1005 N. GLEBE RD. ARLINGTON, VA 22201-4751 PHONE 703/247-1500 FAX 703/247-1678email iihs@highwaysafety.org website http://www.highwaysafety.org

INSURANCE INSTITUTEFOR HIGHWAY SAFETY

January 19, 2001

The Honorable Clyde J. Hart, Jr.Acting Deputy AdministratorFederal Motor Carrier Safety AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation400 Seventh Street, S.W.Washington, D.C. 20590

49 CFR Part 395Comments on Hours of Service of Commercial Driversfrom the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

Docket No. FMCSA 97-2350

Dear Mr. Hart:

Enclosed please find a report on a national public opinion survey,sponsored by the Insurance Research Council, relevant to the Federal MotorCarrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) hours-of-service rulemaking. Youmay contact Elizabeth Sprinkel, Senior Vice President at the InsuranceResearch Council directly should you have any questions about the survey.One noteworthy finding is that a majority of survey respondents said theywould be willing to pay more for goods and shipping to enable truck driversto work no more than 12 hours a day. The percentage cost increases deemedacceptable by the respondents ranged from 1 percent to more than 10percent. This suggests that most Americans believe a daily work hour limitof 12 hours for truck drivers would be worth the costs it incurred.

In addition, 69 percent of respondents supported FMCSA’s proposedrequirement for electronic data recorders to monitor driving hours oftruck drivers. However, 57 percent of respondents did not think theproposed increase in permissible consecutive driving hours, from a 10-hourto a 12-hour driving limit, would be safe, even if the drivers had 12 hoursof rest per day. When developing the final hours-of-service rule, publicsupport for the proposal and the public’s willingness to pay additionalcosts should be considered.

Sincerely,

Elisa R. Braver, Ph.D.Senior Epidemiologist

cc: The Honorable Rodney Slater Docket Clerk, Docket No. FHWA 97-2350

Enclosure

718 Providence Road ■ P.O. Box 3025 ■ Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355-0725www.ircweb.org

Public Attitude Monitor 2000

Cellular Phones • Truck Safety • Uninsured Mororists

Issue 3

PublicAttitudeMonitor2000

Cellular PhonesTrucks andHighway SafetyUninsured Motorists

Executive Summary

More People Own Cellular Phones

Most of the Public Believes ThatUse of Cellular Phones While DrivingDistracts Drivers

Over Two-Thirds of the Public FavorsLaws to Ban Cellular Phone UseWhile Driving

Over Half of the Public OpposesIncreasing the Number of Hours a TruckDriver May Drive at a Stretch

Many Americans Favor ElectronicRecorders to Monitor Drive Time onTrucks and Few Support an Increase inTruck Size

AcknowledgmentsThis survey was conducted by Roper Starch Worldwide, Inc., on behalf of theInsurance Research Council (IRC). The IRC conducts public policy researchfor the property-casualty insurance industry. The survey was formulated anddirected by the IRC’s Public Attitude Monitor Committee.

Numerous individuals on the staff of the American Institute contributed to thesuccess of this project: Elizabeth Sprinkel, Victoria Kilgore, Catherine Higgins,Adam Carmichael, Anne Swigart, Karen Gerace, Diane Epstein, and VirginiaRichter. To all these individuals and organizations, the IRC extends its thanksand appreciation.

Public Attitude Monitor 2000 CommitteeLarry Alan, Nationwide Insurance EnterpriseLynn Phillips Andersen, Liberty Mutual GroupAnn Durand, State Farm Insurance CompaniesSusan Ferguson, Insurance Institute for Highway SafetySharon Heard, Farmers Insurance GroupLarry E. Kibbee, Alliance of American InsurersKim MacDonald, National Association of Independent InsurersSusan Ohm, United Services Automobile AssociationDonna Rosemeyer, Allstate Insurance Company

Insurance Research CouncilDecember 2000

This report, Public Attitude Monitor 2000, Issue 3, is available from theInsurance Research Council, a division of the American Institute forChartered Property Casualty Underwriters, 718 Providence Road,P.O. Box 3025, Malvern, PA 19355-0725, telephone 610.644.2212,fax 610.640.5388, internet www.ircweb.org.

© Copyright 2000, Insurance Research CouncilAll Rights ReservedISBN 1-56594-059-8

PublicAttitudeMonitor

2000

1

Executive Summary

This third issue of the Insurance Research Council’s Public AttitudeMonitor 2000 (PAM) report examines the public’s opinion about cellularphones and driving, large trucks and highway safety, and householdownership of vehicles that are uninsured.

The first part of this report examines the characteristics of cellularphone owners. The survey asks owners a series of questions about use of acellular phone while driving and queries all respondents about whetherthey think cellular phone use distracts drivers. It concludes by askingrespondents their attitude toward proposed restrictions on cellular phoneswhile driving and the potential effectiveness of safety campaigns oncellular phones and driving.

The second part of the report asks respondents their attitude towardproposed changes in regulations that govern long-haul truck drivers.Respondents were asked to evaluate two drive-time options in terms ofhighway safety and effect on driver fatigue: the current 18-hour cycle,which allows up to 10 hours of driving after 8 consecutive hours off duty,or a proposed 24-hour cycle, which allows up to 12 hours of driving after12 hours off duty. Would the public be willing to pay more for goods andservices so that drivers worked no more than 12 hours in one day? Wouldthey support regulations that required electronic data recorders to monitordrive time or allowed bigger tractor-trailers in order to increase efficiency?Finally, what is respondents’ experience with highway safety and trucks:how often have they observed trucks being driven unsafely, what unsafeactions have they observed, and what driving strategies do they use whenthey encounter large trucks on the highway to promote safety?

The final part of the report asks motorists how many licensed vehiclesare owned or leased for personal use by members of their household andhow many of these vehicles are uninsured.

The results presented in this report are based on a survey conducted byRoper Starch Worldwide, Inc., in September 2000. The survey consisted oftelephone interviews with 1,000 respondents 18 years of age and older. Amore detailed description of the methodology and a copy of the surveyquestionnaire with results are included at the end of this report.

PublicAttitudeMonitor

2000

2

Major Findings❒ Almost half (46 percent) of PAM respondents owned a cellular

phone in 2000, almost double the one-quarter of PAM respon-dents who were cellular-phone owners in 1997. Ownershipincreased in every age, educational, income, and regional cat-egory. The increases were especially dramatic among the young(up 150 percent), among those without high-school degrees, andamong those with incomes under $20,000 (both up 300 percent).

❒ Even as cellular phone ownership expanded, self-reported usewhile driving declined. In 2000, 42 percent of owners told inter-viewers that they use their cellular phone at least “sometimes”while driving, compared to 61 percent in 1997. Despite thisdecline, because of the increase in ownership, use while drivingincreased four percentage points among the population. Addi-tional surveys will be necessary to evaluate whether the 2000PAM responses reflect a recent behavioral change, indicating thatcellular phone owners really are using their phones less whiledriving, or whether widespread publicity about the risk of cellularphone use while driving produced a bias toward socially desirableresponses to this question among many respondents.

❒ The vast majority of those who use their cellular phone whiledriving use a hand-held as opposed to a hands-free model (81percent vs. 19 percent). The major reasons for cellular phone useinclude: to discuss business (44 percent), to keep track of familymembers (28 percent), casual conversation (23 percent), and tomake appointments (10 percent).

❒ More than nine in ten respondents (91 percent) agreed that the useof cellular phones while driving distracts drivers and increases thelikelihood of accidents. Between 1997 and 2000, the percentagewho agreed that cellular phones distract drivers increased in everyage group, with the greatest increase (15 percentage points)among the young, those aged 18 to 24. In 2000, 89 percent ofcellular phone owners and 83 percent of owners who “fre-quently,” “often,” or “sometimes” use a phone while drivingagreed that use while driving distracts drivers.

❒ More than two-thirds (69 percent) of the respondents favor lawsto ban cellular phone use while driving, but only one-third (35percent) think it likely that people would obey a ban, and lessthan half (47 percent) think it likely that safety campaigns wouldreduce cellular phone use while driving.

❒ Even though 40 percent have “rarely” or “never” observed truck-ers driving unsafely, the public supports regulations that promotetruck-driving safety. A majority opposes (57 percent) increasing

3

the number of hours a truck driver is allowed to drive at a stretchfrom 10 to 12 hours and considers (59 percent) the current 18-hour drive cycle less fatiguing than a proposed 24-hour drivecycle. More than one-half are willing to pay more for goods andservices to restrict working time to no more than 12 hours perday; more than two-thirds (69 percent) support the installation ofelectronic recorders to enforce drive-time regulations, and only15 percent agreed that bigger tractor-trailers should be allowed toincrease the trucking industry’s efficiency. The public does notbelieve that a 24-hour cycle, which proponents argue requiresmore rest time than the 18-hour cycle even though it allows moredriving at one stretch, would reduce driver fatigue and thusincrease truck safety.

❒ More than nine in ten Americans (92 percent) own or lease a carfor personal use. The percentage of households with at least oneuninsured car dropped from a two-decade high of 17 percent in1997 to 12 percent in 2000, one percentage point below where itstood in 1980.

Use of Cellular Phones and Highway SafetyFirst introduced in the mid-1980s, cellular phone service exploded

during the 1990s as the size and cost of the units shrank and their safetyand convenience were recognized. By November 2000, an estimated 100million persons, more than one-third of the U.S. population, subscribed toa cellular phone service.1 Concern about cellular phone use while drivingalso increased with both scholarly and anecdotal reports that such usecontributes to motor vehicle accidents both in the U.S. and abroad.2 Inresponse, bills were proposed in more than 20 states and passed by severallocal governments to restrict or prohibit the use of cellular phones whiledriving.3

Figure 3-1 compares the characteristics of PAM respondents whoreported that they owned a cellular phone in the 1997 and 2000 surveys.4

The percentage of respondents who reported that they owned a cellularphone increased from 25 percent in 1997 to 46 percent in 2000. In 2000,47 percent of male respondents and 46 percent of female respondents saidthat they owned a cellular phone.

1 Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, “WOW-COM’s World of Wireless Communications.”World Wide Web: http://www.wow-com.com, November 2000.

2 Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, Cellular Phone Use While Driving: Risks and Benefits, July 2000,Section 3, pp. 14-38; National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, An Investigation of the SafetyImplications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles, 1997, Chapter 6, p. 7. World Wide Web: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/research/wireless, November 2000.

3 National Conference of State Legislatures, “Cell Phones and Driving: 1999 State Legislative Update.”World Wide Web: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/esnr/celphone.htm, November 2000; Harvard Center forRisk Analysis, pp. 59-63.

4 Insurance Research Council, Public Attitude Monitor 1997, December 1997, pp. 2-4.

4

Ownership increased in every age, educational, income, and regionalcategory. Between 1997 and 2000, the percentage of adults aged 18 to 24who said they owned a cellular phone increased more than 150 percent,from 17 percent to 43 percent, and the percentage of adults aged 65 andolder who owned a cellular phone increased more than 200 percent, from11 percent to 34 percent. Although ownership remained lowest amongthose in the lowest education and income groups, ownership increasedmore than 300 percent among those without high-school degrees, from 6percent in 1997 to 28 percent in 2000, and among those with incomesunder $20,000, from 6 percent to 24 percent of respondents. By 2000,almost three-fourths (74 percent) of those with an income of $75,000 ormore per year and almost half (49 percent) of those with incomes between

Figure 3-1Cellular Phone Ownership

1997 2000

Number Percent Number Percent

Owns a cellular phone 2,094 25% 1,000 46%

SexMale 1,003 25 481 47

Female 1,091 25 519 46

Age18-24 268 17 143 4325-34 425 28 180 4235-44 471 32 222 5645-54 358 31 178 5555-64 228 25 106 43

65 and Older 343 11 169 34

EducationNon High School Graduate 323 ␣ ␣ 6 174 28

High School Graduate 740 20 314 39Some College 523 26 266 52

College Graduate/␣ ␣Postgraduate 506 42 229 64

IncomeUnder $20,000 409 ␣ ␣ 6 147 24

$20,000 - $39,999 555 22 221 39$40,000 - $74,999 468 38 267 49$75,000 and Over 189 54 183 74

RegionNortheast 419 21 194 47

Midwest 488 32 230 49South 739 24 354 41West 448 22 222 51

Vehicle OwnerYes 1,853 27 918 48No 241 ␣ ␣ 6 82 29

5

$40,000 and $74,999 per year owned a cellular phone. Between 1997 and2000, cellular phone ownership among those living in the western regionjumped from 22 percent to 51 percent, and among vehicle owners, from 27percent to 48 percent, an increase of 78 percent.

More than half (55 percent) of respondents to the 2000 PAM lived inhouseholds in which at least one person owned a cellular phone. Figure3-2 illustrates household differences in phone ownership by respondent’sincome level. Among those with incomes of $75,000 or more per year, 21percent lived in households in which no one owned a cellular phone, 33percent lived in households in which one person owned a cellular phone,and 46 percent lived in households in which two or more persons owned acellular phone. In contrast, among those with incomes under $20,000 peryear, 69 percent lived in households where no one owned a cellular phone,20 percent lived in households with one cellular phone, and 9 percent livedin households with two or more cellular phones.

Despite the broad increase in ownership, the percentage of cellularphone owners who said they used their phone while driving declined. In1997, 61 percent of cellular phone owners said they used their phone whiledriving “frequently,” “often,” or “sometimes,” compared to 42 percent ofcellular phone owners in 2000 (Figure 3-3). However, because of theincrease in cellular phone ownership, use while driving increased fourpercentage points among the total population.

Among those who own a cellular phone and use it at least “sometimes”while driving, 81 percent used a hand-held model and 19 percent used a

Figure 3-2Number of Cellular Phones Within Household

by Income

6

hands-free model (Figure 3-4). The 1997 survey did not ask owners abouttype of cellular phone, so comparative data are not available, but techno-logical innovations, commercial opportunities, and safety concerns suggestthat the use of hands-free models while driving will increase.5

The major reasons for using a cellular phone while driving varied bygender (Figure 3-5). Fifty-eight percent of men, compared to 28 percent ofwomen, used their phone to discuss business. In contrast, 37 percent ofwomen used it to keep track of family members, compared to 21 percent

Figure 3-3Frequency of Using a Cellular Phone

While Driving1997 and 2000 Cellular Phone Owners

Figure 3-4Type of Cellular Phone Used While Driving

5 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Chapter 1, p. 5.

7

of men. Approximately equal percentages of both genders used it forcasual conversation (23 percent overall), to make appointments (10 per-cent overall), or to report emergency situations to authorities (9 percentoverall).

The decline in use while driving coincided with an increase in thepercentage of those who believed that the use of cellular phones distractsdrivers and increases the likelihood of accidents. In 2000, 91 percent ofrespondents agreed that cellular phone use distracts drivers, up from 82percent in 1997 (Figure 3-6). Among 2000 survey respondents who agreedthat cellular phones distract drivers, 53 percent said the phones distractdrivers “a great deal,” compared to 48 percent in 1997. In 2000, 89 percentof cellular phone owners and 83 percent of owners who use a phone whiledriving “frequently,” “often,” or “sometimes” agreed that use while drivingdistracts drivers.

Figure 3-7 indicates that between 1997 and 2000, the drop in use whiledriving and the increase in the percentage who believed that cellularphones distract drivers occurred in every age category. For example,among cellular phone owners aged 18 to 24, 48 percent reported that they

Figure 3-5Most Common Reasons for Using a Cellular

Phone While DrivingBy gender

Note: Multiple responses were allowed. All responses were volunteered.

8

used a cellular phone while driving in 2000 compared to 82 percent in1997. Among the same age group, the number of those who believed thatusing cellular phones distracts drivers increased from 72 percent in 1997to 87 percent in 2000. Among those aged 65 and older, usage while driv-ing dropped from 32 percent in 1997 to 17 percent in 2000, and belief thatusage distracts drivers increased from 86 percent to 95 percent, represent-ing almost the entire sample. In the 2000 survey, no more than half of thesample in any age group said that they use cellular phones at least “some-times” while driving, and at least 90 percent in four out of the six agegroups said they thought that cellular phones distract drivers.

Other recent surveys have reported that between 80 and 90 percent ofcellular phone owners use their phones while driving at least some of thetime. A 1999 industry survey that asked about the duration of calls whiledriving found that only 10 percent of respondents said they did not use the

Figure 3-6Attitudes Toward Cellular Phones and Driving

Does the use of cellular phones in carsdistract drivers?

…by how much?*

*Includes only respondents who agreed that use of cellular phones distracts drivers.

9

phone while driving.6 A government survey conducted in early 1997 thatasked “on how many trips” respondents used their phone found that 11percent indicated they “never” use the phone while driving.7 Althoughthese surveys were phrased differently and were conducted in differentyears, the results are consistent with each other. The 2000 PAM surveyfound double the percentage of respondents (24 percent) reporting thatthey never used a cellular phone while driving. Additional surveys will benecessary to determine whether the 2000 PAM responses reflect a recentbehavior change, indicating that cellular phone owners really are usingtheir phones less while driving, or whether widespread publicity about therisk of cellular phone use while driving produced a bias toward sociallydesirable responses to this question among many respondents.

Sixty-nine percent of respondents indicated they favor (either “strongly”or “somewhat”) laws to ban cellular phone use while driving (Figure 3-8).Support for a ban varied by cellular phone ownership, with 65 percent ofowners favoring a ban, compared to 73 percent of nonowners. However,only 35 percent of the total thought it “somewhat” or “very” likely thatpeople would obey a cellular phone and driving ban, and less than half ofthe sample (47 percent) thought it “somewhat” or “very” likely that safetycampaigns would successfully reduce cellular phone use while driving.Cellular phone owners and nonowners did not differ in their responses toeither of these two questions.

Figure 3-7Age and the Use of a Cellular Phone

While Driving

6 Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, p. 13.7 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Chapter 2, p. 10.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

10

Trucks and Highway SafetyAlthough they constitute only 3 percent of all registered vehicles, large

trucks accounted for 13 percent of all traffic fatalities in 1999.8 During the1990s, approximately 5,000 persons died and more than 110,000 receivednonfatal injuries in large-truck crashes each year. The Department ofTransportation (DOT) estimates that fatigue is either a primary or second-ary factor in 15 percent of fatal large-truck crashes. To reduce fatigue-related crashes, the DOT proposed in May 2000 that the rules governinglong-haul truck drivers, which have been in effect in their present formsince 1962, be revised.9

Current regulations that govern the hours in a day (called “hours ofservice” or HOS) that long-haul truck drivers may work are based on an18-hour cycle; they allow up to 10 hours of driving after 8 consecutivehours off duty or 16 hours of driving within any 24-hour period. The newregulations would be based on a 24-hour cycle. They would allow up to 12hours of driving and require at least 12 hours off duty within a 24-hourcycle. The government argues that because the new cycle would permitmore sleep and reduce the maximum number of hours within a 24-hourcycle that a driver can be behind the wheel from 16 to 12 hours, it wouldreduce fatigue-related crashes.10 To strengthen enforcement of HOSregulations, the government would replace drivers’ paper logs—which

Figure 3-8Attitudes Toward a Ban on Cellular Phone Use

While Driving

8 U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, “Early Assessmentof 1999 Crashes, Injuries, and Fatalities,” 2000. World Wide Web: http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/ncsa/reports/2000/99summary.html, November 2000.

9 “Hours of Service of Drivers; Driver Rest and Sleep for Safe Operations,” Federal Register, vol. 65, no.85, May 2, 2000, 25546 (49 CFR Parts 350 et al.).

10 Ibid., 25554-6.

11

both survey and anecdotal evidence suggest are often inaccurate11—withelectronic on-board recorders.

The proposed changes are controversial. Citing research that shows thatafter eight hours the capacity to drive safely declines substantially, high-way safety groups oppose the drive-time extension but support the elec-tronic recorders and increased off-duty time.12 The trucking industrycontends that work rule changes and the addition of electronic recorderswould cost $19.1 billion over 10 years—$15.7 billion more than thegovernment’s estimate—almost certainly bankrupting smaller carriers andincreasing the cost of truck-hauled goods.13

Respondents were asked two questions related to drive time and drive

11 E. R. Braver et al., “Long Hours and Fatigue: A Survey of Tractor-Trailer Drivers,” Journal of PublicHealth Policy, vol. 13, 341-366; A. T. McCartt et al., “Work and Sleep/Rest Factors Associated withDriving while Drowsy: Experiences Among Long-Distance Truck Drivers,” 41st Annual Proceedings ofthe Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, pp. 95-108.

12 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, “Status Report: Truck Safety,” vol. 35, no. 9, October 21, 2000,pp.1-3; “Status Report: Truck Driver Fatigue,” vol. 32, no. 8, July 26, 1997, p. 5.

13 National Economic Research Associates, “A Review of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’sEconomic Analysis for its Proposed Hours of Service Standard,” prepared for the American TruckingAssociations, August 3, 2000, p. 36; J. D. Schulz, “Dire Consequences: ‘Very Sick’ Trucking IndustrySays HOS Proposal Would Lead to Inflation, Fleet Closings.” World Wide Web: http://www.trafficworld.com/news/feature/index.html, October 2000.

Figure 3-9The Public Believes It Is Not Safe to Increase

Truckers’ Driving TimeNot Safe for Truckersto Drive 12 Hours at 18-Hour Cycle Is Less

Total One Stretch Fatiguing

GenderMale 428 51% 54%

Female 572 63 63

Age18-24 113 41 5125-34 180 54 5835-44 218 56 5745-54 201 60 5955-64 113 61 69

65 and Older 174 70 61

IncomeUnder $20,000 118 58 55

$20,000 - $39,999 205 52 59$40,000 - $74,999 288 60 63$75,000 or More 206 55 52

RegionNortheast 205 62 65

Midwest 301 59 62South 348 52 51West 146 58 61

Total 1,000 57 59

12

cycles: first, whether it is safe to increase the number of hours a truckdriver is allowed to drive at a stretch from 10 to 12 hours with 12 hours ofrest; and second, which repeating cycle is less fatiguing for drivers, an 18-hour cycle of 10 hours driving and 8 hours off, or a 24-hour cycle of 12hours driving and 12 hours off. Responses are shown in Figure 3-9. Fifty-seven percent said it is not safe for truckers to drive 12 hours at onestretch, and 59 percent believed that an 18-hour cycle is less fatiguing thana 24-hour cycle. Women were more likely than men (63 percent versus 51percent) and persons older than age 25 were more likely than those aged18 to 24 (60 percent versus 41 percent) to believe that it was unsafe fortruckers to drive 12 hours at one stretch.

The cost of reducing truckers’ driving time was a concern to only aboutone-third of the sample. Only 32 percent of respondents indicated theywould not be willing to pay more for goods and shipping to have truckerswork no more than 12 hours in a single day (Figure 3-10). Eighteenpercent of the sample said they would be willing to pay an additional 1percent for goods and shipping, 18 percent would pay 3 percent more, 12percent would pay 5 percent more, 8 percent would pay 10 percent ormore, and 12 percent did not know. Thirty-seven percent of men, com-pared to 28 percent of women, indicated they would not pay more forgoods and services to support shorter trucker-driving hours.

Respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with two

Figure 3-10Opinions on the Cost of Reducing

Truckers’ Work HoursHow much more respondents would be willing to pay

for goods and shipping so that truck driverscould work no more than 12 hours per day

13

questions relating to trucking regulations: one, whether electronic datarecorders should be required to monitor compliance with HOS limits, andtwo, whether bigger trucks should be allowed in order to increase effi-ciency. More than two-thirds (69 percent) agreed “strongly” or “some-what” that data recorders on large trucks should be required (Figure 3-11).Support for data recorders was consistent across gender, age, income, andregional differences. Conversely, only 15 percent agreed (either “strongly”or “somewhat”) that bigger tractor-trailers should be allowed in order toincrease the trucking industry’s efficiency. Here there was an age differ-ence: 22 percent of respondents aged 34 and younger agreed that biggertrailers should be allowed, compared to only 11 percent among those 35and older.

The survey found an almost even spread of opinion on the prevalence ofunsafe truck driving. When asked how often they observed a large truckbeing operated in an unsafe manner, 39 percent indicated “rarely” or “never”;33 percent, “sometimes”; and 27 percent, “frequently” or “fairly often”(Figure 3-12). Unsafe actions that they had observed included: changinglanes recklessly (35 percent), speeding (33 percent), tailgating (19 per-cent), running red lights (3 percent), and reckless driving (2 percent).

Studies suggest, however, that passenger-vehicle drivers may not alwaysdrive appropriately around large trucks. In two-vehicle crashes involving alarge truck and a passenger vehicle, police officers cited driver-relatedcrash factors for passenger-vehicle drivers 82 percent of the time but only26 percent of the time for truck drivers.14 The five factors most often citedwere identical for both types of vehicles, but the percentages for passen-ger-vehicle drivers were much larger, ranging from running off the road orout of a traffic lane (28 percent versus 5 percent) to inattentive (10 percent

Figure 3-11Opinions on Large Trucks

14 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. Large Truck Crash Profile: The 1998 National Picture,January 2000, pp. 19-20. World Wide Web: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/pdfs/Profile98.pdf, November 2000.

14

versus 3 percent). Strategies that PAM respondents use when drivingaround large trucks “always” or “most of the time” include: staying farenough behind large trucks to remain visible in the driver’s mirrors (93percent of respondents); leaving extra space when moving in front of alarge truck (90 percent); moving away from large trucks when next tothem on the road (66 percent); changing lanes if behind a large truck (48percent); speeding up around large trucks to get around them quickly (42percent); and changing lanes if in front of a large truck (31 percent) (Fig-ure 3-13).

In summary, even though almost 40 percent have “rarely” or “never”observed truckers driving unsafely, the public—as measured by this survey—supports and is willing to pay for regulations that promote truck-drivingsafety. Almost three-fourths support the installation of electronic recordersto enforce drive-time regulations and no increase in the size of tractor-trailers. More than one-half would pay more for goods and services to

Figure 3-12How Often Respondents Observe a Large Truck

Operated in an Unsafe Manner

Most CommonUnsafe Actions Observed

Note: Multiple responses were allowed.All responses were volunteered.

15

restrict working time to no more than 12 hours a day. A similar percentagefails to support an increase in the number of hours a truck driver is allowedto drive at a stretch from 10 to 12 hours, even with 12 hours of rest a day.The public does not believe that the 24-hour cycle, which proponentsargue requires more rest time than the 18-hour cycle even though it allowsmore driving at one stretch, would reduce driver fatigue and thus increasetruck safety.

Uninsured Vehicles per HouseholdNinety-two percent of the respondents to this survey own or lease a car

for personal use, up from 88 percent in 1997. The percentage of house-holds with at least one uninsured car dropped from a two-decade high of17 percent reported both in 1996 and 1997 to 12 percent in 2000, onepercentage point below where it stood in 1980 (Figure 3-14). The percent-age of households reporting uninsured vehicles fluctuated between 6 and17 percent in the 1990s, possibly because of changes in survey methodol-ogy (face-to-face vs. telephone interviews), reordering of survey questions,and changes in survey content.

Because they are based on self-report, these survey findings are consideredless reliable than insurance claims data in estimating the uninsured motoristpopulation. A forthcoming IRC report examines the ratio of Uninsured

Figure 3-13Driving around Large TrucksPercentage of respondents who…

16

Motorist to Bodily Injury Liability claim frequencies to derive a measure ofthe uninsured driver population that can be compared across states and years.The study estimates that between 1989 and 1997, the population of uninsureddrivers in the United States averaged 15 percent.15

Figure 3-15 shows differences in the number of vehicles and uninsured

Figure 3-14Vehicle Owners With One or More

Uninsured VehiclesPer household

Figure 3-15Number of Vehicles and Uninsured Vehicles per Household

By respondent’s income level

15 Insurance Research Council, Uninsured Motorists, 2000.

17

vehicles per household by respondent’s income level. The number ofvehicles per household increased with each income category, and thenumber of uninsured vehicles decreased from the lowest to highest incomegroups, with fluctuation in the middle-income groups. Those with anannual income of under $20,000 per year averaged 1.40 vehicles perhousehold and 0.30 uninsured vehicles per household. At the other end ofthe scale, those with an annual income of $75,000 or more per year aver-aged 2.88 cars per household but only 0.18 uninsured vehicles per house-hold. Higher-income respondents were more likely to own more cars andfewer uninsured cars than lower-income respondents.

18

MethodologyThis report presents the results of a study commissioned by the Insur-

ance Research Council and conducted by Roper Starch Worldwide, Inc.Telephone interviews were conducted between September 6 and 16, 2000,with 1,000 American men and women respondents 18 years old and older.

The sample interviewed in this study is a representative sample of thepopulation of the continental United States, aged 18 and older, exclusiveof institutionalized segments of the population. The sampling methodol-ogy employed is a multistage, stratified probability sample of interviewinglocations. The data were weighted to correct for any sampling imbalances.

The margin of error for the total sample is plus or minus three percent-age points at the 95 percent confidence level. The margin of error at thesubgroup level is higher.

19

Survey Questions With ResultsPercentages may not add up to 100 because of rounding or multiple responses. The base (N) for

each question is 1,000 unless otherwise noted. An asterisk (*) represents a value of 0.5 percent orless.

Hello, I am ______________ from Roper Starch Worldwide, a national public opinion researchfirm. We are conducting a very important survey about some public policy issues. May I pleasespeak to the youngest adult male—at least 18—who lives there and is home now? (IF NO MALEAVAILABLE: May I please speak to the oldest adult female—at least 18—who lives there and ishome now?)

†Indicates questions asked in 1997 PAM.

1. I am going to ask you some questions regarding cellular phones. First, do you own a cellphone?†

Yes ............................................................................................................. 46%

No .............................................................................................................. 54%

2. How many members of your household have a cell phone?

None .......................................................................................................... 45%

One ............................................................................................................ 31%

Two ............................................................................................................ 17%

Three ............................................................................................................ 4%

Four .............................................................................................................. 2%

Five ................................................................................................................. *

More than five ............................................................................................. 1%

Don’t know ..................................................................................................... *

3. [IF YES TO Q1] How often would you say that you use your cell phone while driving?†

Frequently .................................................................................................. 13%

Fairly often ................................................................................................. 8%

Sometimes ................................................................................................. 21%

Rarely ........................................................................................................ 33%

Never ......................................................................................................... 24%

Don’t drive...................................................................................................... *

Don’t know ..................................................................................................... *

N=465

20

4. [If “Frequently,” “Fairly often,” or “Sometimes” to Q3] Which type of cell phone do youtypically use while driving, hand-held or hands-free?

Hand-held ........................................................................................................ 81%

Hands-free ....................................................................................................... 19%

N=196

5. [If “Frequently,” “Fairly often,” or “Sometimes” to Q3] What are the most common reasonsyou talk on the phone while driving? [ALL RESPONSES VOLUNTEERED, MULTIPLERESPONSES ALLOWED]

Discuss business matters ................................................................................. 44%

Keep track of family members ........................................................................ 28%

Casual conversation/chat ................................................................................. 23%

Make/confirm/cancel appointments ................................................................ 10%

Report emergency situations to authorities ....................................................... 9%

Other .................................................................................................................. 2%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 1%

N=196

6. Some lawmakers have suggested laws to ban using cell phones while driving. Tell mewhich best describes your opinion about these potential laws. Do you strongly favor, some-what favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose these laws?

Strongly favor .................................................................................................. 42%

Somewhat favor ............................................................................................... 27%

Somewhat oppose ............................................................................................ 16%

Strongly oppose ............................................................................................... 11%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 4%

7. If such a law were passed in your area, how likely do you think it is that people would obeyit most of the time? Is it very likely, somewhat likely, somewhat unlikely, or very unlikely?

Very likely ......................................................................................................... 8%

Somewhat likely .............................................................................................. 26%

Somewhat unlikely .......................................................................................... 27%

Very unlikely ................................................................................................... 34%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 5%

21

8. Do you think that the use of cell phones in cars distracts drivers and increases the likelihoodof accidents?†

Yes ................................................................................................................... 91%

No ...................................................................................................................... 8%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 2%

9. [IF YES TO Q8] To what extent do you think that the use of cell phones distracts driversand increases the likelihood of accidents?†

A great deal ...................................................................................................... 53%

Somewhat ........................................................................................................ 40%

Not much ........................................................................................................... 5%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 1%

N=906

10. How do you think that most people would respond to safety campaigns warning drivers thatit is dangerous to conduct cell phone conversations while driving in traffic? Would you saythat it is very likely, somewhat likely, somewhat unlikely, or very unlikely that most peoplewould reduce cell phone use while driving?

Very likely ....................................................................................................... 10%

Somewhat likely .............................................................................................. 37%

Somewhat unlikely .......................................................................................... 25%

Very unlikely ................................................................................................... 25%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 3%

11. Are you a licensed driver?†

Yes ................................................................................................................... 92%

No ...................................................................................................................... 8%

12. [IF YES TO Q11] Cars and large trucks share the same roads. Please tell me how well eachof the following statements describes the way that you drive around large trucks. Do youdrive this way always, most of the time, occasionally, or never?

N=920

a. I move away from large trucks if I am next to one on the road.

Always ....................................................................................................... 38%

Most of the time......................................................................................... 28%

Occasionally .............................................................................................. 20%

Never ......................................................................................................... 13%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 2%

22

b. I change lanes if I find myself in back of a large truck.

Always ....................................................................................................... 24%

Most of the time......................................................................................... 24%

Occasionally .............................................................................................. 35%

Never ......................................................................................................... 15%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 2%

c. I change lanes if a large truck is in back of me.

Always ....................................................................................................... 16%

Most of the time......................................................................................... 15%

Occasionally .............................................................................................. 32%

Never ......................................................................................................... 36%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 1%

d. I speed up when I’m near large trucks so I can get around them quickly.

Always ....................................................................................................... 21%

Most of the time......................................................................................... 21%

Occasionally .............................................................................................. 33%

Never ......................................................................................................... 24%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 1%

e. I leave extra space when I move in front of a large truck.

Always ....................................................................................................... 71%

Most of the time......................................................................................... 19%

Occasionally ................................................................................................ 5%

Never ........................................................................................................... 4%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 1%

f. When driving behind a large truck, I try to stay back far enough for the driver to see mein his/her mirrors.

Always ....................................................................................................... 74%

Most of the time......................................................................................... 19%

Occasionally ................................................................................................ 5%

Never ........................................................................................................... 2%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 1%

23

13. How often would you say that you observe a large truck being operated in an unsafe man-ner? Would you say this occurs frequently, fairly often, sometimes, rarely, or never?

Frequently ........................................................................................................ 14%

Fairly often ...................................................................................................... 13%

Sometimes ....................................................................................................... 33%

Rarely .............................................................................................................. 31%

Never ................................................................................................................. 8%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 2%

14. What type of unsafe actions by large-truck drivers do you see most often? [ALL RE-SPONSES VOLUNTEERED, MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED]

Changing lanes recklessly ............................................................................... 35%

Speeding .......................................................................................................... 33%

Tailgating ......................................................................................................... 19%

Running red lights ............................................................................................. 3%

Cutting off cars .................................................................................................. 2%

Driving recklessly .............................................................................................. 2%

Discourteous driving.......................................................................................... 1%

Other .................................................................................................................. 2%

Don’t know ...................................................................................................... 12%

N=924

15. Currently, truck drivers are allowed to drive no more than 10 hours at a stretch beforetaking an 8-hour break. The U.S. Department of Transportation would like to change therules to allow drivers to drive up to 12 hours at a stretch and also require drivers to take 12hours off each day. Some say that increasing the required rest period from 8 hours to 12hours would increase safety. Others say that allowing the 12-hour driving shifts, instead oflimiting drivers to 10-hour driving shifts, would be unsafe. Please tell me your opinionregarding driving shifts of truck drivers.

a. Do you think it is safe to increase the number of hours a truck driver is allowed to driveat a stretch from 10 hours to 12 hours if they rest 12 hours a day?

Yes ............................................................................................................. 34%

No .............................................................................................................. 57%

Don’t know .................................................................................................. 9%

24

b. Which driving schedule do you think would be less fatiguing for truck drivers: a repeat-ing 18-hour cycle of 10 hours driving and 8 hours off, or a repeating 24-hour cycle of 12hours driving and 12 hours off?

Repeating 18-hour cycle ............................................................................ 59%

Repeating 24-hour cycle ............................................................................ 32%

Don’t know ................................................................................................ 10%

16. The trucking industry says that it can operate more efficiently with longer work hours.Currently drivers can work as much as 16 hours in a single day. How much more would yoube willing to pay for goods and shipping so that truck drivers work no more than 12 hours aday: none, 1 percent, 3 percent, 5 percent, 10 percent, or more than 10 percent?

None ................................................................................................................ 32%

1 percent .......................................................................................................... 18%

3 percent .......................................................................................................... 18%

5 percent .......................................................................................................... 12%

10 percent .......................................................................................................... 5%

More than 10 percent ........................................................................................ 3%

Don’t know ...................................................................................................... 12%

17. The Department of Transportation has proposed that large trucks be required to replace paperlogs with electronic data recorders to see if drivers are complying with hours-of-service limits.Supporters say that the current driving limits are widely violated, drivers can falsify paper logs,and the recorders would make it easier to enforce the limits and be more efficient to use. Oppo-nents say these recorders would be costly and unnecessary, and would violate privacy. Please tellme how you feel about truck drivers using recorders, do you strongly agree, somewhat agree,somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree that data recorders on large trucks should be required?

Strongly agree .................................................................................................. 39%

Somewhat agree............................................................................................... 30%

Somewhat disagree .......................................................................................... 11%

Strongly disagree ............................................................................................. 12%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 8%

25

18. Tractor-trailers are currently limited to 53 feet in trailer length and 80,000 pounds grossweight. The trucking industry says that it could hire fewer drivers and operate more effi-ciently if it had longer and heavier trucks. Others say that bigger trailers are harder tocontrol and would threaten highway safety and that they increase wear and tear on roadsand bridges. What is your opinion on allowing longer and heavier trailers: do you stronglyagree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree that bigger trailers shouldbe allowed to increase the trucking industry’s efficiency?

Strongly agree .................................................................................................... 7%

Somewhat agree................................................................................................. 8%

Somewhat disagree .......................................................................................... 15%

Strongly disagree ............................................................................................. 67%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................ 4%

19. How many licensed vehicles—that is, cars, trucks, vans, jeeps, or campers—are owned orleased for personal use by members of your household?†

None .................................................................................................................. 8%

One .................................................................................................................. 23%

Two .................................................................................................................. 31%

Three ................................................................................................................ 21%

Four .................................................................................................................... 8%

Five .................................................................................................................... 5%

More than five ................................................................................................... 4%

Don’t know ........................................................................................................... *

Mean ................................................................................................................ 2.24

20. [IF ONE OR MORE IN Q19] How many vehicles in your household, if any, carry noinsurance at all?†

None ................................................................................................................ 87%

One .................................................................................................................... 7%

Two .................................................................................................................... 3%

Three .................................................................................................................. 1%

Four .................................................................................................................... 1%

Five ....................................................................................................................... *

More than five ...................................................................................................... *

Don’t know ........................................................................................................... *

Mean ................................................................................................................ 0.20

N=918

26

Now I have a few more questions for classification purposes only.

21. Please tell me the year in which you were born. [Results recoded to show age.]

18-24 ................................................................................................................ 14%

25-34 ................................................................................................................ 18%

35-44 ................................................................................................................ 22%

45-54 ................................................................................................................ 18%

55-64 ................................................................................................................ 11%

65 or older ........................................................................................................ 17%

Mean ................................................................................................................ 44.7

Median ................................................................................................................ 42

22. What is the highest level of education you have completed? [ALL RESPONSES VOLUN-TEERED.]

Less than high school graduate........................................................................ 17%

High school graduate ....................................................................................... 31%

Technical school ................................................................................................ 3%

Some college or two-year college degree ........................................................ 24%

Four-year college degree ................................................................................. 15%

Some postgraduate work/postgraduate degree .................................................. 8%

Refused .............................................................................................................. 2%

23. Finally, I’d like to read you a list of income categories. Would you please stop me when Iread the category that best describes the combined annual income of all members of thishousehold?

Under $20,000 ................................................................................................. 15%

$20,000 to under $40,000 ................................................................................ 22%

$40,000 to under $75,000 ................................................................................ 27%

$75,000 to under $100,000 .............................................................................. 10%

$100,000 and over ............................................................................................. 8%

Refused ............................................................................................................ 18%

24. Sex of respondent.

Male ................................................................................................................. 48%

Female ............................................................................................................. 52%

27

25. Census region.

Northeast .......................................................................................................... 19%

Midwest ........................................................................................................... 23%

South ................................................................................................................ 35%

West ................................................................................................................. 22%

26. Region size.

Rural ................................................................................................................ 26%

Suburbs ............................................................................................................ 47%

Urban ............................................................................................................... 26%

28

29

ListOFPUBLICATIONS718 Providence Rd. • P.O. Box 3025 • Malvern, PA 19355 • Phone: 610.644.2212 • Fax: 610.640.5388 • www.ircweb.org

Publications listed here are available from the Insurance Research Council. Please make check payable to the InsuranceResearch Council in U.S. dollars. Prices are subject to change.

Public Attitude Monitor SeriesThe IRC has conducted Public Attitude Monitor (PAM) surveys of U.S. households since 1980, measuring public attitudesand beliefs on a variety of topics related to risk and insurance. Copies are available for all editions. Cost: $10 each in the U.S.and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.

PAM 2000. Issue 1: Class Action Lawsuits, Third Party Bad Faith Lawsuits, Insurance Fraud. Issue 2: Insurance Satisfaction,General Insurance Knowledge, Banks and Insurance, Primary Seat Belt Enforcement, Red Light Cameras. Issue 3: CellularPhones, Large Trucks, Uninsured Motorists.

PAM 1999. Issue 1: Perceptions of the Risk of Natural Disaster. Issue 2: Workers Compensation Fraud, Year 2000 ComputerProblems. Issue 3: Vehicle Theft, Reducing Accidents among the Youngest and Oldest Drivers. Issue 4: Vehicle Safety Issues.PAM 1998. Issue 1: Insurer Profitability. Issue 2: Insurance Regulation, Choice in Auto Insurance.

PAM 1997. Issue 1: Domestic Violence. Issue 2: Air Bags. Issue 3: Cellular Phones, Truck Safety, Insurance Rating Factors.Issue 4: Aggressive Driving, No-Fault Auto Insurance, Uninsured Motorists, Fraud. Issue 5: Drinking and Driving, Speeding.For topics covered in earlier issues, call IRC or refer to www.ircweb.org.

Most Recent PublicationsSprains and Strains Resulting From Auto Accidents: An Analysis of Auto Insurance Claims, June 2000, 40 pages.This study, based on 1997 closed claim bodily injury liability data from Injuries in Auto Accidents: An Analysis of AutoInsurance Claims, looks at sprain and strain claimants with low injury and accident severity. Medical treatment patterns,economic losses, and reimbursements are explored among represented and nonrepresented claimants. Cost: $25 in the U.S.and $35 elsewhere, postpaid.

Business Attitude Monitor 2000, April 2000, 64 pages.The 2000 edition of the Business Attitude Monitor surveyed firms with annual sales volume of between $5 million and $100million about their attitudes toward the deregulation of commercial lines rates and forms and their satisfaction with variousaspects of their insurance experience. Cost: $25 in the U.S. and $35 elsewhere, postpaid.

Trends in Auto Injury Claims, 2000 Edition, January 2000.This report examines the frequency and severity of bodily injury, property damage, and personal injury protection claimsfrom 1980 through 1998 countrywide and by individual state. Territories within states are investigated for the period 1995through 1997. In addition, Trends in Auto Injury Claims provides information on the bodily injury to property damage claimsratio, average loss costs, and average written liability premiums. Charts and graphs of observed trends are included as well asdetailed tables of the data compiled from major statistical reporting agencies and state insurance departments; all organized ina permanent binder. Cost: $75 in the U.S. and $100 elsewhere, postpaid.Paying for Auto Injuries, September 1999, 111 pages.An excellent companion to Injuries in Auto Accidents: An Analysis of Auto Insurance Claims, this volume provides insightinto the experiences of over 5,000 auto accident victims injured between 1995 and 1998. This is a detailed analysis, includingover 100 graphs, tables and charts, of their responses to an in-depth survey on injury severity and treatment, economic lossand reimbursement, extent of disability, attorney representation, and satisfaction with settlement. Cost: $25 in the U.S., $35elsewhere, postpaid. This book updates similar surveys published by the IRC: Paying for Auto Injuries, June 1994, ($25/$35);Attorney Involvement in Auto Injury Claims, December 1988, ($25/$35); and Automobile Injuries And Their Compensa-tion In The United States, March 1979 ($35/$50). Databases are also available for purchase from the IRC.

Uninsured Motorists, August 1999, 91 pages.This study examines the extent of the uninsured motorist problem on a state-by-state basis, types and effectiveness of lawsthat encourage financial responsibility of vehicle owners, and the provisions of Uninsured Motorist laws affecting claimfrequencies and coverage costs. Cost: $25 in the U.S. and $35 elsewhere, postpaid. Also available Uninsured Motorists,October 1989, 63 pages.

Injuries in Auto Accidents: An Analysis of Auto Insurance Claims, June 1999, 179 pages.This book reports results of a countrywide survey of over 87,000 auto injury claims paid by 40 major auto insurers in 1997.It discusses characteristics of the accidents and of those injured, trends in losses incurred and payments received, incidence ofattorney involvement and its effect on claim costs, and variations by city and state in these and other factors. Comparisons are madebetween the 1997 data and similar studies conducted in 1992, 1987, and 1977. Also available: 1992 closed claim study,

30

Auto Injuries: Claiming Behavior and Its Impact on Insurance Costs, September 1994, 126 pages; Compensation for Auto-mobile Injuries in the United States, March 1989, 187 pages; and 1977 closed claim and consumer panel study, AutomobileInjuries and Their Compensation in the United States, March 1979, 254 pages plus 409 pages of tables in Vol. II. Cost for eachreport: $35 in the U.S., $50 elsewhere, postpaid. Databases from each of these studies are available for purchase from IRC.

Fighting Fraud in the Insurance Industry, Second Edition, October 1997, 72 pages.This report documents the various aspects of insurer efforts to fight fraud in the property-casualty insurance industry, includ-ing: the methods used to recognize and handle fraud, the use of SIUs, public education efforts, and fraud control spending.The study also updates information relating to companies’ expanding anti-fraud efforts in conjunction with national and stateorganizations. Cost: $10 in the U.S. and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.Homeowners Loss Patterns in Eight Cities, August 1997, 167 pages.This study demonstrates the variations in homeowners insurance loss experience across and within eight major U.S. cities andthe communities within five miles of the cities’ boundaries. The eight urban areas included in the study are Chicago, Detroit,Los Angeles, Milwaukee, New York City, New Orleans, Philadelphia, and St. Louis. The report provides detailed informationon claim counts and dollar losses by six major causes of loss—fire, lightning, and removal; liability and medical; wind andhail; water and freezing; theft; and all other causes of loss. Cost: $35 in the U.S. and $50 elsewhere, postpaid.

Automobile InsuranceFraud and Buildup in Auto Injury Claims:Pushing the Limits of the Auto Insurance System, September 1996, 110 pages.This study systematically examines fraud and buildup in private passenger auto insurance claims in the United States. Thefindings are based on approximately 12,000 bodily injury liability claims and 3,000 no-fault personal injury protection claimsclosed during the spring and summer of 1992 in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, New York,South Carolina and Texas. Cost: $25 in the U.S. and $35 elsewhere, postpaid.

Adequacy of Motor Vehicle Records in Evaluating Driver Performance, May 1991, 119 pages.A survey of 27,627 reportable auto crashes in 40 states found only 40% of them recorded on reports obtained from state motorvehicle departments. This indicates millions of accident and violation records have disappeared from public view, making itharder for prospective employers and auto insurers to identify high-risk drivers. Results are shown by state andfor 26 major cities. Cost: $18 in the U.S. and $25 elsewhere, postpaid.

Property/Liability InsuranceFairness and Balance in Residential Property Insurance:A National Survey of Homeowners’ Attitudes, October 1996, 74 pages.A national public attitude survey of over 2,000 current/previous/potential homeowners was conducted by The TarranceGroup. Specific issues examined include availability of homeowners insurance, fairness of pricing and coverage choices,disparate impact, private and government programs for underserved markets, and other challenges in urban insurancemarkets. Cost: $10 in the U.S. and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.

Motivating Safety in the Workplace, June 1995, 42 pages.This survey of approximately 3,200 small and medium businesses examines the different measures employers take to preventworkplace injury and illness. Among other topics, the report documents the measures that surveyed business owners feel aremost effective in promoting safety, what motivates them to implement the measures, and what prevents them from takingadditional preventative action. Cost: $10 in the U.S. and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.

Coastal Exposure and Community Protection,Hurricane Andrew’s Legacy, April 1995, 48 pages.This study uses data from coastal counties in the 18 states along the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico to document populationand insured exposure increases from 1980 through 1993. The devastation of Hurricane Andrew is analyzed to show the strengthsand weaknesses of current building codes, practices, and enforcement, and to make recommendations for improvement. Computermodels are presented which estimate potential losses from future hurricanes. Cost: $10 in the U.S. and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.

Medical Cost Containment in Casualty Claims, May 1991, 50 pages.Rising medical costs are a major cause of higher insurance costs for workers’ compensation, general liability and automobileinsurance. This report explores medical cost containment techniques used by insurers of those coverages and offers an assess-ment of their effectiveness. Cost: $10 in the U.S. and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.

Fire Following Earthquake: Estimates of the Conflagration Risk to Insured Properties in Greater Los Angeles and SanFrancisco, March 1987, 83 pages.This study indicates that major earthquakes in the Los Angeles Basin and the San Francisco Bay area would be likely to causemajor conflagrations and generate fire damage of $4 to $17 billion, depending on quake location and wind conditions. Estimated“burn rates” are shown for communities affected. Cost: $10 in the U.S. and $20 elsewhere, postpaid.

For a complete list of available IRC publications, please contact the Insurance Research Council, 718 Providence Rd., P.O. Box3025, Malvern, PA 19355; phone: (610) 644-2212; fax: (610) 640-5388; internet: www.ircweb.org.

31

718 Providence Rd. • P.O. Box 3025 • Malvern, PA 19355 • Phone: 610.644.2212 • Fax: 610.640.5388 • www.ircweb.org

Date

I would like to order the following Insurance Research Council publications.

Quantity Title of Publication(s) Cost

Subtotal

(PA deliveries add 6%—Allegheny and PhiladelphiaCounty deliveries add 7%)

Total

Please make checks payable to the Insurance Research Council.Payment must accompany orders.

For Charge: MasterCard Discover American Express VISA

Account Number: Expiration Date:

Cardholder’s Signature:

Ship to:

Telephone number:

PUBLICATIONORDERFORM

32

Insurance Research CouncilThe Insurance Research Council is a division of the American Institute forChartered Property Casualty Underwriters. The Institute is an independent,nonprofit organization dedicated to providing educational programs, profes-sional certification, and research for the property and liability insurancebusiness. Within the Institute, the Council’s purpose is to provide timely andreliable research to all parties involved in public policy issues affecting riskand insurance, but the Council does not lobby or take legislative positions. TheCouncil is supported by leading property and liability insurance organizations.

2000 MembersAlliance of American InsurersAllstate Insurance CompanyAmerican Family Insurance GroupFarmers Insurance GroupGEICOThe Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.Kemper Insurance CompaniesLiberty Mutual GroupNationwide Insurance EnterpriseNational Association of Independent InsurersPrudential Property and Casualty Insurance CompanySAFECO Insurance CompaniesState Farm Insurance CompaniesUnited Services Automobile Association

2000 Advisory BoardMichael F. Dineen, Kemper Insurance Companies, ChairmanAnn Durand, State Farm Insurance Companies, TreasurerGary Bellinghausen, SAFECO Insurance CompaniesJohn B. Conners, Liberty Mutual GroupFrederick Cripe, Allstate Insurance CompanyJames F. Eldridge, American Family Insurance GroupAlice H. Gannon, United Services Automobile AssociationLeonard T. Guarini, Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance CompanyKevin Kelso, Farmers Insurance GroupRodger S. Lawson, Alliance of American InsurersJack S. Ramirez, National Association of Independent InsurersRobert K. Yass, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.W. Craig Zimpher, Nationwide Insurance Enterprise

Elizabeth A. Sprinkel, American Institute for CPCU, Secretary