Seat Belt & Motorcycle Helmet Survey - Mississippi … Belt & Motorcycle Helmet Survey November 2016...

Seat Belt & Motorcycle

Helmet Survey November 2016

Prepared by:J.W. Landrum Observational Laboratory David R. Parrish, Daniel Suddoth, Kristin Smith, and Hamilton Kammer

2

Report layout and design by Sara Stukenborg.

Funds for the production of this document were provided by the Mississippi Office of Highway Safety.

3

CONTENTS

Introduction 4

Seat Belt Survey Methodology 6

Section One 8Pre-campaign observational seat belt results

Section Two 10Post-campaign obervational seat bely results

Section Three 24Click it or ticket countermeasures

Section Four 28Belt use before and after intervention

Section Five 32County assessments

Section Six 40Motorcycle helmet use

Summary 42

4

INTRODUCTION

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports there were 35,092 motor vehicle traffic fatalities in the United States in 2015. This number of fatalities represents a dramatic 7.2 percent increase from the previous year’s fatality count of 32,744. As confounding as this loss of life seems, it is a constant reminder that fatal crashes have claimed many lives over the years and continue to claim on average about 96 lives each and every day in the United States. In terms of a rate estimate, NHTSA calculates a national rate of 1.12 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2015.

Vehicle safety is a major component in all aspects of vehicle and road designs. However, it is the behavior of the driver and passengers with respect to belt use that ultimately determines the probability of survival in most vehicle crashes. A great number of fatalities may have been avoided if proper vehicle restraints had been used at the time of the crashes. NHTSA estimates the use of seat belts by passenger vehicle occupants age 5 and older saved 13,941 lives in 2015 alone.

NHTSA reports Mississippi’s 2014 traffic fatality rate of 20.27 fatalities per 100,000 population. Mississippi’s rate was almost twice the national average, which was 10.25. This disturbing fatality rate continues to be realized by the 607 lives lost in Mississippi in 2014. Although significant increases have been observed in seat belt usage since the primary law was passed, the loss of life due to automobile crashes in Mississippi is still staggering. Perhaps one contributing factor for this could be attributed to the state continuing to lag behind several other states in occupant protection practices and likewise, the belt use national average. Mississippi had an estimated 79.6% seat belt usage rate in 2015. The national average was 88.5%. In 2015, only 5 states had a lower belt usage rate than Mississippi – Arkansas at 77.7%, Montana at 77.0%, Massachusetts at 74.1%, South Dakota at 73.6%, and New Hampshire at 69.5%. Over the past several years, Mississippi has climbed from near the bottom of the rankings to a much more positive seat belt usage rate very close to the national average and back down close to the bottom again. It should also be noted that of all the 34 states (includes Washington D.C.) with a primary seat belt law, Mississippi only ranked higher than one state, Arkansas, in observed belt use.

5

For the past twelve years, Mississippi has participated in a major effort conducted under the term “Click It or Ticket” (CIOT), during Memorial Day mobilizations. These efforts have been an attempt to increase seat belt awareness and use by implementing a number of phases. In 2016, the first of these phases was an earned media phase including public service announcements, brochures, and newspaper articles that were introduced to the Mississippi public. After two weeks of earned media, an extensive paid media campaign began (second phase). Lastly, a statewide law enforcement blitz (third phase) increased the intensity of seatbelt law enforcement throughout the state. All law enforcement agencies participated in this increased level of enforcement by using safety checkpoints and saturated patrolling efforts.

In 2016, two observational seat belt surveys were conducted by the Social Science Research Center at Mississippi State University. One survey was conducted prior to media and law enforcement intervention. This pre-campaign survey was a subsample of the NHTSA-approved survey design that contains the official sample for the 2016 post-campaign survey cycle. This pre-CIOT survey consisted of 54 sites in 8 counties. The follow-up or post-campaign survey in 2016 utilized the full 173 site, 16 county survey sample. This is the fourth year the newly approved sample was utilized to provide the official, statewide seat belt estimate for Mississippi.

This report will be divided into six sections.

Section One presents results from the pre-campaign observational study of 54 sites in 8 counties.

Section Two shows results of the post-campaign and official statewide 2016 Mississippi observational seat belt survey from 173 sites in 16 counties.

Section Three illustrates the media and enforcement efforts orchestrated by the Mississippi Office of Highway Safety.

Section Four compares estimated seat belt usages among the 2015 statewide survey, 2016 baseline survey, and 2016 statewide survey.

Section Five displays the most current county assesments including demographics, crash fatalities, and enforcement.

Section Six summarizes motorcycle helmet use.

DESCRIPTION OF SECTIONS

6

SEAT BELT SURVEYMETHODOLOGY

The seat belt and motorcycle survey for Mississippi uses a multi-stage area probability approach. In the first stage, an

appropriate number of sampling units are randomly selected. The primary sampling unit for the Mississippi survey is the county. The counties with the least amount of crash-related

occupant fatalities, approximately the bottom 15%, are excluded from the sampling process. The survey was conducted in 16

Mississippi Counties which comprised 35% of the State’s crash-related occupant fatalities between 2005 and 2009.

Further details on the sampling methodology of the survey can be found in the document “PROPOSAL FOR MISSISSIPPI OBSERVATIONAL SURVEYS OF SAFETY BELT ANDMOTORCYCLE HELMET USE”

prepared by William A. Leaf (PRG), David. R. Parrish (SSRC), and Mark G. Soloman (PRG). This methodology was approved by NHTSA in 2011 and can be obtained from the Social Science Research Center at Mississippi

State University, Box 5287 Mississippi State, MS 39762, or by contacting Mr. David Parrish at (662) 325-8116 or [email protected].

Special thanks to Preusser Research Group (PRG) for their assistance in the development of this methodology and continuing technical expertise.

7

SUMMARY OF SAMPLINGMETHODOLOGY

A. Five counties were selected as certainty counties because of having crash-related occupant fatalities (and likewise population) much larger than other Mississippi Counties. These counties also comprise nearly 21 percent of the state’s crash-related occupant fatalities. The certainty counties were DeSoto, Harrison, Hinds, Jackson, and Rankin.

B. Twenty-nine counties, whose combined crash-related occupant fatalities accounted for about 15% of the state’s population, were eliminated from the sampling frame.

C. Sampling was done without replacement. In addition to the five certainty counties, 11 other counties were chosen, thus the sample consists of 16 counties.

D. The sample includes 173 forty-five minute observation periods at 173 pseudo-randomly chosen road segment locations. Each road segment within a county was randomly chosen with probability of being chosen proportionate to the DVMT of the road segment. The five certainty counties were allotted 15 observation periods, while the remaining 11 counties were allotted either 10 or 8 observation periods each.

E. The qualifying route segments comprising the sampling population are identified from the Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT) Roadway Characteristics File.

F. The route segments from each of the survey counties are stratified into the following 5 groupings using MDOT functional classification data: (1) Interstates and Other Expressways, (2) Other Principal Arterials, (3) Minor Arterials and (4) Collectors (5) Local Roads

G. For a given county, segments were pseudo-randomly chosen from each of the five strata.H. For each certainty county, the 15 sites were grouped by proximity into two clusters of 7 and 8 sites.I. For each of the other 11 counties, clusters of 5 or 8 were selected depending on the presence or

requirement to survey all road classifications (A minimum of 2 road segments per road classification was satisfied.)

J. For each cluster a day of the week was randomly chosen. All days of the week were eligible for selection.

K. Once a site was assigned a day of the week, observation times between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. were randomly chosen in 1 hour and 15 minute increments.

L. Direction of observation was randomly assigned for all 173 sites.M. Observers were instructed to observe from a site using the assigned direction for a period of 45

minutes.N. The sampling frame includes counting all passenger vehicles, sports utility vehicles, vans and pickup

trucks. Other vehicles, such as large buses, larger trucks and farm equipment are excluded from observation.

O. One observer is used at each observation site and the shoulder belt use/nonuse of all front seat, outboard occupants of qualifying vehicles is recorded on forms supplied by the SSRC.

8

SECTION ONEPRE-CAMPAIGN OBSERVATIONAL SEAT BELT RESULTS

The data from this baseline survey was collected between April 11 and May 1, 2016. The counties in the “mini” survey were hand-picked from the statewide sample with the intention of including a mixture of different geographical regions where both rural and urban counties are represented. The 2016 mini survey sample is identical to the sample in 2013, 2014 and 2015.

Prior to any media or law enforcement efforts encouraging seat belt usage, a 2016 baseline or “mini” survey was conducted. This survey was administered with intentions of establishing a seat belt usage rate before the CIOT campaign. Observations from 54 sites in 8 counties made up the baseline survey. The 54-site sample was a subsample of the larger statewide survey, which is detailed in Section Two of this report.

Figure 1: Pre-CIOT Survey Counties

DeSotoHarrisonLeeLefloreMadisonPerryPikeRankin

8 sites7 sites5 sites8 sites5 sites8 sites5 sites8 sites

9

Table 1: Baseline Seat Belt Usage and Rates by the Type of VehicleBaseline Survey of 54 Sites in 8 Counties

Table 1 shows the baseline belt use figures for driver and outside front seat passenger by type of vehicle observed. The overall usage rate for the baseline survey was 83.2%. Sports Utility Vehicle occupants topped the percent belted ranks with an estimated belt use rate of 87.4%. Passenger car and van occupants exhibited higher than average belt rates at 86.1% and 85.8% respectively. Pickup truck occupants continue to exhibit the lowest belt use rates in Mississippi at 73.3%. Seat belt compliance for pickup truck occupants is a considerable problem area for Mississippi, which if addressed could result in a much higher total Mississippi belt use rate.

Type of Vehicle Occupants Observed Percent Belted

Passenger CarPickup Truck

SUVVan

2,312

Total

1,3301,369332

5,343

86.1%73.3%87.4%85.8%

83.2%

Table 2: Baseline Seat Belt Usage Rates by CountyBaseline Survey of 54 Sites in 8 Counties

A breakdown of seat belt usage rates by county in the pre-CIOT survey (Table 2) illustrates half of the eight counties surveyed above 80% belt use, with Harrison being the top-ranked at 94.6% estimated belt use. Leflore County showed the lowest estimated belt use rate in the mini survey at 63.7%.

The 2016 baseline survey produced an overall estimated seat belt rate of 83.2%, which is higher than the 2015 baseline rate of 82.0% and equal to the 83.2% estimate belt rate in 2014.

DesotoHarrison

LeeLeflore

MadisonPerryPike

Rankin

Total

9681,222

442667498551500495

5,343

86.9%94.6%72.4%63.7%85.1%89.1%79.6%79.4%

83.2%

County Occupants Observed Percent Belted

10

SECTION TWOPOST-CAMPAIGN OBSERVATIONAL SEAT BELT RESULTS

In 2013 NHTSA directed each state to perform their respective statewide observational seat belt usage surveys according to a new criteria set forth by the federal agency’s final rule in 2011. Mississippi, therefore, designed a new survey sampling methodology and began using the model in 2013. The NHTSA-approved survey design has been used as the official estimator of seat belt usage for the past three years. It resulted in a 74.4% estimated statewide belt use in 2013, 78.3% in 2014 and 79.6% in 2015. This same design was implemented for the statewide survey in 2016.

The 2016 post-campaign survey was conducted after an intense seat belt media and enforcement campaign known as “Click It or Ticket” during the month of May, 2016. The intentions of this survey are to quantitatively gauge how effective the campaign was received by the motoring public and to generate an official 2016 estimate of seat belt usage for the state. Figure 2 shows the counties that frame the 2016 observational seat belt survey. There were 173 road segments observed in 16 counties.

Figure 2: Post-CIOT Survey Counties

ChickasawDeSotoHancockHarrisonHindsHolmesJacksonLeeLefloreMadisonPanolaPerryPikePontotocPrentissRankin

8 sites15 sites10 sites15 sites15 sites8 sites

15 sites10 sites8 sites



15 sites

11

Road Class Occupants Observed

Belt UsageRate

Table 3: Seat Belt Usage Rates by Road ClassFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 Counties

Interstates & Other Expressways 4,562 85.8%Other Principal Arterials 4,968 83.0%

Minor Arterials 3,719 80.7%Collectors 2,011 77.6%

Local Roads 1,149 66.2%

The overall result for the 2016 Mississippi Seat Belt Survey is a 77.9% occupant seat belt usage rate with a standard er-ror of 1.093%. The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval is 75.7% and the upper limit is 80.0%. There were 16,389 vehicle occupants observed. As confirmed by many previous surveys, there continues to be a trend of higher seat belt usage rates on higher traffic count roads. Table 3 shows “interstates and other expressways” along with “other principal arterials” leading the road class categories with 85.8% and 83.0% estimated belt usage rates respectively in 2016. The next level of road category, “minor arterials” follows with a belt use rate above eighty at 80.7%. The. “collectors” and “local roads” fell well below the 80% mark at 77.6% and 66.2% respectively. Last year (2015) was the only year, since beginning to survey local roads in 2013, local roads breached the 70% usage mark at 71.2%. Clearly the 66.2% belt use estimate for local roads in 2016 reminds the state of a major problem area for belt use compliance in Mississippi.

Table 4: Seat Belt Usage Rates by Vehicle TypeFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 Counties

Table 4 illustrates the breakdown of belt usage rates in four vehicle categories. SUV’s lead the belt use categories with 83.1% estimated use. Passenger cars and vans were very close behind with 82.5% and 82.6% belt use respectively. It was not a surprise to once again see pickup trucks as the trailing vehicle type in this breakdown. Each year pickup trucks pale in comparison to the other vehicle categories. The 68.7% estimated

belt usage of pickup truck occupants is significantly lower than the other three vehicle types and the only vehicle type below 80%.

The following series of tables (Tables 5-10) provides breakdowns of seat belt use rates by type of vehicle, by county, by driver/passen-ger, and by gender. Please note that “unsure” gender observations are omitted in these breakdowns. The extent of this data narrow-ing produces more specific results, but the data is of practical use only if the number of observations is significant enough to draw conclusions. Usually the minimum number of total observations per category should be around 30 before conclusions can be drawn. Many of the figures in this series of tables may not meet this requirement. Likewise, inconsistencies in calculated values are to be ex-pected due to the effect of small sample sizes in some circumstances. However, this in-depth breakdown can be used as a loose guide to potential specific problem areas that may deserve attention.

Passenger Car/Wagon 6,958 82.5%Pickup 4,548 68.7%SUV 3,840 83.1%Van 1,043 82.6%

Vehicle OccupantsObserved

Belt Usage Rate

12

Full Survey of 173 Sites in 16 CountiesAll Types of Vehicles by Driver/Passenger and Gender (N =16,380)

Table 5: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – All Vehicles

Encouraging Observations:• Perry County claimed the highest overall belt use

estimate in 2016 at 92.3.• Harrison County showed over 90% overall belt

usage for the sixth year in a row.• Female drivers in six counties and female

passengers in eight counties are shown buckling up over 90% of the time.

Room for Improvement:• Two counties (Chickasaw and Leflore) illustrated

disappointing overall and categorical belt use estimates below 70 percent.

• Male drivers in eight counties and male passengers in seven counties show belt use less than 70% of the time.

• There is a 27 percentage point difference in belt use between male drivers and male passengers in Hancock County.

CountyDrivers Passengers Occupants

Male Female All Male Female All AllDeSoto 85.4% 95.1% 88.5% 78.6 % 95.3 % 88.0 % 88.4 %

n= 1132 749 1881 170 231 401 2282Harrison 88.1% 94.1% 90.4 % 84.9 % 92.9% 90.3% 90.3%

n= 901 670 1571 107 278 385 1956Hinds 63.8% 76.1 % 71.3% 80.7 % 83.5% 79.9 % 72.5%

n= 525 426 951 92 94 186 1137Jackson 84.3% 94.4% 87.8 % 81.6% 94.5% 88.7 % 88.0 %

n= 707 420 1127 111 258 369 1496Rankin 69.6% 73.0% 72.0% 77.2 % 74.4% 76.4% 72.6 %

n= 513 447 960 93 167 260 1220Chicaksaw 63.2 % 70.0% 64.9 % 46.1% 73.4% 66.3 % 65.0 %

n= 237 152 389 35 43 78 467Hancock 65.5 % 90.8 % 72.9 % 92.5 % 95.8% 94.4% 75.7 %

n= 347 232 579 62 123 185 764Holmes 76.0 % 83.5 % 78.8% 63.8 % 96.3% 76.8% 78.8%

n= 380 195 575 55 93 148 723Lee 67.1% 76.1 % 70.5% 57.7% 76.8% 71.2% 70.3 %

n= 380 315 695 68 96 164 859Leflore 66.2 % 75.8 % 70.3 % 50.7% 76.7 % 57.7% 68.7 %

n= 332 246 578 47 29 76 654Madison 76.6% 84.9 % 80.8 % 68.5 % 93.4% 71.8 % 81.4%

n= 441 268 709 63 113 176 885Panola 77.1 % 86.3 % 80.4 % 68.6 % 85.4 % 80.1 % 80.3 %

n= 555 367 922 108 213 321 1243Perry 90.2% 98.5 % 93.2% 79.9% 97.6 % 89.0 % 92.3%

n= 310 211 521 39 96 135 656Pike 73.9 % 90.5% 82.3% 75.3% 90.2% 83.9 % 82.8 %

n= 373 375 748 58 106 164 912Pontotoc 66.2 % 83.8% 72.8 % 63.1% 86.1 % 72.1 % 72.9 %

n= 371 227 598 57 74 131 729Prentiss 65.6% 74.4% 69.0% 71.5 % 89.6% 82.3% 70.6 %

n= 196 100 296 29 72 101 397Total 73.3% 83.8% 77.6% 71.5% 87.4% 79.2% 77.9%

n= 7700 5400 13100 1194 2086 3280 16380

13

Table 5: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – All VehiclesFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 CountiesCars+SUVs+Vans by Driver/Passenger and Gender (N = 11,836)

Table 6: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – Cars+SUVs+Vans

Encouraging Observations:• DeSoto, Harrison, Jackson and Perry Counties show

over 90% overall usage rate.• Excluding pickups, the overall belt use average for the

state is 82.4%..• Seven counties show all passengers (male and female)

buckling at over 90%.

Room for Improvement:• Leflore County shows very low belt use rates even

without pickups considered.• There is a 22.3 percentage point difference between

male drivers and male passengers in Hinds County.


Male Female All Male Female All AllDeSoto 90.9% 95.8% 93.2% 73.4 % 97.3 % 92.4% 93.2 %

n= 684 695 1379 100 202 302 1681Harrison 90.6% 94.3 % 92.4 % 92.0% 92.9 % 92.2% 92.5%

n= 540 630 1170 74 228 302 1472Hinds 64.0% 76.3% 72.5% 86.2 % 85.7 % 82.8% 74.1 %

n= 321 412 733 61 83 144 877Jackson 89.9% 95.0% 92.2% 88.7 % 95.2 % 91.7 % 92.4 %

n= 406 384 790 76 206 282 1072Rankin 74.6% 73.1 % 75.0% 81.1% 76.3% 76.5% 75.3 %

n= 281 434 715 66 128 194 909Chicaksaw 71.0 % 70.1 % 70.5 % 67.9% 69.2% 77.8 % 71.4%

n= 115 145 260 7 33 47 307Hancock 75.4% 90.6 % 79.7 % 94.4% 96.8% 96.0% 81.4 %

n= 198 200 398 40 83 123 521Holmes 81.6% 83.6 % 83.6% 74.5% 95.7% 82.5% 84.2%

n= 228 187 415 36 78 114 529Lee 76.6% 77.9 % 77.4 % 67.8% 74.7% 75.6% 77.1%

n= 200 298 498 36 79 115 613Leflore 66.6% 77.3 % 73.0% 68.3% 68.2 % 68.8% 72.2 %

n= 158 227 385 26 23 49 434Madison 86.0% 84.9% 87.3 % 87.7 % 93.8 % 94.1% 88.3%

n= 263 261 524 44 101 145 669Panola 80.8% 87.1% 84.0% 74.7% 85.1 % 83.3% 83.9 %

n= 327 335 662 73 170 243 905Perry 97.6% 98.4 % 98.0% 95.4% 95.3 % 96.3 % 97.6%

n= 154 201 355 20 76 96 451Pike 75.7% 90.6% 85.6% 77.3% 96.0% 90.6% 86.8%

n= 193 334 527 31 81 112 639Pontotoc 76.6% 83.9 % 79.9% 85.2% 78.6% 75.4% 79.7 %

n= 175 210 385 29 58 87 472Prentiss 723% 73.8% 73.9 % 88.5% 87.8% 80.9% 75.3 %

n= 114 96 210 20 55 75 285Total 78.7% 84.2% 82.0% 81.8% 86.6% 84.7% 82.4%

n= 4357 5049 9406 746 1684 2430 11836

14

Full Survey of 173 Sites in 16 CountiesPassenger Cars by Driver/Passenger and Gender (N =6,957)

Table 7: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – Passenger Cars

Encouraging Observations:• Mississippi’s three coastal counties, as well as,

DeSoto and Perry show belt usage above 90%• Perry County shows an outstanding 97.2% belt

compliance rate based on 243 observations.• Nine counties exhibit female passenger belt

usages over 90%

Room for Improvement:• Leflore County has the lowest overall belt use rate at

66.9%.• Belt use for passengers in Lee County is

disproportionate to drivers• Based on 195 observations, male drivers in Hinds

County had a very low belt compliance rate of 64.1%


Male Female All Male Female All AllDeSoto 89.7% 95.7 % 92.4% 74.7 % 95.8 % 91.1 % 92.4 %

n= 490 486 976 65 132 197 1173Harrison 92.3% 94.2 % 92.9 % 91.1 % 97.7 % 95.4% 93.3%

n= 266 348 614 29 103 132 746Hinds 64.1% 76.8 % 72.5% 78.7 % 89.1 % 83.0 % 74.1 %

n= 195 248 443 35 43 78 521Jackson 87.7% 93.3% 90.1 % 77.3 % 92.9 % 89.6 % 90.3 %

n= 218 193 411 31 95 126 537Rankin 77.6% 71.9 % 75.2% 79.9 % 80.7% 78.9% 75.8 %

n= 163 230 393 40 60 100 493Chicaksaw 71.3 % 69.3 % 70.5 % 67.9 % 76.6% 77.8 % 72.2 %

n= 72 89 161 5 17 22 183Hancock 94.5 % 85.2 % 88.6 % 97.5 % 98.7% 98.1% 91.3 %

n= 104 89 193 18 41 59 252Holmes 80.7 % 80.2 % 81.7% 83.1 % 97.9% 87.7 % 82.8%

n= 180 140 320 25 51 76 396Lee 70.3% 78.3 % 75.3 % 66.3% 56.2% 59.4% 72.6 %

n= 115 170 285 19 36 55 340Leflore 70.0 % 69.7 % 67.8 % 70.5% 89.0 % 71.9% 66.9 %

n= 96 134 230 14 11 25 255Madison 89.5% 76.7 % 88.0 % 98.1 % 90.7 % 93.3 % 89.4%

n= 144 145 289 19 55 74 363Panola 79.4 % 84.8 % 82.6 % 76.4 % 85.0 % 83.2 % 82.8 %

n= 239 249 488 59 119 178 666Perry 98.2% 97.9 % 97.7 % 94.7% 92.3 % 94.1 % 97.2%

n= 86 118 204 7 32 39 243Pike 83.2 % 91.6% 87.5% 78.6% 94.9% 92.0 % 88.3 %

n= 120 194 314 17 50 67 381Pontotoc 75.2 % 83.0 % 79.4 % 96.4% 75.1 % 74.8 % 77.5 %

n= 95 120 215 12 28 40 255Prentiss 75.2% 70.2 % 76.8 % 90.2 % 96.4% 86.7 % 78.5 %

n= 68 54 122 9 22 31 153Total 80.6% 82.1% 82.0% 82.8% 87.9% 84.8% 82.5%

n= 2651 3007 5658 404 895 1299 6957

15

Table 7: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – Passenger Cars Table 8: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – Pickup TrucksFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 CountiesPickup Trucks by Driver/Passenger and Gender (N =4,544)

Encouraging Observation:• Perry County was the closest to the 90% usage mark at 87.8%• Truck passengers in Hancock and Perry were buckled at a rate

higher than 90%• Six counties show female drivers buckling up at over a 90%

rate, but many of these are based on small sample sizes.

Room for Improvement:• Nine counties illustrated belt use lower than

70%, four of which were below 60%.• With 4,544 observations, overall belt use in

pickup trucks is only 68.7%.


Male Female All Male Female All AllDeSoto 78.8% 82.1 % 79.1% 80.6 % 84.6 % 77.9% 78.8%

n= 448 54 502 70 29 99 601Harrison 84.7% 84.4 % 84.5 % 61.6% 93.4% 81.8% 83.7%

n= 361 40 401 33 50 83 484Hinds 76.0% 68.1 % 76.2% 75.7 % 70.5 % 77.4% 76.6%

n= 204 14 218 31 11 42 260Jackson 79.2% 93.0% 80.4 % 63.7% 91.1 % 74.6 % 79.8 %

n= 301 36 337 35 52 87 424Rankin 62.0% 78.9 % 62.5% 78.1 % 68.0% 62.4% 63.2 %

n= 232 13 245 27 39 66 311Chicaksaw 58.8 % 58.5 % 59.7% 31.1 % 51.9% 36.3% 58.3 %

n= 122 7 129 21 10 31 160Hancock 55.2 % 96.1 % 57.2 % 84.6 % 93.1% 91.0% 62.0 %

n= 149 32 181 22 40 62 243Holmes 71.1% 82.3 % 71.8% 30.9% 97.8% 59.0 % 70.1%

n= 152 8 160 19 15 34 194Lee 58.7% 52.5 % 57.7 % 47.8% 83.9% 54.0% 56.8 %

n= 180 17 197 32 17 49 246Leflore 63.6 % 67.5 % 62.7 % 43.0% 89.6 % 48.8% 60.8 %

n= 174 19 193 21 6 27 220Madison 61.5% 91.4 % 62.6% 37.4 % 86.1% 51.9% 61.2%

n= 178 7 185 19 12 31 216Panola 71.2 % 72.6 % 71.9 % 66.3 % 85.5 % 71.6 % 71.4 %

n= 228 32 260 35 43 78 338Perry 87.6% 100.0 % 87.8% 65.1% 100.0% 91.3% 87.8%

n= 156 10 166 19 20 39 205Pike 69.9 % 92.1% 73.4% 71.2% 73.2% 69.3 % 72.1 %

n= 180 41 221 27 25 52 273Pontotoc 59.1 % 65.0 % 59.7 % 45.4% 73.3 % 54.4 % 59.0 %

n= 196 17 213 28 16 44 257Prentiss 54.7% 100.0 % 55.6 % 53.7% 97.3% 74.3% 56.2 %

n= 82 4 86 9 17 26 112Total 68.4% 79.8% 69.0% 58.5% 83.4% 67.5% 68.7%

n= 3343 351 3694 448 402 850 4544

16

Full Survey of 173 Sites in 16 CountiesSUVs by Driver/Passenger and Gender (N =3,839)

Table 9: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – SUVs

Encouraging Observations:• DeSoto and Perry Counties exhibited above 90%

usage rates across all categories.• Five of the sixteen counties have overall belt use

rates over 90%.• Ten of the sixteen counties have overall

passengers belted at over 90%.

Room for Improvement:• Chickasaw County had the only overall belt rate of less than 70%. • Rankin County showed only a 70.0% overall usage rate.• Male drivers in seven counties buckled less than 70% of the time.• Hancock County had a 24.2 percentage point discrepancy

between drivers and passengers.


Male Female All Male Female All AllDeSoto 92.8% 94.1% 94.5% 95.2 % 100.0 % 98.8 % 95.2 %

n= 119 156 275 21 42 63 338Harrison 89.3% 94.8 % 92.7 % 89.4% 90.7 % 91.1% 92.7%

n= 240 244 484 36 107 143 627Hinds 69.4% 79.0% 75.8% 76.2 % 87.9 % 87.5% 78.1 %

n= 87 132 219 18 29 47 266Jackson 91.9% 91.7% 92.8 % 87.0 % 95.9 % 91.5 % 92.7 %

n= 156 166 322 39 91 130 452Rankin 65.9% 77.9 % 69.8% 90.2% 83.2% 80.2% 70.0 %

n= 98 171 269 17 55 72 341Chicaksaw 66.1 % 69.3 % 69.8 % 61.5% 60.5% 71.9 % 69.1 %

n= 32 44 76 7 10 17 93Hancock 64.1% 95.3 % 71.0 % 94.8 % 95.6% 95.1% 72.3 %

n= 74 92 166 18 34 52 218Holmes 79.0 % 97.0 % 90.9% 82.0% 100.0% 94.0% 91.9%

n= 34 37 71 7 15 22 93Lee 81.7% 77.5 % 77.1 % 82.4% 96.7% 94.3% 79.6 %

n= 61 106 167 13 26 39 206Leflore 64.0 % 85.8 % 80.4% 47.0% 85.9 % 64.7% 79.6 %

n= 46 86 132 8 9 17 149Madison 74.7% 92.1% 86.8 % 87.4 % 100.0 % 97.4% 87.5%

n= 86 101 187 18 36 54 241Panola 83.5 % 90.4% 87.3% 75.8% 86.4 % 80.6% 84.8 %

n= 58 73 131 10 33 43 174Perry 96.3% 99.5 % 99.1% 100.0% 90.7 % 96.9 % 98.9%

n= 52 74 1264 10 37 47 173Pike 68.2% 93.2% 84.4% 94.9% 97.0% 93.8% 85.2 %

n= 59 120 179 12 26 38 217Pontotoc 68.5 % 80.5 % 77.9% 85.0% 88.0 % 85.6% 78.5 %

n= 54 67 121 5 19 40 145Prentiss 77.3% 86.1 % 76.0 % 100.0% 93.2% 94.3 % 79.0 %

n= 39 32 71 7 28 35 106Total 76.6% 87.5% 82.5% 83.9% 90.5% 88.4% 83.1%

n= 1295 1701 2996 246 597 843 3839

17

Table 9: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – SUVs Table 10: Seat Belt Usage Rates by County – VansFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 CountiesVans by Driver/Passenger and Gender (N =1,040)

Encouraging Observations: • Although many percentages in this breakdown are based

on less than 30 observations and determined not to be representative, the overall usage rate for van occupants is over 90% for seven of the sixteen counties.

• Chickasaw and Panola, two counties that normally don’t have exceptional belt use rates in other vehicle types, showed over 90% usage rate in vans.

Room for Improvement:• Based on relatively small sample sizes, Hinds,

Hancock, Leflore, and Prentiss show the most need for belt use improvement in vans.


Male Female All Male Female All AllDeSoto 93.6% 100.0 % 96.1% 80.7 % 95.6 % 80.5 % 93.7 %

n= 75 53 128 14 28 42 170Harrison 86.7% 92.9% 89.0 % 93.0 % 71.4% 73.3% 85.9%

n= 34 38 72 9 18 27 99Hinds 60.3% 65.7 % 58.2% 95.6% 88.0 % 90.7 % 65.7 %

n= 39 32 71 8 11 19 90Jackson 91.8% 100.0% 94.5 % 100.0% 97.0 % 98.0 % 94.6 %

n= 32 25 57 6 20 26 83Rankin 83.7% 94.2% 84.7% 100.0% 71.1% 77.1% 84.7 %

n= 20 33 53 9 13 22 75Chicaksaw 78.6 % 100.0% 90.8% 100.0% 93.1% 94.8 % 92.0%

n= 11 12 23 2 6 8 31Hancock 71.2 % 89.5 % 67.5% 73.8 % 80.8% 77.3% 62.8 %

n= 20 19 39 4 8 12 51Holmes 88.0 % 95.5% 92.9% 50.0 % 81.6% 74.9% 87.1%

n= 14 10 24 4 12 16 40Lee 91.3% 91.1 % 91.8 % 44.4% 92.3% 89.2% 91.8 %

n= 24 22 46 4 17 21 67Leflore 48.1% 83.9% 59.5 % 67.9% 36.2 % 54.5% 55.7 %

n= 16 7 23 4 3 7 30Madison 93.5% 89.2% 90.6 % 90.0 % 100.0 % 96.6 % 92.2%

n= 33 15 48 7 10 17 65Panola 93.2 % 88.8 % 93.6 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 95.0 %

n= 30 13 43 4 18 22 65Perry 97.4% 100.0% 98.4% 50.0% 100.0% 91.4 % 97.7%

n= 16 9 25 3 7 10 35Pike 87.9 % 77.4% 79.6% 57.3% 100.0% 69.9 % 80.6%

n= 14 20 34 2 5 7 41Pontotoc 80.5% 93.6 % 84.8 % 80.7% 100.0% 91.9% 84.8 %

n= 26 23 49 12 11 23 72Prentiss 74.0% 77.0% 73.4% 83.3 % 50.9% 50.9% 70.0%

n= 7 10 17 4 5 9 26Total 81.6% 89.0% 83.1% 79.4% 84.5% 81.9% 82.6%

n= 411 341 752 96 192 288 1040

18

Figure 3A: Male Seat Belt Usage Rates by Vehicle Type & RaceFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 Counties

88.4% <76%CAR PICKUP

The highest belt usage of any vehicle type for white males.

The second column in each graph shows males of all races buckling no

more than 76% of the time.

Figure 3A and Figure 3B are graphic illustrations of how well the observed population buckled up by gender, race, and type of vehicle. Figure 3A shows males, and Figure 3B shows females.

Results for the vehicle occupants deemed to be Hispanic are included but the sample sizes for this population are low for most of the vehicle types within both genders. Perhaps the most distinguishable observance between the graphs is the gap between black occupants and white occupants in each vehicle category. In 2016, and in prior years of this survey, the estimated seat belt use among the black population lags almost 10 percentage points behind whites in most circumstances. The lines are almost parallel across the graph.

19

Figure 3B: Female Seat Belt Usage Rates by Vehicle Type & RaceFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 Counties

79.7% 86.2%SUV VAN

The highest belt usage of any vehicle type for black males.

The highest belt usage of any vehicle type for black

females.

Also illustrated is white females buckling up over 90% of the time in 3 out of 4 vehicle types and outperforming males across the board in all vehicle types. For many years, a comparison between graphs has shown females using vehicle restraints far better than males. In general, perhaps the conclusion can be drawn that females are more likely to be using a seat belt restraint in Mississippi due to their belief in compliance with the primary seat belt law or their attitude towards vehicle occupant safety. Both benefits, of course, should be ideologies that transfer across gender.

20

Figure 4: Seat Belt Usage Rates by Race & GenderFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 Counties

Figure 5 shows a definite upward trend of seat belt usage rates since 1997. Each year displays an official belt use rate and 95% confidence interval upper and lower limits. Since the primary seat belt law went into effect in 2006, the trend stayed relatively flat for about 3 years as can be seen by the overlapping of confidence intervals from 2006 to 2009. The rate took a significant positive jump in 2010 to 81.0% and small positive incremental increases of less than 1 percent the next couple of years. In 2013, the introduction of a new set of sampling criteria may have contributed to a significant decrease in the belt use estimation for the state. The statewide seat belt usage estimate fell from 83.2% to 74.4% from 2012 to 2013, and the confidence intervals do not overlap. Increases were recorded in each year of the next two years, 2014 and 2015. Lastly, the 2016 statewide belt use estimate of 77.9% shows a decrease of almost 2 percentage points from the 2015 estimated rate of 79.6%. The confidence intervals for the past three years overlap, thus implying the decrease in estimated belt usage rate is most likely due to normal fluctuation and not significant.

Figure 5: Mississippi Seat Belt Usage RatesWith 95% Confidence Interval Upper and Lower Limits (1997 – 2016)

50.8%

63.7%

58.0%

53.3%

65.4%65.6%65.9%66.4%

64.2%

76.0%74.7%

73.6%

77.3%

82.4%83.2%84.5%

77.1%

80.8%81.8%

80.0%

45.6%

52.3%51.0%

47.5%

57.8%58.4%58.1%60.0%

57.4%

71.2%

68.9%69.0%

74.8%

79.7%80.6%81.0%

71.7%

75.8%77.5%

75.7%

48.2%

58.0%

54.5%

50.4%

61.6%62.0%62.0%63.2%

60.8%

73.6%71.8%71.3%

76.0%

81.0%81.9%83.2%

74.4%

78.3%79.6%

77.9%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Perc

ent B

elt U

sage

Year

Figure 4 presents an analysis of belt use broken down only by race and gender. This chart reveals that, when it comes to buckling up, males within the black and white race categories lag about 7 to 9 percentage points behind females. Likewise, Hispanic females, despite the small sample size, outperform their male counterparts with almost a 10 percentage point difference between the two. Hispanic females also top the chart with 92.8% using seat belts. White females were a couple percentage points behind at a 90.5% estimated usage rate. White males, Hispanic males and black females buckle at almost the same rate in the lower 80 percent range. Black males round out the list with a calculated belt usage rate of 74.2%.

21

The map of the United States in Figure 6 has been included to offer a geographic perspective of Mississippi’s peer states with regard to belt use rates in 2015. Mississippi is included in the red states or lowest belt use states with less than 80% belt use compliance. States in the yellow category had belt use rates above 80% but less than 90%. The highest belt use states in the nation (above 90%) are the green colored states, with California taking the top spot at 97.3% estimated belt use. A ranking of the states in terms of belt use has also been included on the map in parentheses after their respective belt use rates (e.g. Mississippi ranked 45th in the nation in belt use in 2015).

Figure 6: National Seat Belt Use Rates in 2014Source: 2015 NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts: Crash/Stats DOT HS 812274 – May 2016

22

BUCKLE UP

23

MISSISSIPPI

24

SECTION THREECLICK IT OR TICKET COUNTERMEASURES

Sandwiched between the observational survey efforts used in determining estimated seat belt use across the state, the primary countermeasures aimed at increasing seat belt usage are conducted in Mississippi’s Click It or Ticket campaign. This attempt in changing human behavior by media messaging and increased enforcement efforts has been very successful, not only in Mississippi, but throughout the nation. Media messaging is divided into the two distinct groups of earned media and paid media, and the enforcement arm of the campaign involves amplified patrols, safety checkpoints, and issuances of citations for not abiding by the state’s primary seat belt law.

Earned media is the use of credible third-party organizations to deliver a message to the general public. This is mainly accomplished through printed news articles, news stories on television, and radio news stories. Data received from the Mann Agency, LLC shows the earned media segment of the 2016 CIOT Memorial Blitz Campaign including 20 television news stories, 1 radio news story, 63 printed news sto-ries, and 94 online stories. Bonus media included 2,039 TV ads, 1,482 radio ads, and 1 outdoor board. Figure 7 shows the estimated value of this year’s earned media conducted from May 9 through June 16, 2016. Bonus TV advertisements dominated the earned media value estimates with 43% or $147,706.42 worth of message outreach. Online stories, TV news stories, and bonus radio ads accounts for a majority of the remaining earned media with a combined 51% of the total expenditures. Print new stories, bonus outdoor boards, and radio news stories round out the remaining 6% of message investments.

Radio News Stories

$1,805.000%

TV News Stories$61,650.00

18%

Print New Stories$17,974.99

5%

Online Stories$79,624.99

23%

Bonus TV Ads$147,706.42

43%

Bonus Outdoor Boards

$1,831.641%

Bonus Radio Ads$32,953.00

10%

Figure 7: CIOT Earned/Bonus Media Estimated Values(Total: $343,546.04)

Figure 7: CIOT Earned/Bonus MediaEstimated Values(Total: $343,546.04)

25

The paid media component of the CIOT campaign was almost a $300,000 effort in 2016. Paid media is exactly as it sounds, media outlets are compensated monetarily for the use of their services to deliver a message to the general public. The use of television and radio spots, printed and online advertisements, outdoor signage (e.g. electronic billboards and portable message boards), and advertisements in movie theaters and sports stadiums are the primary channels of delivery in paid media. Again, referencing data received from the Mann Agency, LLC, paid media during the CIOT Memorial Blitz Campaign in 2016 included 2,622 television spots, 2,918 radio spots, 2 printed advertisements, 36 online advertisements, 56 outdoor signs, and 586 movie theaters. Figure 8 illustrates the breakdown of funds used to distribute the CIOT message to the general public in Mississippi from May 16 through May 30, 2016. Television and outdoor ads made the bulk of the payouts with a combined 63% of the overall investment. The remaining 37% was a mixture of radio, online, print, and movie theater ads.

TV Ads$123,558.58

41%

Radio Ads$45,802.16

15%

Print Ads$1,340.00

1%Outdoor Ads$67,099.96

22%

Online Ads$45,558.93

15%

Movie Theaters$16,384.00

6%

Figure 8: CIOT Paid Media Values (Total: $299,743.63)

The last and perhaps most critical component of the CIOT campaign is enforcement of the primary seat belt law. High visibility patrols and safety checkpoints by law enforcement agencies across the state were conducted from May 23 to June 5, 2016. These efforts allow the general public to see the consequences of choosing not to follow the primary seat belt law. A $25 citation is administered to the driver for each unbelted occupant in the front seat of a vehicle.

Figure 8: CIOT Paird Media Values(Total: $299,743.63)

26

The most complete data available at the time of this report is 2015 enforcement data, and according to those data obtained from the Mississippi Office of Highway Safety, there were 26,606 seat belt citations written by municipal, county and state law enforcement agencies in 2015. Figure 9 shows how the number of seat belt violations recorded in 2015 compares to the previous 15 years. It is known these numbers are grossly underreported. The most accurate segment of the 26,606 total is the 12,154 eCitations recorded by the Mississippi Highway Patrol. The remainder of the total is derived from the Mississippi Driver History File supplied by MOHS, which is the best source currently available. Unfortunately, this file contains only Mississippi drivers and there are easily thousands of seat belt citations that never make it to this database. Each year the totals are calculated in the same manner so the graph does give some indication of the overall trend in seat belt citations issued.

720 1,037 1,249 1,495 2,405 3,771

15,037

41,298

44,317 44,50541,795

38,923

33,363

38,092

35,780

26,606

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

Num

ber

of R

epor

ted

Seat

Bel

t Vio

latio

ns

Year

Figure 9: Number of Seat Belt Violations Recorded (2000-2015)Source: Mississippi Office of Highway Safety

28

SECTION FOURBELT USE BEFORE AND AFTER INTERVENTION

CountyPercent Belted

PercentChange

Percent Change2015

Follow-Up2016 Mini*

2016Follow-Up

A B C A to C B to CChicasaw 84.2% - 65.0% -19.2% -

Desoto 82.5% 92.5% 88.4% 5.9% -4.1%Hancock 80.3% - 75.7% -4.6% -Harrison 91.9% 91.2% 90.3% -1.6% -0.9%Holmes 80.8% - 78.8% -2.0% -Hinds 79.1% - 72.5% -6.6% -

Jackson 83.8% - 88.0% 4.2% -Lee 83.2% 71.2% 70.3% -12.9% -0.9%

Leflore 67.9% 71.0% 68.7% 0.8% -2.3%Madison 78.2% 87.5% 81.4% 3.2% -6.1%-2.Panola 77.7% - 80.3% 2.6% -

Perry 89.3% 94.8% 92.3% 3.0% -2.5%Pike 83.7% 80.8% 82.8% -0.9% 2.0%

Pontotoc 72.6% - 72.9% 0.3% -Prentiss 62.5% - 70.6% 8.1% -Rankin 75.4% 84.0% 72.6% -2.8% -11.4%Total 79.6% 86.0% 77.9% -1.7% -8.1%

Table 11: Baseline Versus Follow-Up County ComparisonsSeat Belt Usage Rates *Mini 2016 results are unweighted

Since 2012 seat belt observational surveys have been conducted based on the same sampling criteria set forth by NHTSA. In Table 11 below, the follow-up or post-CIOT survey in 2015 is compared to the follow-up survey of 2016. Also, the mini survey of 2016, which is performed before CIOT in selected counties, is compared to the 2016 follow-up survey results. As stated previously, the mini survey uses observations from 54 sites in 8 counties and each follow-up includes 173 sites from 16 counties.

The survey results of 2016 showed stark differences from the estimated belt usages of 2015. These differences could be the product of a variety of circumstances, but pinpointing causation is not possible. The media and enforcement campaign seemed to have a positive effect on belt use in a few regions of Mississippi, but the general trend was negative. A 77.9% estimated belt use rate for Mississippi is lower than the past two years of survey results (78.3% in 2014 and 79.6% in 2015).

29

*Mini 2016 results are unweighted


Percent Change

PercentChange2015

Follow-Up2016 Mini*

2016 Follow-Up

A B C A to C A to BInterstates & Other

Expressways85.4% 87.5% 85.8% 0.4% -1.7%

Other PrincipalArterials

85.6% 84.0% 83.0% -2.6% -1.0%

Minor Arterials 82.1% 79.6% 80.7% -1.4% 1.1%Collectors 77.6% 83.9% 77.6% 0.0% -6.3%

Local Roads 71.2% 78.9% 66.2% -5.0% -12.7%

*Mini 2016 results are unweightedTable 12: Road Class ComparisonsSeat Belt Usage Rates by Road Class

As can be seen in Table 11, the overall result of the 2016 statewide survey was 1.7 percentage points lower than the year before. In comparing the follow-ups surveys from 2015 (A) to 2016 (C), major negative differences can be seen in Chickasaw (-19.2%), Hinds (-6.6%), and Lee (-12.9%) counties. The only significant increases in belt use from 2015 to 2016 came from DeSoto (+5.9%) and Prentiss (+8.1%). All other differences among the counties surveyed were less than 5% in either a positive or negative direction. These differences are considered to be due to normal fluctuations and of minimal impact.

Comparing the mini 2016 (B) to the follow-up 2016 (C) is intended to gauge the impact of the CIOT campaign from before implementation to after the completion of media and enforcement activities. However, since the mini survey is a subsample of 54 sites, the comparison is not exactly equitable. The percent change between belt use es-timations show many insignificant increases or decreases over the campaign period. The comparison of the overall belt use estimates shows a decrease of 8.1% in estimated belt usage from pre-CIOT to post-CIOT. Of the 8 counties compared, there were two outliers. Madison County, which has shown volatile rates in the past few years, exhibit-ed a 6.1 percentage point drop in estimated belt use from the mini (87.5%) to the follow-up (81.4%). Also, Rankin County exhibited a drop of 11.4 percentage points from the mini (84.0%) to the follow-up (72.6%).

Comparing before and after belt usage rates by road classification is presented in Table 12. Only one of the rate differences from the 2015 follow-up (A) to the 2016 follow-up (C) is positive, which is not a good indicator that seat belt awareness campaigns and enforcement had positive impacts on behavioral change. “Interstates & other expressways” showed the only slight increase of 0.4%. The largest change was a 5.0 percentage point decrease in belt usage observed on local roads. When comparing the 2016 mini (B) to the 2016 follow-up (C), the changes were more pronounced with respect to the lower volume roadways. Collector roads showed a 6.3% drop, while local roads experienced a whopping 12.7% drop in belt use.

30


Percent Change

PercentChange2015

Follow-Up2016 Mini*

2016 Follow-Up

A B C A to C A to BCar/Wagon 81.4% 86.1% 82.5% 1.1% -3.6%

Pickup 73.3% 73.3% 68.7% -4.6% -4.6%SUV 83.5% 87.4% 83.1% -0.4% -4.3%Van 80.9% 85.8% 82.6% 1.7% -3.2%

Table 13: Vehicle Type ComparisonsSeat Belt Usage Rates by Vehicle Type *Mini 2016 results are unweighted

Race/GenderPercent Belted

PercentChange

Percent Change2015

Follow-Up2016 Mini*

2016Follow-Up

A B C A to C B to CBlack Males 81.9% 82.8% 81.8% -0.1% -1.0%

Black Females 74.9% 72.6% 74.2% -0.7% 1.6%White Males 87.2% 92.6% 92.8% 5.6% 0.2%

White Females 71.8% 90.9% 83.0% 11.2% -7.9%Hispanic Males 89.9% 91.0% 90.5% 0.6% -0.5%

Hispanic Females 81.8% 80.1% 81.3% -0.5% 1.2%

*Mini 2016 results are unweightedTable 14: Baseline Versus Follow-Up Race/Gender ComparisonsSeat Belt Usage Rates by Race and Gender

Table 13 illustrates, from the 2015 follow-up (A) to the 2016 follow-up (C), the belt use rates for pickups varied the most over the year. Pickups showed a 4.6% decrease in belt use from 2015 to 2016. The increases in observed belt use for cars and vans are slight at 1.1% and 1.7% respectively, and the decrease of 0.4% in SUV’s is negligible. Comparison of the 2016 mini (B) to the 2016 follow-up (C) paints a much different picture than comparing the follow-ups. All categories of vehicle type show negative gains in belt use. Pickup trucks and SUV’s decreased in belt use by 4.6 and 4.3 percentage points respectively. However, the differences between these estimates can most likely be attributed to weighting factors and the samples not being the same. Again, the mini is a subset of the statewide or follow-up survey, and the percentage point decreases shown are not to be equated with a direct failure of the impact of Mississippi’s CIOT campaign.

In Table 14 the comparison of belt use is across race and gender. One can see there are many slight changes when comparing the 2016 mini (B) to the 2016 follow-up (C). Only one of these changes is significant – a 7.9 percentage point decrease for Hispanic males. The sample size for Hispanic males is low however and may not reflect the behavioral characteristics of that subset of the population with respect to belt use. The next highest contrast is in black males with a 1.6 percentage point increase from pre-CIOT to post-CIOT in 2016. All other changes across gender and race are minimal.

When contrasting the results of the 2015 follow-up (A) to the 2016 follow-up (C), there are virtually no changes in observed belt use with respect to the white and black motorists observed. The only significant increases are shown in both genders of Hispanic motorists. However, Hispanic vehicle occupant observations are relatively low and vary greatly each year. Therefore, the estimates cannot be considered representative statewide due to these low sample sizes. But, the Hispanic population may continue to grow and should be considered as an integral part of any future seat belt campaign.

31




PercentChange

Percent Change2015

Follow-Up2016 Mini*

2016Follow-Up

A B C A to C B to CDesoto 84.1% 86.9% 92.5% 8.4% 5.6%

Harrison 89.2% 94.6% 91.2% 2.0% -3.4%Lee 87.9% 72.4% 71.2% -16.7% -1.2%

Leflore 70.5% 63.7% 71.0% 0.5% 7.3%Madison 85.8% 85.1% 87.5% 1.7% 2.4%

Perry 91.5% 89.1% 94.8% 3.3% 5.7%Pike 83.7% 79.6% 80.8% -2.9% 1.2%

Rankin 82.3% 79.4% 84.0% 1.7% 4.6%Total 84.6% 83.2% 86.0% 1.4% 2.8%

Table 15: County Comparisons of 54 Mini SitesSeat Belt Usage Rates by County *All results are unweighted

The 2015 follow-up and 2016 follow-up both use the full survey results from 173 sites in 16 counties. Comparing these full surveys to the 2016 mini is not an equitable comparison. Therefore, in an effort to develop a meaningful evaluation, the 54 sites that comprise the 2016 mini were filtered out of the two other surveys and another comparison was conducted. The results of this comparison by county surveyed can be seen in Table 15.

This “mini sites only” comparison in Table 15 showed a small rise in belt use from the 2015 follow-up (A) to the 2016 follow-up (C). However, Lee County exhibited a huge decline in belt use over the year (-16.7%). DeSoto County showed the only substantial increase in belt use across the year and over the CIOT campaign in 2016. Leflore and Perry join DeSoto in exhibiting percentage point increases greater than 5 over the 2016 CIOT campaign. All other differences in Table 15 are considered normal fluctuations in observed belt use estimates.

Section Five Sources

United States Census Bureau and American Community Survey (2010 – 2014). [Data Table) Demographic and Housing Estimates. Retrieved from http://census.gov

Mississippi Department of Transportation. 2014 Mississippi Public Roads Selected Statistics Extent, Travel, and Designation. Retrieved from http://mdot.ms.gov

State of Mississippi Department of Revenue. (2015). Annual Report. Retrieved from http://www.dor.ms.gov/

Mississippi Office of Highway Safety

32

SECTION FIVE

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities

2014 Unbelted Fatalities


4 1 25% 3 75%

FatalitiesChickasaw

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt

CitationsMHP 219 200 78

Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



16 7 44% 9 56%

FatalitiesDeSoto

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement% White 72.4%% Black 23.1%% Other 4.5%

% Age 15-19 7.4%% Age 65+ 10.9%

Road - Miles ofRoadway 2011

1,585

Vehicle - Number of Registered Vehicles 2014

169,525

Demographics

% White 55.2%% Black 43.3%% Other 1.5%

% Age 15-19 7.2%% Age 65+ 14.8%


721


16,266

Demographics

Population Estimate: 17,376


Females

Males

Females

Males

9,060

8,316

85,436

80,830

*Note: Accurate municipal and county seat belt citation data not available.


33

COUNTY ASSESSMENTS

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



6 4 67% 2 33%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



17 8 47% 9 53%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Hankcock

Harrison


% Age 15-19 6.4%% Age 65+ 16.5%


937


Demographics


% Age 15-19 6.7%% Age 65+ 12.5%


1,646


Demographics

45,337

181,216



Females

Males

Females

Males

23,005

22,131

97,402

96,240



34

SECTION FIVE

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



17 3 18% 14 82%

Hinds

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



10 3 30% 7 70%

FatalitiesHolmes

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Fatalities


% Age 15-19 7.9%% Age 65+ 11.4%


2,340


193,569

Demographics


% Age 15-19 8.7%% Age 65+ 13.2%


1,016


15,186

Demographics



Females

Males

130,837

115,527

Females

Males

9,926

9,039



35

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



19 13 68% 6 32%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



18 4 22% 14 78%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Jackson

Lee


% Age 15-19 6.7%% Age 65+ 13.3%


1,468


135,461

Demographics


% Age 15-19 6.6%% Age 65+ 13.6%


1,279


77,130

Demographics



Females

Males

71,186

69,008

COUNTY ASSESSMENTS

Females

Males

44,221

40,367



36

SECTION FIVE

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



3 1 33% 2 67%

Leflore

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



7 2 29% 5 71%

FatalitiesMadison

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Fatalities


% Age 15-19 8.2%% Age 65+ 12.1%


922


22,540

Demographics


% Age 15-19 7.1%% Age 65+ 11.4%


1,314


100,642

Demographics



Females

Males

16,617

15,155

Females

Males

51,414

47,208



37

COUNTY ASSESSMENTS

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



10 3 30% 7 70%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



0 0 0 0 0

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Panola

Perry


% Age 15-19 6.8%% Age 65+ 13.4%


1,209


30,554

Demographics


% Age 15-19 6.8%% Age 65+ 15.8%


704


13,239

Demographics



Females

Males

17,946

16,561

Females

Males

6,246

5,927



38

SECTION FIVE

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



11 3 27% 8 73%

Pike

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



9 4 44% 5 56%

FatalitiesPontotoc

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Fatalities


% Age 15-19 7.4%% Age 65+ 14.7%


1,002


38,265

Demographics


% Age 15-19 7.4% % Age 65+ 13.7%


921


29,836

Demographics



Females

Males

21,089

19,120

Females

Males

15,486

14,888



39

COUNTY ASSESSMENTS

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



6 5 83% 1 17%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

2014 Fatalities

2014 Belted

Fatalities

2014 % Belted

Fatalities



12 7 58% 5 42%

Fatalities

2013Seatbelt

Citations

2014Seatbelt

Citations

2015Seatbelt


Enforcement

Prentiss

Rankin


% Age 15-19 7.1%% Age 65+ 16.1%


875


21,902

Demographics


% Age 15-19 6.3%% Age 65+ 12.3%


1,576


152,263

Demographics



Females

Males

12,863

12,475

Females

Males

75,037

70,446



40

SECTION SIXMOTORCYCLE HELMET USE

The final segment of this survey is motorcycle helmet use in Mississippi. Mississippi is fortunate to have an excellent motorcycle helmet law. It is a primary law. All motorcycle riders must wear helmets or receive a ticket. As a part of the post-campaign seat belt survey, motorcycle helmet use is also observed during the same time periods and at the same locations as vehicle occupants. There were 162 motorcycle riders observed in 2016, with 139 drivers and 23 passengers.

After some volatility in the nationwide estimated use of motorcycle helmets from 2011 to 2014, the helmet usage rate was determined to fluctuate slightly over the past few years. In 2011 the nationwide rate was 66.5%. In 2012, the rate fell to 60.4% and dropped slightly below 60% in 2013. The rate saw a slight spike in 2014 to 64.3% just before falling back to 60.7% in 2015.

Mississippi, however, has maintained a consistently high percentage of helmet use. Over the past several years, Mississippi’s observed motorcycle helmet use has been in the upper 90% range. For the second consecutive year, observed motorcycle helmet use in Mississippi is 100%.

Table 12 provides a breakdown of 2016 helmet use in Mississippi by gender and race. There are no categories that show any noncompliance with the helmet law in 2016. Note there was no attempt in the survey to judge whether the helmet was legal or illegal.

Motorcycle helmet use for Mississippi in 2016 is:

100.0%

MotorcycleRiders

Number of Drivers

Hemleted Drivers

PercentHelmeted

Drivers

Number of Passengers

Helmeted Passengers

PercentHemletedPassengers

Black Males 10 10 100.0% 0 0 -Black Females 0 0 - 1 1 100.0%White Males 127 127 100.0% 3 3 100.0%

White Females 2 2 100.0% 19 19 100.0%Hispanic Males 0 0 - 0 0 -

Hispanic Females 0 0 - 0 0 -Total 139 139 100.0% 23 23 100.0%

Table 15: Unweighted Motorcycle Helmet Usage in MississippiFull Survey of 173 Sites in 16 Countries

NHTA Traffic Safety Facts - Motorcycle Use in 2015 - Overall Results (DOT HS 812 275)

Overall observed motorcycle helmet use in Mississippi for 2016

41

Did you know?Overall observed motorcycle helmet use

in Mississippi for 2016

Passenger helmet use is also

For the second consecutive year, observed motorcycle helmet use in Mississippi is

60% 64%2013 2014 2015

61%

100%100%

Nationwide motorcycle helmet use:

100%

42

SUMMARY

For over a decade, intense media and enforcement campaigns have been directed towards Mississippians with the intent of increasing their awareness of seat belt laws, promoting highway safety, and changing the behavior of those who do not buckle their belts. The Click It or Ticket campaign is conducted over a four week period of earned media, paid media, and enforcement. This awareness and enforcement effort is part of the Memorial Day mobilization. The effectiveness of these efforts was evaluated by surveys managed by the Social Science Research Center at Mississippi State University.

In 2016, a NHTSA-approved survey design was used to estimate belt use rates for Mississippi. The statewide survey, which includes 173 observation sites in 16 counties, was used to estimate the belt use rate of Mississippi motorists after the CIOT campaign in early June. The overall estimate from the full survey is considered the official belt use rate for Mississippi in 2016. Prior to CIOT, a subsample, or mini, survey was administered to establish a baseline belt use rate. The mini survey consisted of 54 sites in 8 counties. The baseline was conducted in April and early May.

Overall, the unweighted baseline information indicated an 83.2% estimated belt use rate in the spring of 2016, and when compared to the appropriately weighted 77.9% estimate for the post-campaign survey in the summer, Mississippi did not show a favorable change in belt use over the campaign period. However, the drop in observed belt usage from 2016’s baseline to follow-up surveys is not considered a reflection of a failed CIOT campaign. Media and enforcement efforts in 2016 were administered successfully. The efforts of the Mississippi Office of Highway Safety certainly aid in the awareness and enforcement of Mississippi’s primary belt law; however, the 77.9% overall belt use estimate for the state in 2016 is down 1.7 percentage points from the previous year’s 79.6% estimated belt use rate. Because the confidence intervals between the last two years overlap, this negative change does not necessarily imply the CIOT program was unsuccessful. The state was on the verge of surpassing the 80% belt use mark and continuing its march toward the national average (89% in 2015), but now has taken a small step backwards to widen the margin. This year’s belt use estimate should be utilized as motivation for increasing the reach of the CIOT program and challenging the state to make the program stronger in years to come. Mississippi’s continued efforts in increasing belt usage facilitates the overarching goal of saving lives on our state’s road network.

Finally, as is evident by the survey results, Mississippi has an excellent usage rate for motorcycle helmet usage. For a number of years, the helmet use rate has been near 100% and in 2016, for the second year in a row, observed helmet use was 100%.

43

48%

58%

54%

50%

62%62%62%63%61%

74%72%71%

76%

81%82%83%

74%

78%80%78%

69%69%67%

71%73%

75%

79%80%82%81%82%83%84%85%84%

86%87%87%89%

90%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Perc

ent B

elte

d

Year

Mississippi

United States & Territories

By comparing the national belt use estimates to Mississippi’s observed usages over the past 20 years one can see the gap between the those two figures converging. The graph shows only about 1 out of every 2 Mississippi motorists buckling up in the late 1990’s. From 2001 to 2005, a relatively flat belt use rate in the lower 60 percent range was exhibited by the state. In 2006, Mississippi enacted a primary seat belt law that provided the catalyst for over a 10 percentage point increase in observed seat belt use. This significant increase in belt use in 2006 started an upward climb to 83% in 2012. The 83% belt use estimate was the highest ever recorded in Mississippi and only 3 percentage points below the national average of 86%. Unfortunately, a new sampling criteria introduced by NHTSA counteracted the previous years of apparent achievement by catapulting observed belt use estimates down 9 percentage points to 74% in 2013. Since that time however, the resilience and drive of Mississippi resulted in a climb back up to the 80% (79.6%) mark in 2015 and slightly falling down to 78% (77.9%) in 2016. The national average for belt use breached the 90% mark (90.1%) in 2016, and although Mississippi took a step in the opposite direction this year, the state will strive to close the gap once again.

44

Mississippi State University is an equal opportunity institution. Discrimination in university employment, programs, or activities based on race, color, ethnicity, sex, pregnancy, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, genetic information, status as a U.S. veteran, or any other status protected by applicable law is prohibited. Questions about equal opportunity programs or compliance should be directed to the Office of

Compliance and Integrity, 56 Morgan Avenue, P.O. Box 6044, Mississippi State, MS, (662) 325-5839.

Seat Belt & Motorcycle Helmet Survey - Mississippi … Belt & Motorcycle Helmet Survey November 2016...

Documents

Transcript of Seat Belt & Motorcycle Helmet Survey - Mississippi … Belt & Motorcycle Helmet Survey November 2016...