Improving self-report measures of speeding

There is continuing debate regarding the psychometric properties of self-report measures of behaviour, particularly in road safety research. Practical considerations often preclude the use of objective assessments, leading to reliance on self-report measures. Acknowledging that such measures are likely to remain commonly used, this pilot project sought not to argue whether self-report measures should continue to be used, but to explore factors associated with how individuals respond to self-reported speeding measures. This paper reports preliminary findings from a qualitative study (focus groups and in-depth interviews) conducted with licensed drivers to explore the operational utility of self-reported speeding behaviour measures. Drawing upon concepts from the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991) and Agency Theory (Bandura, 2001), we identified four dimensions of self-reported speeding: including timeframe, speed zone, degree over the speed limit and, overall frequency of the behaviour, and examined participants’ perceptions of the operational utility of these factors. Issues related to comprehensibility, perceived accuracy, response format and layout were also explored. Results indicated that: heterogeneity in the timeframe of behavioural reflections suggests a need to provide a set timeframe for participants to consider when thinking about their previous speeding behaviour; response categories and formats should be carefully considered to ensure the most accurate representations of the frequency and degree of speeding are captured; the need to clearly articulate “low-level” speeding on self-report measures; and, that self-reports of speeding behaviour are typically context-irrelevant unless stipulated in the question. Limitations and directions for further research are discussed