Do perceptions of speeding act as a barrier to automated speed enforcement in the United States?

Abstract

Speed is a significant contributor to both the likelihood and severity of road crashes, and automated speed enforcement has been demonstrated as an effective way to enforce speed limits and reduce crashes. Although automated speed enforcement has a range of benefits, in the United States it is not adopted or illegal in 25 out of 50 states, even though it has greater public support than is commonly perceived. Part of the reason may be that in the United States, speeding is consistently seen as far less dangerous than other behaviors such as driving while intoxicated or texting and driving. This paper tests whether challenging the belief (among some) that speeding is ‘no big deal’ can increase public support for automated speed enforcement. Using a national sample of U.S. adults, we measured a range of beliefs about the dangers of speeding as well as whether respondents would vote in favor of automated speed enforcement. Critically, a random sample of respondents were provided with a message about the dangers of speeding. We found that many respondents did not believe that speeding was particularly dangerous, and that people with these beliefs were less likely to support automated speed enforcement. However, providing a message about the dangers of speeding was effective in increasing support for automated enforcement, especially among people who did not hold extreme beliefs about the (lack of) danger of speed. These findings suggest that consistent road safety messaging may help increase community support for speed enforcement measures.