Go High-Viz!

Educating Riders about Conspicuity

Minnesota Motorcycle Safety Center

Overview

1. Goals

2. Objectives

3. Target audience

4. Key messages

5. Strategies

6. Tactics

7. Partners

8. Budget (timeline)

9. Evaluation

Why conspicuity?

Rider responsibility

– Half of motorcycle crashes are multi-vehicle

– Riders and other drivers share responsibility

– Riders must make effort to be seen

NHTSA motorcycle countermeasures

– Conspicuity integral to motorcycle safety programs

National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety (NAMS)

– “Encourage motorcyclists to enhance their conspicuity” (essential recommendation)

Goals

1: Educate motorcycle riders in conspicuity products, techniques, strategies

2: Increase motorcyclists’ use of high-visibility clothing, conspicuity products

3: Reduce multi-vehicle crashes, injuries, fatalities

Objectives

1: Design, build, promote Web page with conspicuity information, strategies

2: Increase motorcyclists’ use of reflective vests, white helmets, brightly colored clothing, motorcycle modifications 10 percent in 2009

3: Reduce multi-vehicle crashes in which other drivers “don’t see” motorcycle riders 10 percent in 2009

Target audience and key messages

Primary: M/F 35-54

Secondary: M/F 20-34

Key messages:

A. Choose high-viz riding gear

B. Use strategic lane positioning

C: Make high-viz motorcycle modifications

Strategies

1: Educate riders why conspicuity is important

2: Provide a tool to ”measure” conspicuity

3: Provide numerous options to improve conspicuity

4: Provide conspicuity resources

Tactics

1. Web site

2. Print ads

3. Flyers

4. Word of mouth

5. Events

6. Earned media

Web site: www.highviz.org

1. “Be a Perfect 10” interactive quiz

2. Top 10 Tips

3. 10 more Tips

4. Free reflective decals

5. High-viz resources

6. Reflective sticker contest

“Be a Perfect 10” quiz

Top 10 Tips/Points

1. Reflective vest (4)2. White helmet (3)3. Bright jacket (2)4. Positioning (2)5. Modulator (1)6. Taillight (1)7. Reflectives (1)8. Movement (1)9. Auxiliaries (1)10. Hand signals (1)

10 More Tips/points

11. Night riding (1/2)12. Dawn/dusk (1/2)13. Horn (1/2)14. Marker lights (1/2)15. Poor weather (1/2)16. Sun angle (1/2)17. Bike profile (1/2)18. Bike color (1/2)19. High beam (1/4)20. Unusual effects (1/4)

Free reflective decal

High-viz resources

A. High-viz products/vendors

B. Additional reading

• Research papers

• Magazine articles

• Human vision

• Camouflage theory

• Retroreflectivity

• Etc.

Ad #1

SUPERHERO

Ad #2

ROCK STAR

Ad #3

STATE TROOPER

Billboard #1

Billboard #2

Billboard #3

Billboard #4

Billboard #5

Flyers 3x6”

Retroreflective decal

(printed on backing)

• BRC, ERC students

• Magazine inserts

• Law enforcement

• Local events

• SASE

Partnerships

Aerostich

Biker Hiway

Dennis Kirk

Glo Concepts

Momentum Photo

Nightfire Patches

Olympia Moto Sports

Streetglo Reflective Decals

Tin Wolf

Vizibrite

Volunteers and well-wishers

Budget 2008—initial launch

Web, print, survey development and design $0

Survey printing, mailing, reports (three years) $21,000

Print ad photography $14,500

Poster printing (1,500) $2,000

Poster distribution $2,000

Retro-reflective flyer printing (40,000) $8,500

Flyer distribution $500

Event attendance $500

Campaign introduction/flyer distribution

insert in Minnesota Rider Review $2,500

Total $51,500

Budget—year 2 (2009)

Poster printing (1,500) $2,000

Poster distribution $2,000

Retro-reflective flyer printing (40,000) $8,500

Flyer distribution $500

Event attendance $500

Adapt posters to indoor format $0

Indoor ads (375 postings for 5 months) $47,000

Total $60,500

Grand total (2 years) $109,000

Budget—year 3 (2010)

Poster printing $2,000

Poster distribution $2,000

Retro-reflective flyer printing $8,500

Flyer distribution $500

Event attendance $500

Outdoor ad production $5,000

Paid advertising (estimated) $50,000

Total $68,500

Grand total (3 years) $177,500

What’s next?

Rider coaches are role models

Campaign available to other states

• No boundaries

• Promote to students

and motorcycling public

• Satisfies one element of

technical assessments

• Evaluated for effectiveness

Summary

1. Goals

2. Objectives

3. Target audience

4. Key messages

5. Strategies

6. Tactics

7. Partners

8. Budget (timeline)

9. Evaluation

Evaluating the Conspicuity Campaign

Campaign evaluation

Survey

Web visitors/page views

Crash data

Advantages of mail survey

• Less expensive

• Better response rate

• Easier to reach target audience

Statewide survey

Minnesota motorcyclists

Three waves

Pre–campaign baseline (Jan 2008)

Mid–campaign (Oct 2008)

Post–campaign (Jan 2011)

Designing the survey

Objectives:

Measure behavior change

Obtain demographic and exposure data

Designing the survey

Areas of interest:

1. Campaign awareness; use of high-viz gear, strategies, products

2. Demographic data

3. Experience and exposure

4. Perception of risk

5. Perception of safety messaging

Designing the survey

Develop questions that respondents:

1. Will interpret the same way

2. Will respond to accurately

3. Will be willing to respond to

4. Limit requests for personal information

Constructing the survey

Survey questions:

1. Should be easy to maneuver and complete

2. Should appear interesting and important

3. Wording and visual appearance should be uncomplicated

4. Group topics from most salient to least

Pre-test the surveyUse co-workers, friends, family

Pilot the survey

Small random sample

Constructing the survey

List from which names will be drawn

• Should hit entire target population

• Should be current

• No repeated names or addresses

Determine the sampling frame

Answer to “what size?” is counterintuitive:

Population of 25,000 at 3%: 1,024 respondents

Population of 2,000,000 at 3%: 1,067 respondents

Conversely:

Population of 1,000 at 3%: 517 respondents

As population size decreases, sample size must increase

Determine sample size

• Avoid inconvenience

• Include SASE (real stamp)

• Cover letter explaining nature of survey

• Follow up with reminder (postcard)

Strategies to increase response rate

Include a “reward” if possible

Strategies to increase response rate

Resource: Questionnaire design and survey implementation

Dillman, D.A. (2007).

Internet, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 3rd ed.

New York: Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Minnesota Motorcycle

Rider Survey

2008

Methods

All registered motorcycle owners, duplicates removed

Random sample of 3,000 from group

Embroidered patch included

Reminder mailed to entire sample

Results

Baseline response rates:

1,491 respondents (49.7% response rate)

All survey items (response rates above 90%)

Survey margin of error

± 3%

95% confidence level

Results

Mid-campaign response rates:

1,404 respondents (46.8% response rate)

All survey items (response rates above 90%)

Survey margin of error

± 3%

95% confidence level

Results—rider age

10.8%

13.2%

29.8%

33.5%

12.8%

10.6%

14.2%

26.8%

32.7%

15.8%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

< 30 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 +

Pre-Campaign (N=1,490) Mid-Campaign (N=1,392)

60.6%

26.2%

5.0%

71.0%

21.7%

4.7% 2.6%

8.2%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

One Two Three Four

Pre-Campaign (N=1,491) Mid-Campaign (N=1,404)

Results—motorcycles owned

6.2%

94.1%

4.9% 1.0%2.3%

91.5%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Endorsement Permit Neither

Pre-Campaign (N=1,458) Mid-Campaign (N=1,365)

Results—endorsement status

Results—nutshell

1. 87% male, 13% female—consistent

2. 61% own one motorcycle26% own two motorcycles13% own three or more

3. 44% have had at least one trainingcourse within the last 25 years

Results—nutshell

4. 38% ride H-D; 23% ride Honda

5. 38% ride cruisers18% ride touring bikes13% ride sport bikes

6. Average miles ridden 3,906

Results—nutshell

7. 33% had 25+ years experience28% 5 years or less

8. 35% were returning riders60% of returning riders 5 years or less

9. 59% helmet all or some of time30% wear helmet rarely or never

Results—conspicuity baseline

1. Black helmets: 60% 5% white helmets 11% solid bright color helmet9% multi-color bright helmet

2. Helmets w/ reflectives: 27%

3. Upper body gear: 70% black13% wore white or bright colors

Results—conspicuity baseline

3. Reflective vest: 97% rarely/never

Only 1.4% “all” or “most” of time

4. High-viz modifications: 47% 61% auxiliary headlamps47% marker lights (often stock)36% reflectives

Results—website traffic

1. Website visitors—up 22%2006-2007 average: 170,000/year2008-2009 average: 208,000/year

2. Pages viewed—up 430%2006-2007 average: 120,000/year2008-2009 average: 637,000/year

3. High-viz pages viewed: 120,000+

Results—crash data

1: All mc crashes—down 18%2007: 1,623 2009: 1,329

2. Multi-veh. mc crashes—down 22%2007: 733 2009: 570

3. Ratio Multi/Single vehicle—down 5%2007: 45.2 2009: 42.9

Results—crash data

4: Failure to yield—down 16%2007: 228 2009: 190

5. Inattention/distraction—down 20%2007: 128 2009: 103

Targets for each of these was to bring them down 10%. Objectives met!

Go High-Viz!

Rider Conspicuity Campaign