Improving the Driving Practices of Pizza Deliverers: Response Generalization and Moderating Effects of Driving History

Abstract

A practical intervention program, targeting the safety belt use of pizza deliverers at two stores, increased significantly the use of both safety belts (143% above baseline) and turn signals (25% above baseline). Control subjects (i.e., pizza deliverers at a third no-intervention store and patrons driving to the pizza stores) showed no changes in belt or turn signal use over the course of 7-month study. The intervention program was staggered across two pizza stores and consisted of a group meeting wherein employees discussed the value of safety belts, received feedback regarding their low safety belt use, offered suggestions for increasing their belt use, and made a personal commitment to buckle up by signing buckle-up promise cards. Subsequently, employee-designed buckle-up reminder signs were placed in the pizza stores. By linking license plate numbers to individual driving records, we examined certain aspects of driving history as moderators of pre- and postintervention belt use. Although baseline belt use was significantly lower for drivers with one or more driving demerits or accidents in the previous 5 years, after the intervention these risk groups increased their belt use significantly and at the same rate as drivers with no demerits or accidents. Whereas baseline belt use was similar for younger (under 25) and older (25 or older) drivers, younger drivers were markedly more influenced by the intervention than were older drivers. Individual variation in belt use during baseline, intervention, and follow-up phases indicated that some drivers require more effective and costly intervention programs to motivate their safe driving practices.

The Additive Impact of Group and Individual Publicly Displayed Feedback: Examining Individual Response Patterns and Response Generalization in a Safe-Driving Occupational Intervention

“…In addition, this deliverer was observed to decrease his complete stopping notably. This is similar to one pizza deliverer reported in Ludwig and Geller (1991) who decreased his safety-belt use from around 100% during baseline to 0% at one point during the intervention phase.…”

“…Much of our research has found that an increase in a nontargeted behavior can result from an intervention on a similar response class depending on the intervention method (reviewed in Ludwig & Geller, 2000; see also Stokes & Baer, 1977). For example, Ludwig and Geller (1991) intervened to improve safety belt use and observed an increase in drivers' turn-signal use; Ludwig and Geller (1997) also found generalization across nontargeted driving behaviors after an intervention targeting complete stopping. Similarly, Camden, Price, and Ludwig (2009) reported on an absenteeism intervention that also decreased incidents of leaving work early.…”

“…Most pizza deliverers are 18-to 24-year-old men driving during the most dangerous times of the day (i.e., 5 p.m.-2 a.m.; Ludwig & Geller, 1991). These employees are paid on commission per pizza sold and can often make more money by taking risky shortcuts (such as not coming to a complete stop at an intersection; Ludwig & Geller, 2000).…”

Evaluating the Safety Benefits of a Low-Cost Driving Behavior Management System in Commercial Vehicle Operations: Report

“…The delivery of feedback to increase safety-related work behaviors has received great attention in the organizational behavior management literature (Fellner & Sulzer-Azaroff, 1984;Ludwig & Geller, 1991, 1997Reber & Wallin, 1984;Williams & Geller, 2000). However, the motivational effects of feedback have been questioned.…”

Behavior Change in the Funny Papers: Feedback to Cartoonists on Safety Belt Use

“…Actually, behavioral researchers have studied various strategies to increase safety belt use among vehide occupants at work sites (e.g., Geller, 1983;Hagenzieker, 1991;Ludwig & Geller, 1991), schools (Roberts, Fanurik, & Wilson, 1988;Williams, Thyer, Bailey, & Harrison, 1989), and throughout the community (e.g., Geller & Lehman, 1991;Seekins et al, 1988). Most ofthese interventions, however, demonstrated their effectiveness in a single setting or community and were designed to intervene directly with vehide occupants.…”