The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Changing Speeding Behaviour in Scotland: An evaluation of the 'Foolsspeed' campaign

Changes in subjective norms over time

In order to investigate whether any changes in subjective norms or in scores for the items which make up subjective norms would be sustained for the following year of the study, similar comparisons were therefore made for those respondents matching between the baseline and 4 ^th survey. We were also interested in whether any changes in subjective norms occurred before the screening of the Friends and Family ad, i.e. between the baseline and the 2nd survey. A summary of the main changes over all survey stages is given in Table 4.10 overleaf. A p-value given in bold indicates that the change was in the desired direction (i.e. became more anti-speeding or less pro-speeding), while a p-value given in italics indicates that the change was in the 'wrong' direction (i.e. became less anti-speeding or more pro-speeding). A dash indicates that there was no significant change.

Table 4.10: Subjective Norms: comparison of baseline with follow-up surveys

Between the baseline and the 2 ^nd survey (i.e. before the screening of the Friends and Family ad), there was no change in overall subjective norms, and only minor changes in the items which make up subjective norms. There was a decrease in the extent to which one's father was judged likely to disapprove of speeding (baseline -1.31, 2 ^nd survey -1.15, p<0.05), and a decrease in the combined score for 'closest friends', indicating a decrease in the extent to which friends were seen as disapproving of speeding (baseline -5.21, 2 ^nd survey -4.25, p<0.05).

Examining the changes between the baseline and 4 ^th survey - i.e. a year after the first screening of Friends and Family - several changes in normative beliefs were apparent. 'People you work with' were still rated as significantly more likely to disapprove of speeding at the 4 ^th survey (baseline -0.54, 4 ^th survey -0.74, p<0.05), but there was no longer a significant change in the rating of 'boss'. Furthermore, two of the referents, 'mother' and 'father' were now rated as significantly less likely to disapprove of speeding than at the baseline, although they were still rated overall as anti-speeding (mother: baseline -1.71, 4 ^th survey -1.47, p<0.05; father: baseline -1.42, 4 ^th survey -1.23, p<0.05). It would seem overall that there was little meaningful change in normative beliefs - beliefs about others' approval or disapproval of speeding - over the course of the survey.

As described above, motivation to comply with four of the referents - partner/spouse, father, closest friends and boss - increased significantly between the baseline and the 3 ^rd survey. However, there was no longer a significant change by the 4 ^th survey in any of these referent scores, suggesting that the change was short-lived. There were also no longer, at the 4 ^th survey, any changes in the combined scores (normative belief x motivation to comply) for any of the referents, or in the Composite Subjective Norms scores (Table 4.11).

Table 4.11: Composite Subjective Norms: comparison of baseline with 3 ^rd and 4 ^th surveys

Comparison by awareness of Friends and Family ad

In order to assess whether there were any changes in subjective norms which could be associated with exposure to the Friends and Family ad, item and composite subjective norms scores for those who had seen the ad were compared with the scores for those who had not. This analysis indicates that those who saw the ad between the baseline and 3 ^rd survey displayed significantly more negative scores (i.e. more anti-speeding) at the 3 ^rd survey compared to the baseline for two of the referent items, 'boss' and 'people you work with'. Those who did not see the ad did not display any changes between the baseline and 3 ^rd survey for any of the referents. Neither those who had seen the ad nor those who had not displayed a significant change in composite subjective norms between baseline and 3 ^rd survey.

At the 4 ^th survey, those who had seen the Friends and Family ad displayed significant changes in normative beliefs scores (perceptions of others' approval or disapproval of speeding) for five of the referents. However, two of these changes, for 'father' and 'mother', were in the 'wrong' direction; that is, respondents perceived these referents as less, rather than more, disapproving of speeding. The three referents who were perceived as more disapproving of speeding were 'boss', 'people you work with', and 'a competent driver'. Those who had not seen the Friends and Family ad at the 4 ^th survey displayed no significant changes in an anti-speeding direction, and had a significantly higher combined score (i.e. more pro-speeding) for the referent 'the police', at the 4 ^th survey.

Overall, the analysis suggests that the Friends and Family ad had, at best, only a weak effect on subjective norms.

Comparison by speeding behaviour

Results were also analysed to assess whether those who were categorised as frequent speeders at the baseline survey demonstrated similar or different patterns of response, in relation to subjective norms, to those categorised as occasional and infrequent speeders. None of the three categories of speeder displayed any significant change between the baseline and 3 ^rd survey, in composite subjective norms. Baseline occasional speeders displayed a more negative combined score (i.e. normative belief x motivation to comply) for the referent 'people you work with' (baseline -2.99, 3 ^rd survey -3.90, p<0.05), and infrequent speeders displayed a more negative combined score for 'boss' (baseline -4.73, 3 ^rd survey -6.97, p<0.05). Frequent speeders displayed no changes for any of the referents at the 3 ^rd survey.

There were very few changes from baseline scores for each of the three groups at the 4 ^th survey. None of the groups displayed a change in composite Subjective Norms, or in combined scores for any of the referents.

4.3 PERCEIVED BEHAVIOURAL CONTROL

Within the Theory of Planned Behaviour, Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC) is operationalised in various ways (see Sections 1.3 and 2.1). In the fuller measure, PBC is made up of control beliefs about the likelihood of different factors increasing or decreasing one's control over speeding, and corresponding control frequency, i.e. the frequency with which one experiences these factors in everyday driving. These are summed together to produce a composite Perceived Behavioural Control score. Table 4.12 shows mean scores for each of the control beliefs, comparing baseline and 4 ^th survey results - those obtained after the first screening of the Simon Says ad. Baseline scores are shown in italics and 4 ^th survey scores in bold.

The largely negative scores at both stages suggest that respondents rated most of the factors as discouraging of speeding. In particular, driving on 'an unfamiliar road' and with 'children in the car' were strongly felt to discourage speeding. Situations in which passengers or 'the driver behind' wanted the respondent to speed up were rated as having a contrary effect (i.e. they would discourage the respondent from speeding). Only two of the control beliefs, being in 'a flow of traffic going at 40mph' and 'running late for an appointment', appeared to reduce control over speeding (i.e. to increase the likelihood of speeding).

Table 4.12: Control beliefs: comparison of baseline and 4 ^th survey

Between the baseline and the 4 ^th survey, there were changes in three of the control beliefs. For the factors being in 'a flow of traffic going at 40mph' and 'running late for an appointment', respondents reported decreasing likelihood of speeding at the 4 ^th survey (flow of traffic: baseline 0.35, 4 ^th survey 0.09, p<0.05; running late: baseline 0.11, 4 ^th survey -0.23, p<0.01). For the factor 'there were pedestrians around', respondents reported increased likelihood of speeding at the 4 ^th survey (baseline -1.78, 4 ^th survey -1.60, p<0.05). However, the scores for this item were overall very negative, indicating a low likelihood of speeding in this circumstance.

Table 4.13 displays scores for the corresponding control frequencies, again comparing baseline and 4 ^th survey.

Table 4.13: Control frequency: comparison of baseline and 4 ^th survey

At both stages, respondents reported driving most frequently in circumstances 'where there were pedestrians around', in a 'flow of traffic going at 40mph on a 30mph road', and in front of drivers behind who wanted them to 'drive faster'.

Between the baseline and 4 ^th survey, there was a significant increase in reported frequency of driving '[while feeling] the driver behind wants you to drive faster' (baseline 4.61, 4 ^th survey 4.81, p<0.05), and a significant decrease in reported frequency of driving 'where there are pedestrians around' (baseline 5.41, 4 ^th survey 5.16, p<0.01). These changes may reflect differences over the four years in respondents' individual circumstances or in the local driving environment.

Within the Theory of Planned Behaviour, the full measure of Perceived Behavioural Control is computed by calculating, for each item, the product of the control belief and control frequency and then taking the sum of the products for each item, i.e.

Perceived behavioural control at an item level and the composite perceived behavioural control are presented in Table 4.14, comparing baseline and 4 ^th survey.

Table 4.14: Perceived Behavioural Control: comparison of baseline and 4 ^th survey

Between the baseline and 4 ^th survey, scores for one of the factors increased significantly (driving 'with pedestrians around', baseline -9.78, 4 ^th survey -8.31, p<0.01), suggesting less control over (i.e. more likelihood of) speeding in that circumstance, although scores were still negative. Scores for another factor, 'running late for an appointment when driving', decreased significantly (baseline 1.27, 4 ^th survey 0.30, p<0.05), suggested more control over (i.e. less likelihood of) speeding in that circumstance. There was no significant change in composite perceived behavioural control between the baseline and 4 ^th survey. Overall, there appears to have been little meaningful change in perceived behavioural control scores at an item or composite level over the four years of the study.

« Previous | Contents | Next »