Two Speed
 |
 Panasonic Ladies Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator with Three Heads $39.99 Time Remaining: 6d 29m Buy It Now for only: $39.99 |
 Panasonic ES2045P Ladies Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator with Three Heads $47.99 Time Remaining: 15d 22h 24m Buy It Now for only: $47.99 |
 Panasonic Ladies Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator with Three Heads $37.99 Time Remaining: 19d 4h 18m Buy It Now for only: $37.99 |
 Panasonic ES2045P Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator w 3 Heads $55.86 Time Remaining: 16d 20h 37m Buy It Now for only: $55.86 |
 Panasonic ES2045P Ladies Cordless Pink Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator Rechargeable $46.95 Time Remaining: 12d 39m Buy It Now for only: $46.95 |
 Two Brand New Sealed Personna Speed 3 Value Pack of 8 For A Total of 16 Blade $12.08 Time Remaining: 19d 12h 18m Buy It Now for only: $12.08 |
 OSTER 220v TWO SPEED ARMATURE ASSY 084906 000 BRAND NEW $32.95 Time Remaining: 21d 12h 28m Buy It Now for only: $32.95 |
 OSTER Golden A5 Two Speed Pet Clipper Model 78005 140 $157.43 Time Remaining: 13d 7h 33m Buy It Now for only: $157.43 |
 Panasonic ES2045P Epiglide Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator $65.99 Time Remaining: 27d 13h 52m Buy It Now for only: $65.99 |
 OSTER Turbo A5 2 Two Speed Hair Pet Clipper Model 78005 314 $166.23 Time Remaining: 13d 7h 33m Buy It Now for only: $166.23 |
 Panasonic ES2045P Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator $94.83 Time Remaining: 29d 12h 40m Buy It Now for only: $94.83 |
 NEW Panasonic ES2045P Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator $58.00 Time Remaining: 20d 6h 8m Buy It Now for only: $58.00 |
 Epilady Sport two speed corded epilator EP 811 158 $44.95 Time Remaining: 2d 8h 29m Buy It Now for only: $44.95 |
 BRAUN BODY MASSAGING EPILATOR HAIR REMOVAL TRIMMER GROOMING TWO SPEED CONTROL $59.99 Time Remaining: 2d 52m Buy It Now for only: $59.99 |
 Panasonic ES2045P Wet Dry Two Speed Epilator with Three Heads Pink $127.09 Time Remaining: 6d 8h 28m Buy It Now for only: $127.09 |
Two Speed
The Prevalence and Risk Reduction of Vehicle Speeding through Safety-Induced Behavioral and Psychological Methods
1. Introduction
Many aspects contribute to the six million car accidents and the forty thousand driving related fatalities in the United States annually (Snyder, 2010). The hazard that will be looked at in greater detail in this report is the act of driving above the speed limit set in place. A speed limit is a safety measure set in place to regulate the maximum speed of vehicles on a certain stretch of road. Speed limits are not only set in place to improve the safety of drivers and reduce traffic related causalities but to also reduce noise pollution, vibrations, and emissions. Few places around the world lack speed limits such as some of Germany's autobahns. Even though Germany's autobahns might be known for having no speed limit, even they realize sometimes speed limits are necessary for safety. Most speed limits are set to the eighty-five percentile mark which is the speed at which eighty-five percent of the drivers using that road drive at (Stuster and Coffman, 1998).
However, speed limits in the United States are in most cases set some amount below the eighty-five percentile speed. The speed limits in the United States being set below the eighty-five percentile is a good thing though. Stuster and Coffman (1998) reported that increased speed limits on highways increased the amount of speeding related accidents and reducing speed limits on highways reduced the amount of speeding related accidents. Driving above the speed limit, even just one mile per hour, is considered illegal and can result in a traffic violation with a fine and an additional three points added to the driver's license. Speed limits are a good measure to follow, but only hold true on days with ideal road conditions such as clear weather and dry road conditions.
One should not drive sixty miles per hour on a sixty mile per hour speed limited highway when there are less than ideal conditions such as slippery road conditions or vision is hindered by weather conditions such as snow, rain, or fog. It is known that about 4% of injuries are obtained through unsafe conditions and about 96% of injuries are obtained via unsafe acts. It is also common knowledge in the United States that violating speed limits is not only against the law but an unsafe act that could affect yourself and the other drivers sharing the road. Although the information is known, people still choose to drive above the speed limit. People choose to drive above the speed limit most likely because they feel they are driving at a safe speed for the road and because the advantages outweigh the disadvantages in their opinion.
2. Literature Review
In order to move forward with proposing possible methods to reduce the amount of people that drive above the speed limit, previous research on the prevalence of speed limits and speeding related accidents must be understood. Speed limits are instituted in most countries around the world due to the belief that speed limits increase the safety of the drivers using the road. However, some places around the world do not have speed limits such as the autobahns in Germany. An autobahn is a name for a highway in Germany that is usually noted for not having a set speed limit. According to De Croo et al. (2008) 52% of Germany's autobahns have no speed limit while 33% of them have permanent speed limits and the other 15% have temporary speed limits due to less than ideal road conditions at certain times of the year.
The prevalence of speed limits may not be high on the German autobahns but the amount of speed limits around the world is large and ever increasing. Speed limits are a clear beneficial tool to driver safety on the road. De Croo et al. (2008) stated that 67% of Germany's automobile accidents occurred on autobahns without permanent speed limits and only 33% of automobile accidents occurred on autobahns with a permanent speed limit. This research is an indicator that without speed limits, people may end up driving above what the safest speed is for the road resulting in an increase in speed related vehicle accidents. The last piece of information that De Croo et al. (2008) provides that supports the increase of driver safety with the implementation and enforcement of speed limits is that a 130km/hr speed limit was placed on a autobahn with no previous speed limit. Within one decade of the speed limit implementation, the vehicle accident rate decreased by 48% and the casualty rate decreased by 58%.
This is very strong evidence that abiding by an enforced speed limit will increase the safety of drivers on the road and decrease the possibility of accidents. Stuster and Coffman (1998) also support the safety gained through the implementation and enforcement of speed limits. However, Stuster and Coffman (1998) proposed that the drivers driving closest to the average speed of the drivers on the road were the least likely to suffer an accident. The average speed would be defined as the road's speed limit in most cases. This is a startling fact because not only does driving above the speed limit increase the risk of an automobile accident but driving below the speed limit also increases the risk of an automobile accident too. Lastly, Stuster and Coffman (1998) were able to prove that reducing speed limits on moderate and high speed roads also reduced the amount of vehicle accidents. Examples of some of the meta-analysis done by Stuster and Coffman using transportation records included a 37mph zone being reduced to 31mph where the fatal crashes were reduced by 24% in Denmark (Stuster and Coffman, 1998).
A second example is in Germany where the speed limit was reduced from 37mph to 31mph and the amount of vehicle crashes was reduced by 20% (Stuster and Coffman, 1998). An example of a speed increase was in the US where a speed limit of 55mph was raised to 65mph and the amount of fatal crashes increased by 21% (Stuster and Coffman, 1998). To accompany these results though it must be noted that Stuster and Coffman (1998) believe that in general changing the speed limit in lower speed zones has little to no affect on the speed of the drivers therefore little to no affect on the prevalence of vehicle crashes. In conclusion to the reviewed literature, not only were De Croo et al. (2008) and Stuster and Coffman (1998) able to prove the applicability of speed limits to road safety. Stuster and Coffman (1998) were also able to prove that speed limit variance in low speed areas makes much less of an impact on the safety of drivers than speed limit variance in moderate to high speed areas.
3. Research Methodology
To fully understand how many drivers drive at least five or more miles above the speed limit, a survey was obtained from a random group of 41 individuals. The survey group consisted of 23 males and 18 females ranging from 17 to 53 years of age. More detailed age statistics for the survey participants can be viewed in table 1 at the end of the report. The survey group consisted primarily of students around the age of 20 from a college in central Pennsylvania, however, some individuals were also chosen for the survey from the southeastern Pennsylvania area.
Every individual was asked the same question, "Do you more often than not find yourself driving five or more miles above the speed limit." The only answer allowed was a simple yes or no. The purpose of this survey was to try and determine a rough percentage of the total amount of people that drive above the speed limit, the percentage of males that drive above the speed limit, and the percentage of females that drive above the speed limit. The conclusion to the survey statistics was that roughly 73% of people regularly drive five or more miles above the speed limit. This final result of 73% of the total survey population regularly driving above the speed limit is on par with the results proposed by Stuster and Coffman (1998).
They found that roughly 70% of vehicles on low, moderate, and high speed roads drove above the speed limit. Their results were also conclusive with similar reports flowing in from the European Transportation Council and Canada (Stuster and Coffman, 1998). The second conclusion determined was that females are more likely to drive at least five or more miles above the speed limit. 65% of males admitted to regularly driving above the speed limit while 83% of females admitted to the same act. Many of the males replied that they no longer drove above the speed limit because of a previous encounter at some point with police enforcement issuing a traffic violation to them. Maybe men are more likely to learn from their mistakes than women.
Overall, the general compliance with speed limits on roads is very poor. Now that the impact on changing speed limits is known and the prevalence of speeding is known a solution can be proposed to reducing the amount of people that speed while they drive. 3.1. The ABC Model The reason people like to speed rather than driving at a safe speed can be explained using the ABC model. The ABC model states that a person's behavior is a function of activators and consequences. An activator is defined as a person, place, or thing that happens before a behavior takes place that encourages the behavior (Oyewole, 2010). On the other hand a consequence is defined as an event that takes place after the behavior that increases or decreases the probability that the behavior will happen again (Oyewole, 2010).
In this case the behavior would be considered driving above or below the speed limit. Possible activators would be speed limit signs, police enforcement, type of car being driven, driver's personality, and the driver's education. All of those items affect the probability that someone is likely to drive above the speed limit. A person is more likely to speed if they have a car that is easily able to drive well above the speed limit. An individual is also likely to drive above the speed limit if they see no police enforcement or speed limit signs. On the other hand possible consequences for the behavior of speeding could be a traffic violation with a fine, car crash, injury, death, wasting gas, and saving time. Although the negative consequences may far outweigh the positive consequences, people still choose to drive above and well above the speed limit on a daily basis continuously putting their lives in danger.
Luckily, the ABC model can be applied as a solution to the act of driving above the speed limit. If speed limit signs and police enforcement were made more visible and more prevalent, the driver could be made more aware of the fact that speeding is looked down upon. Over time, the driver may become conditioned to not drive above the speed limit due to the constant reminders of the speed limit. This is a classic example of Pavlonian conditioning. The driver can be conditioned by associating the act of speeding with something bad such as seeing police or the thought of a traffic violation. Eventually the driver will think of the two being associated very closely. The driver will then be much less likely to speed. The driver's education could also be changed in order to prevent the act of driving above the speed limit.
Driving above the speed limit is not advertised or talked about nearly as much as driving under the influence and driving without a seatbelt. The annual alcohol traffic related injury rate was reduced by 30% in 1994 by the "Designated Driver" campaign established in only 1988 (Winsten, 2009). If information about driving above the speed limit were to become more main stream the number of drivers that would drive above the speed limit would surely decrease. Another way to reduce the amount of people that speed while they drive is to set in place a device that stops a car from going above a certain speed. Most cars have the ability to hit speeds of over 120 miles per hour. A speed limiter could be placed on cars to stop them from going above 80 miles per hour. This sort of change would allow for people to safely pass other drivers on the highway still but would stop people from driving far above the speed limit and seriously endangering other drivers on the road. In conclusion to the ABC model, an increase in enforcement of speeding, an increase in the amount of speed limit signs, an increase in the knowledge of why speeding is dangerous, and a speed limiter installed on cars are all possible methods to reducing the amount of people that drive above the speed limit. 3.2. The Domino Theory Another idea used to assess behavior based safety and aid in accident prevention is the Domino Theory which was brought about in 1932 by a man by the name of Heinrich (Oyewole, 2010).
The Domino Theory states that an injury is the end result of a chain set of circumstances. If one circumstance is to be removed then the chance of injury will be greatly diminished. Four circumstances lead to an injury in this model. The first circumstance is social environment and ancestry, second is carelessness, third is an unsafe act or condition, and right before the injury is an accident. One can remove the chance of injury by removing the unsafe act or condition which will therefore eliminate the accident and then the injury. In comparison, the person's social environment could also change from a culture where safety is not seen as very important to a culture where safety is seen as very important. By changing the person's social view of safety, the carelessness will cease to exist which will eliminate the unsafe act and therefore no accident will occur. Just like the ABC model, the domino theory allows for another perspective to the solution for the problem at hand, speeding. Basically, the domino theory states in order to prevent injuries from occurring due to the hazard of driving above the speed limit, the circumstances leading to the injury must be removed. The first situation leading to an injury which is the social environment and ancestry of an individual can never be entirely removed.
People will always be inclined to drive above the speed limit at some point in order to get somewhere in a shorter amount of time. However, increasing the drivers' knowledge of the hazards of speeding can decrease the amount of times they will be likely to speed. This goes back to the solution proposed via the ABC model. An increase in the knowledge about speeding will lead to a social environment where speeding is seen as a dangerous thing to do. Someone surrounded by a social environment where speeding is seen as a dangerous method of driving will be much less likely to speed.
The second circumstance stated in the domino theory is carelessness. However, there is no proposed way to decrease the carelessness of a driver. The third circumstance is an unsafe act or condition. Unsafe conditions cannot be removed because the weather is not able to be altered. However, knowledge of unsafe conditions can be improved. This goes back to increasing the knowledge of drivers all over the world. If drivers' were to better understand how to drive in slippery conditions or foggy weather there would be much less speeding in those sorts of conditions and reduced amount of vehicle accidents.
It is important to remember that in unsafe conditions the definition of speeding is not driving above the enforced speed limit but is changed to driving above a safe speed for the conditions present. The safe speed determined for the conditions is entirely up to the driver in the conditions. The unsafe act discussed in the domino theory would be the act of speeding which could most likely be decreased by increasing the awareness of the hazards of speeding, increasing the police enforcement of speed limits, and implementing speed limiters into vehicles.
The last circumstance before an injury is the accident. The injury is always a result of the accident. However, just because there is an accident, does not mean there needs to be an injury resulting from it. Some people often buy vehicles with a heavier frame and a higher vehicle safety rating to decrease the likeliness of an injury or fatality during a vehicle accident. This may not relate to reducing the act of speeding on the roads but plays into safety involved with the act of speeding by protecting yourself not only from yourself speeding but other drivers too. In other words, the final measure to safety in any sort of vehicle accident is the type of vehicle being driven.
4. Results and Conclusion
Figure 1 shows the analysis plot from the obtained data. It could be seen that the difference between speeders and non-speeders in both genders.
It is obvious from the graph that a much higher percent of females prefer to drive above the speed limit as compared to males. Table 1 shows the age statistics for the survey participants. The mean ages for both genders and the total population were all about twenty five years of age.
The percentage of speeders can be seen for the total population, male gender, and the female gender in Table 2 as 73%, 65%, and 83% respectively.
The experimental survey to determine the percentage of speeders can be deemed as successful due to the fact that the results obtained were similar to Stuster and Coffman's (1998) results. The results of the survey also show a vast non-compliance with the speed limits that are regularly set in place and enforced in the United States. The second half of the research done involved using behavior based safety models such as the Domino Theory and the ABC model.
The proposed methods of reducing the amount of speeding on the roads included the following: 1)Increasing the awareness of drivers to speed limits by increasing the amount of speed limit visuals on the road, increasing the amount of police enforcement in moderate to high speed zones, and starting an advertisement campaign to educate people on the hazards of driving above the speed limit. 2)Increasing the knowledge of drivers to the hazards and negative consequences of driving above the speed limit such as less gas mileage on the car, greater risk of an accident, death, wear on the vehicle, and lastly the possible traffic violations and fines. 3)Possibly install speed limiters on cars so that drivers cannot drive excessively above the speed limit but can still drive safely on moderate to high speed roads.
These are very plausible solutions to the reduction of the amount of people that drive above the speed limit. In the end, all of these solutions relate to taking a proactive approach to safety instead of a reactive approach. In the end, a person should not have to experience a speed related accident before they realize not to speed anymore and put themselves and others in danger.It should be the job of the government, educators, and groups around the world to let people know the hazards and negative consequences associated with speeding. It may seem like common sense that speeding is dangerous but when the topic is never reaffirmed or brought up with the driver then they will eventually start to believe it is not dangerous and that it would never happen to them.
In conclusion, a proactive approach should be taken towards the hazard of speeding by most importantly increasing awareness and educating drivers.
References
De Croo, H., Bandmann, M., Mackay, G.M., Vollenhoven, P., Allsop, R., Costa, P., Sterckx, D., Koch, D., and I.A. Sender 2008. Speed Fact Sheet. Pages 1-4.
Oyewole, S.A. 2010. IHS-400 – Safety Engineering, Lesson 1: Introduction to Safety Engineering. Slides 36-41.
Oyewole, S.A. 2010. IHS-400 – Safety Engineering, Lesson 6: Safety Engineering Psychology. Slides 26-34.
Snyder, E. 2010. Car Accident Statistics. www.EdgarSnyder.com. Retrieved on December 2, 2010 from http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/statistics.html
Stuster, J. and Z. Coffman, 1998. Synthesis of Safety Research Related to Speed and Speed Management. Pages 1-7.
About the Author
Dr. Samuel A. Oyewole is an Assistant Professor of Environmental Health and Safety Engineering in the Dept. of Energy and Mineral Engineering, Pennsylvania State University. Dr. Samuel Oyewole obtained his Ph.D. in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering from the Pennsylvania State University. He has over a decade of industrial and research experience, with published papers in several professional conferences and research journals. Dr. Oyewole is a member of the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE), and the Human Factors Engineering Society (HFES).
iPad 2 Speed - Does it Feel Faster than iPad 1