ABSTRACT
Of all safety-pertinent interventions, seat-belts have been regarded as particularly efficacious. Seat-belts reduce fatalities by over 40% in comparisons between belted and unbelted occupants of the same vehicles. Interventions may be followed by less cautious driving, an effect known as behavioural adaptation. Thus, the advantages of antilock braking (ABS) are lost after three-years’ using vehicles so-equipped. Fuller suggests that driving is mainly shaped by positive reinforcement, leading to dangerous driving behaviours. Collision is likely to be the main source of negative reinforcement, since it entails tangible damage and injury. The negative reinforcement contingencies associated with sharp braking differ according to whether or not a seat-belt is worn. The seat-belt user suffers much less motion within the interior of the automobile than does the seat-belt non-user and will avoid looming. The present conditioning model explains why seat-belt non-use leads to slower driving behaviours compared with seat-belt use: looming is present in the former to act as a powerful negative reinforcer.
