Feature Players

There have been rapid advancements in vehicle safety features in the past decade and these features are increasingly becoming standard equipment on new vehicles. Perhaps more important, the presence of an ever-growing number of safety features has given rise to discussions about the effects of these features on road safety generally, and on auto insurance in particular.

While some proponents suggest the inclusion of new features will substantially reduce road crashes, others are less sure.

To better understand public knowledge, attitudes and opinions about safety features – and how the public interacts with them – the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF) partnered with the Toyota Canada Foundation (TCF) to undertake a national public opinion poll on this topic in 2011. A follow-up poll was conducted in 2012, with funding from TCF, the Brewers Association of Canada and Aviva Canada.

Each poll included questions about six different safety features, including anti-lock braking systems (ABS), traction control (TC), electronic stability control (ESC), brake override, brake assist and electronic brake force distribution (EBFD).

In the 2011 poll, 2,506 Canadians responded to a survey (about two-thirds online; one-third by phone) containing 120 items. The national sample was stratified by province and weighted according to gender and age to avoid bias and to ensure that the sample was representative of the national population. Based on the sample size, results are considered accurate within 2%, 19 times out of 20.

The 2012 poll, for its part, involved a subset of questions about vehicle safety features that were part of a broader survey involving 903 Canadians. The results are considered accurate within 3.3%, 19 times out of 20.

Both polls revealed public knowledge of vehicle safety features is low in relation to most features, with just a few exceptions. The feature most respondents reported being familiar with was ABS. Specifically, 71% agreed or strongly agreed they were familiar with the feature in 2012 and 80% in 2011, a statistically significant difference. For TC, 50% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed they were familiar with the feature in 2012 and 54% in 2011.

The finding is perhaps not surprising since both features have been around for much longer than some of the others cited in the surveys.

With regard to the remaining safety features, 34% were familiar with ESC in 2012 compared to 31% in 2011; for brake assist, 33% in both 2012 and 2011; for EBFD, 24% in 2012 compared to 31% in 2011 (a significant difference); and for brake override, 22% in 2012 compared to 17% in 2011 (again, a significant difference).

Of some concern, familiarity with ABS and EBFD was actually significantly lower in 2012 than in 2011. More years of data, however, are needed to determine if knowledge of these safety features is improving or not.

The profile of those who agreed or strongly agreed they were familiar with safety features was further investigated. Factors examined included gender, age, the number of kilometres driven in a typical month, urban or rural residence, and whether or not the driver has ever been injured in a motor vehicle collision.

For all six safety features, being male increased the likelihood of agreeing or strongly agreeing there was familiarity with the feature. With regard to ESC, TC and ABS, results indicate having reported driving more kilometres in a typical month also increased the likelihood of reporting being familiar.

Finally, for ESC, TC and brake assist, having ever been injured in a motor vehicle collision increased the reported likelihood of being familiar with these features.

FEATURES OF NOTE

While knowledge and awareness of all safety features is important, there are certain ones that have significant potential to reduce crashes and that target a broader range of driving situations that can occur more frequently.

For example, ESC is an active safety feature to help reduce the number and severity of collisions resulting from a loss of control. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety in the United States has reported that ESC decreases fatal single-vehicle crash risk by 49%, and fatal multiple vehicle crash risk by 20% for both cars and SUVs. Such findings led Transport Canada to introduce a new Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard requiring ESC to be installed on most vehicles manufactured after August 31, 2011.

ESC systems, which go by a number of different names, can reduce the danger element in several fairly common driving situations, including the following:

• a large animal appears on the roadway and the driver must take action to avoid a collision;

• inclement weather or poor road conditions make skidding and sliding more likely;

• a driver approaches a curve too quickly, forcing the driver to steer more aggressively;

• the vehicle in front of a driver suddenly changes lanes, forcing the driver to make a quick, evasive move; and

• an unanticipated event forces a driver to swerve quickly.

ESC has been shown to be very effective in providing traction and anti-skid support in situations where, without the feature, control of the vehicle would be lost. This is noteworthy since motor vehicle crashes involving drivers who lose control of their vehicles often have severe consequences, including road departure, collision with objects near the road and rollovers.

ESC is designed to be particularly useful in cases of over- and under-steering (i.e., the vehicle continues to turn beyond the driver’s steering input because the rear end is sliding outwards or the vehicle turns less than the driver’s steering input because the wheels have insufficient traction).

Although a majority of Canadians rank safety as a top priority influencing vehicle-purchasing decisions, as features are more rapidly added to vehicles, it will likely become more challenging for drivers to keep pace. Their awareness of safety features, how they work and what they are designed to do will be essential to ensure the potential benefits are realized in terms of crash reductions. 

BAD BEHAVIOUR

It cannot be overlooked that drivers play an important role in maximizing the protection features can offer. For example, brake assist was developed because studies demonstrated that when making emergency stops, about half of drivers do not press the brake quickly or hard enough to make full use of the vehicle’s braking power.

The feature can help drivers come to a stop more quickly by ensuring that the maximum braking power is applied during emergency braking. That said, if the driver is tailgating, following another vehicle too closely or is distracted, he or she will not only have less time to react, but the feature may not be able to function as intended to help avoid a collision.

Of concern, the 2011 poll revealed a minority of drivers are more likely to engage in risky driving behaviours as a result of having safety features on their vehicles. One explanation for this phenomenon is “behavioural adaptation,” meaning that some drivers will modify their driving habits in response to new information about traffic and vehicle safety features that they think influences crash risk.

The problematic end result is some drivers may drive less carefully because they believe they are safer.

As evidence of this, when respondents were asked whether or not they would drink and drive if their vehicle was equipped with modern safety features, 7.5% of those polled said they would be likely or very likely to do so, compared to 3.2% who reported that they currently often drink and drive.

Other examples of behavioural adaptation noted in the findings include that 13.1% of drivers said they would be likely to tailgate others if their vehicle had safety features, and 20% responded they would be likely to drive while tired or fatigued if their vehicle had safety features. These self-reported freque ncy ratings represent telling increases from the number of drivers who currently admit to tailgating or driving while fatigued, namely 8.6% and 16.0%, respectively.

To improve knowledge and awareness among Canadians, TIRF has partnered with the TCF to create BrainonBoard.ca, a web-based program. Also available in French, the program offers information about vehicle safety features, and how to maximize the protection they provide by combining them with safe driving behaviours.

To accrue the potential crash-avoidance benefits of safety features, it is critical that drivers know what safety features are available on their vehicles and what they do. Some organizations have proposed that the need for auto insurance may diminish as a result of advanced vehicle safety features among other factors. But the two polls suggest more work is needed to increase knowledge and awareness among Canadian drivers in order for significant reductions in crashes to become a reality.