20 percentage points. Nevada saw similar increases in message awareness (17 points) and enforcement awareness (12 points). Observed seat belt use increased significantly in both states: Colorado saw an overall gain of 5 percentage points (from 72% to 77%), while Nevada achieved an 8 percentage point increase (from 79% to 87%). The impact was generally greater at high schools than at colleges. In Nevada, teen passengers showed a larger increase in use (+10 points) compared to drivers (+6 points). Additionally, the percentage of unbuckled teens killed in fatal crashes declined in both states during the study period, though these changes were not statistically significant due to small sample sizes. The significance of these findings lies in the demonstration that substantial gains in seat belt use can be achieved even in states with secondary enforcement laws and low fine levels ($20 in Colorado, $25 in Nevada). The report concludes that the sTEP model effectively targeted the teen demographic, with paid media and focused enforcement driving behavioral change. The authors suggest that greater improvements could likely be realized if these states upgraded to primary enforcement laws or increased fine levels. The study provides evidence that coordinated, multi-wave campaigns combining media and enforcement are effective strategies for improving occupant protection among novice drivers.

Key finding

Teen seat belt use increased by 5 percentage points in Colorado and 8 percentage points in Nevada following the demonstration projects.

Methodology

naturalistic

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 (9 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
• 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).

• Applied Guidance: countermeasure evaluation
• Empirical Findings: observational prevalence