- Email: [email protected]
A parent training program for the road safety education of preschool children†
Accid. Anal. & Pro.. Vol 13. No. 3, pp. 255-267, 1981 Printed in Great Britain
0001-4575/g11030255-13102.00]0 Copyright © 1981 Pergamon Press Ltd
A PARENT TRAINING PROGRAM FOR THE ROAD
SAFETY EDUCATION OF PRESCHOOL CHILDRENt MARIA LIMBOURGand DIETERGERBER Universityof Tiibingen,Tubingen,FederalRepublicof Germany Al~traet--A main goal of the research project reported in this paper was the developmentand the evaluation of a road safety training program for preschoolchildren on the basis of behavioral learning theories and empiricalresearch findings. This training program was tested in four pilot studies with 233 children and finallyevaluatedwith658 children,age 3---6.Withthis program,parentsof childrenbetweenthe age of 2 and 7 learn how to teach their childrensafe pedestrianbehavior.The trainingprogramis a media package whichconsistsol a filmpresentingthe learningobjectivesand the trainingmethodsand a brochure giving concrete instructions about the training process. Both the film and the brochure describe the exercises whichthe parents shouldpracticewith their childrendirectlyin real trafficsituations.
INTRODUCTION A number of accident studies conducted during the past years has pointed out that children in the age group of approximately 6--8 years have an extremely high road accident rate as pedestrians (OECD Report, 1978). Nevertheless, children are allowed to participate in traffic as pedestrians at a very early age (Sandels, 1970, 1975; Routledge et al., 1974; Schulte and Biischges, 1976; Heinrich and Langosch, 1976). Road safety education should therefore begin at the earliest possible age. The responsibility during the first phase of road safety education lies mostly with the parents. Moreover, parents are usually in the best position to instruct their children directly---on the way to kindergarten, while shopping or when they are taking them for a walk. For these reasons the aim of this research project was to develop and evaluate a road safety training program for preschool children which can be conducted by the parents themselves. Our parent training program is intended to teach parents of approximately 3-7 year old children methods they can use for the road safety education of their children. The children have to learn in particular how to behave safely as pedestrians. The general acknowledgement of the necessity of traffic education for preschool children has resulted in several teaching programs (Gerber et al., 1977; Rothengatter, 1977). Unfortunately these programs had only a limited empirical and theoretical basis. Most of these programs have never been evaluated. Instead, the objective of our study has been to develop a road safety training program on the basis of learning theories and empirical research findings. This training program was tested in four pilot studies with 233 children, age 2-7, and their parents, and finally evaluated with 658 children age 3-6 and their mothers. During the development of the project, both the learning objectives and the training methods were constantly improved (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). The final road safety program, its empirical and theoretical basis and its evaluation will be described in detail.
THE EMPIRICAL BASIS OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM In order to select the learning objectives and the training methods for a road safety training program we had to perform a task analysis (Kroj and Pfafferott, 1975; Van der Molen, 1976; OECD-Report, 1978). This task analysis was made on the basis of the empirical findings about (a) children's traffic behavior, (b) the actual participation of children in traffic (exposure) (c) the abilities and skills that are relevant for traffic participation, (d) the ability of parents from various social backgrounds to teach their children safe road behavior and the parents, own needs, interests and their attitude towards road safety education. tThis research project was supportedby the Ministryof Transportation(Researchproject No. 7511-1;Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen.Cologne.West Germany). 255
256
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
(a) The tra~c behavior of children The road behavior of children was studied by the method of observation in several studies (Finlayson. 1972; Nummenmaa et al., 1972; Knightning et al., 1972; Grayson 1975; Sandels, 1975; Gorges et al., 1976; Limbourg, 1976; Limbourg et al., 1977, 1978). The results of these studies show differences in the road crossing behavior of the children depending upon their age: Most of the 3-5 years old children cross the road quickly without stopping at the kerb or at the line of vision (between parked cars) and without looking aroung before crossing. The 6-7 years old children stop at the kerb and look around before crossing, but they do not stop to look around at the line of vision. Their behavior becomes more unsafe when they are distracted from the traffic situation by games, friends, animals, etc. The majority of the 8-9 years old children cross the road safely, they stop at the kerb and at the line of vision, and also look around before and during the crossing. These results show that children behave rather unsafely in traffic until the age of 8 years. (b) The trajfic participation of preschool children In order to gain informations about the participation of children in traffic we interviewed 846 parents in Stuttgart and surroundings about kind and extent of their children's traffic participation. As in the studies by Schulte and Bfisches (1976) and Bongard and Winterfeld (1977), the children in our random sample increasingly went to and got back from school without their parents the older they got: 2.5% of the 3-year olds, 12.5% of the 4-year-olds, 20.7% of the 5-year-olds, 57.7% of the 6-year-olds and more than 90% of the 7-year-olds went to and back from school without their parents. Although playing in the street represents an extremely great danger to the children, nearly 20% of them do play in the street (Schulte and Biischges, 1976). In our questionnaire, the parents indicated that 14% of the 3-year-olds, 28.7% of the 4-year-olds, 24.5% of the 5-yearolds, 37.7% of the 6-year-olds and 29.2% of the 7-year-olds were allowed to play in the street. These figures show clearly the extent to which children of preschool age participate in traffic and also show how large the potential danger is. This becomes even more obvious when one considers the following fact. Approximately 50% of the 846 parents indicated, when asked about "near accidents", that their child had been endangered in traffic at least once because it had behaved incorrectly. The reasons stated for the child's incorrect behavior were primarily the inability to concentrate if anything happened to distract its attention. The evaluation of the parents' answers confirms the accident statistics. In general, children are particularly endangered when their attention is diverted by games, friends, etc. A behaviorally oriented safety training, therefore, has to pay special attention to such conditions as diversion (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). (c) Children's abilities and limitations in tragic A number of studies in child development have pointed out that children, until the age of 6 years, have very little control over their attention and almost no regulatory mechanism to inhibit impulses that arise (Witkin, 1960; Kogan, 1976; Mackworth, 1976: Turnure, 1970; Fischer and Cohen. 1978). From 7 years on cognitive regulatory mechanisms appear more and more, but they are not fully developed until the age of 11 or 12 years. This makes small children very unreliable in traffic unless they can be trained to react to relevant roadway characteristics automatically (Vinj& 1978). Behavioral training seems to be the best method for teaching children safe pedestrian behavior (Cratty, 1973, Bailey, 1974; Gelfand and Hartmann, 1975). (d) Parents as agents for road safety education It has frequently been pointed out that parents play an important role in influencing the road safety education of preschool children (Kaiser, 1974; Seemann and Sachsenmeier, 1974; Winkler, 1974; Nummenmaa et al. 1975), but there are only very few specific studies about using parents as agents for road safety instruction (Bongard and Winterfeld, 1977; Giinther and Limbourg, 1976; Gorges, 1972). The following questions have to be answered in this connection: (a) Do parents feel responsible for the road safety education of their children? Are
Road safetyeducationof preschool children
257
they prepared to participate in parent training programs for road safety education? (b) Are parents interested in road safety education? (c) How effective is the instruction by the parents? (d) What are the expectations (goals, training methods, etc.) parents place on road safety programs? In order to answer these questions, we distributed a questionnaire to 846 parents with children the age of 3-7 in Stuttgart and surroundings. In this study 90% of the parents interviewed were of the opinion that it is mainly the responsibility of the parents to prepare their children for traffic situations. Within the family, it is predominantly the mother who is actively engaged in the road safety education of the children (88%). Seventy eight percent of parents stated that their child received road safety instruction at home; 46% of the parents believe, that children should be prepared for traffic situations starting at the age of 4; 27% think that 3 years is the right age. Unfortunately, most parents do not train their children systematically and continuously, but only at times when they happen to think of it. This is mostly the case when the parents take the child shopping (38%), on the way to school or kindergarten (25%), or when they take the child for a walk (22%). Eightynine percent parents rely totally on common sense when preparing their children for road safety. The parents showed great interest in participating in a parent training program for road safety education: 81% of parents with 3-year-olds, 85% of parents with 4-year-olds, 74% of parents with 5-year-oids, 69% of parents with 6-year-oids, and 58% of parents with 7-year-olds declared themselves willing to take part in such a training program. Since there are no empirical data available about road safety education at the home of the child, particular emphasis was placed on this area in the questionnaire. The results showed that parents do in fact use some effective techniques in road safety education. "Demonstrating the proper behavior" (72.3%) and "praising the child for correct behavior", are however, complemented by less promising methods, such as "general information" (71.1%), "describing the dangers" (75.2%) (Limbourg and Giinther, 1977). Parents showed a preference to carry out road safety education in real traffic situations (98.6% of parents interviewed ) and much less frequently at home (only 26% play traffic games with their children). However, the parents instructions in a traffic situation concerned mainly on the acquisition of rules, such as learning the traffic signs. Nonetheless, it is a very good sign that parents prefer to instruct their children about road safety when the child is confronted directly with a real traffic situation. The expectation that parents can systematically employ the techniques described above is therefore quite realistic. It is essential that parents be introduced particularly to the merits of systematic training and the values of behavioral techniques. A parent training program for road safety education can only be successful if it fulfills the parents' expectations. Normative expectations, goals, techniques, etc. of the training should correspond to those of the parents, if possible. For this reason, it is important to know the parents' attitude toward safety education in general, to have an idea of their aims in this respect, their needs, etc. The majority of the mothers were of the opinion that a systematic road education will lead to (a) a reduction in children's traffic accidents (80.2%), (b) an improvement in the child's traffic behavior (91%), (c) traffic participation of the child at an earlier age (70.1%), (d) better memorization of traffic rules by the child (96.3.%.) (e) greater self confidence, less fear of traffic (88.2%). Road safety education is expected to be closely oriented towards generally accepted standards, such as traffic rules for pedestrians (94.1%). The consequences of our parent study for the development of an training program are: (a) Mothers show great willingness to accept the main responsibility for road safety education of preschool children and to participate in training programs. (b) The indications that parents care about good road safety education are there; their efforts have to be supported and instruction should be extended, intensified and approached more systematically. (c) The expectations the parents put into a safety training program are appropriate and realistic. All in all, they correspond very closely to our own concept. THE THEORETICAL BASIS OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM Most traffic education programs focus on knowledge and use cognitive training methods (Gerber et al., 1978). These cognitive methods may increase the traffic knowledge of small children, but they do not change their behavior (Giinther and Limbourg, 1976; Vinj& 1978). In
258
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
order to modify the behavior of children in traffic, it is necessary to use behavioral training methods (Cratty, 1973; Bailey, 1974; Gelfand and Hartmann, 1975; Sulzer-Azaroff and Mayer, 1977; Rothengatter, 1977). Therefore, the theoretical basis of the program is behavioral learning theory. Consequently, the theory of operant conditioning by Skinner (1953) and the theory of social learning by Bandura (1969) are of the greatest importance. According to Skinner, most learning processes are governed by the consequences which are the results of actions (learning through success or failure): the reinforcement of a reaction increases the probability that the reaction will recur. Those techniques derived from Skinner's theory of operant conditioning are particularly suitable for changing the behavior of small children. The techniques of positive reinforcement are particularly useful to develop the desired behavior in a child (Hilgard and Bower, 1966). With this technique, the positive reinforcements. such as praise and reward, become contingent, i.e. they are placed in a systematic relation to the behavior that is to be built up. An additional operant technique, which is applied in our program, is chaining of behaviors. This method serves to develop more complex behaviors in the child which are required, e.g. when crossing a road. Such a complex chain of behaviors like road crossing consists of a sequence of elementary behaviors: stopping at the kerb, looking to the left, looking to the right, looking to the left again, etc. Another technique which is very important in the program is stimulus control (stimulus discrimination). This technique works with differential reinforcement and is used to set the stage for responding. The discriminative stimuli in our program are environmental cues like traffic lights, sidewalks, kerbs. These cues have to achieve control over the child's behavior. This technique is used for developing behaviors such as "stopping at the kerb", "cross when the light turns green", "stopping at the line of vision", "cross when the road is clear". Another important operant technique is stimulus generalization. The child must learn to transfer one kind of behavior acquired in a certain traffic situation to others that are similar. The training therefore should be conducted not only in the child's neighborhood, but repeated in surroundings the child is not familiar with. According to Bandura's Social Learning Theory, modeling procedures are particularly suitable to introduce the desired behavior and to enlarge the behavioral repertoire. In this learning process, the child observes a model which acts the way the child has to learn and it soon learns to show the new behavior itself. Therefore, parents participating in this training program are taught to reflect on their own (model) behavior and to show adequate model behavior within the training program. The parents are requested to demonstrate the correct behavior in road traffic to their children at all times. In addition, according to the findings of Bandura et al. (1%6), it is extremely important that parents verbalize their model behavior simultaneously in order fo focus the attention of their children on the relevant model behavior. Finally, the importance of positive reinforcement of the child's imitative behavior by the parents is emphasized. THE LEARNING OBJECTIVES OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM (a) The learning objectives for the children Since the aim of our training program is to modify the pedestrian behavior of children, the learning objectives are either behavioral or operationalized in terms of behavior. In order to determine the learning objectives for the training program a task analysis was made. Every learning objective combines a specific content (e.g. kerb, parked vehicles, cross sections, etc.) with a specific behavior (e.g. stop, look right-left, etc.) (Tyler, 1970). However, this two-dimensional matrix proved too limited, since it does not include one of the most important factors which causes accidents, i.e. the distraction of the child through games or friends, etc. Many authors have emphasized the problems arising out of the child's total absorption in his games (Sandels, 1974), its small attention span (Grayson, 1972) and its propensity for distraction at preschool age (Limbourg and Giinther, 1977). If a child's attention is diverted, it behaves much more irrationally than would be the case if it were to concentrate on the traffic situation (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). These findings have to be included in a training program. Distraction, however, can neither be classified as content (a traffic situation the child has to cope with) nor as behavior in a traffic situation. It is an
Road safety education of preschool children
259
aggravating condition. For that reason, we have changed Tyler's two dimensional objective matrix to a three dimensional model. The third dimension describes the condition which modifies the final behavior. Although there are a number of aggravating conditions (rain, ice, noise, etc.), we have concentrated entirely on the condition of distraction. This decision was based on the results of research about the behavior of children in traffic situations (task analysis). Proceeding from Tyler's matrix of objectives, we have collected as many contents, i.e. situation, the child could encounter in traffic, as possible (e.g. kerbs, parked vehicles, pedestrian crossings, cross sections, etc.). From this collection of contents we selected those which have to be considered essential for mastering traffic situations. We intend to call these contents "elementary". Those contents which are tied to very specific environmental conditions (e.g. streets without a sidewalk, streetcar rails, with cars parked on the sidewalk, etc.) have not been taken into consideration, since they present no problems to the majority of parents. Following this, an analysis of these situations with respect to the behavior they demand from the pedestrian was made. For this, we followed to some extent the study of Older and Grayson (1974). Thus we arrived at a collection of behaviors that are required in traffic. Finally, the two dimensions (situation and behavior) were combined. Then the third dimension (aggravating condition = distraction) was added. Every objective therefore consists of three individual elements: (a) situation, (b) behavior and (c) distraction. These learning objectives were then arranged hierarchically in the order of difficulties they present to children. In order to judge the degree of difficulties the learning objectives present, we used the results from accident analysis, behavior observation, studies on traffic participation, etc., as well as studies about children's abilities (perception, motor control, etc.). The objectives arrived at are summarized in Table 1. (b) The learning objectives/or the parents On the basis of the objectives and training methods chosen for the training program, we arrived at the following objectives for the parents: Objective 1: The parents must learn to determine the objectives for their children independently The requirements to be met by a training program for road safety education vary greatly and depend on a number of factors, such as the traffic situation in the neighborhood, the behavior of the child in traffic situations, the age of the child, etc. For that reason, we considered it not feasible to determine the objectives for the training on the basis of one single factor, such as the age of the child. Rather, we thought it necessary to enable and train the parents so that they can determine the objectives for the training of their child themselves. Applying the techniques of behavior modification (Schulte, 1974), parents should be encouraged to do the following on
Table 1. The learning objectives of the road safety training program training stage I
I. walk at the inner side of sidewalk 2. Stop at kerb
training stage II
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
look to the left and to the right at the kerb cross the road straight ahead cross the road quickly but w i t h o u t rmnning cross over at traffic lights while the light is green crossing over at zebra crossing for pedestrian: give a signal by extending the arm 8. crossing over at zebra crossing for pedestrian: wait until the cars stop before crossing over 9. select zebra crossing for p e d e s t r i a n or traffic light to cross the road
Fraining stage III
IO. stop at the line of vision 11. look to the left, to the right and to the left at the line of vision
Training stage IV
12. walk alone to the kindergarten,
school etc.
260
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
their own: (a) an analysis of the child's behavior in traffic (with the aid of a test sheet which refers to the child's behavior) (b) observation of child's behavior in traffic (with observation sheet), (c) the selection of the learning objectives. Objective 2: Parents must learn to apply training methods correctly (a) Parents should at all times demonstrate the correct behavior to their children. (b) Parents should always explain loud and clearly what they are doing. (c) Parents should reward their children for correct behavior in traffic situations. Objective 3: Parents must learn to check the effectiveness of the safety training Parents should be able to evaluate whether the objectives aimed at have been realized or not (Kroj and Pfafferott, 1975). To carry out this effectiveness check, the technique of behavior observation mentioned above is used. The parents observe their child in various traffic situations on different occasions. This observation will show whether the child has mastered the behavior it has practiced and whether it remains stable, i.e. whether the child reacts in the same way permanently. The effectiveness check should be continuous, i.e. it must be applied at every stage of the training. The data on the behavior thus collected will at the same time serve as a starting point for determining the next objectives.
DEVELOPMENT AND TRIAL RUN OF THE PARENT TRAINING PROGRAM FOR ROAD SAFETY EDUCATION
The training program is the result of a long process of development and trial. In the course of this process, we have conducted four pilot studies. These studies served to test: 1. objectives 2. training methods 3. employment of parents as agents for road safety education 4. the use of various media for the orientation of parents (film, pamphlet, parent teacher meeting). In the following, the four pilot studies are briefly described (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). (a) Pilot study I The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of behavioral techniques for teaching safe pedestrian behavior to 3-7 year old children. Beyond that, various objectives in the matrix of learning objectives were to be evaluated. Fifty eight children from 3 to 7 years old (approximately I0 per group) were matched on the basis of a pretest (observation of behavior), and then placed at random in an experimental group or a control group. Other matching criteria were age, sex and social status of the parents. The experimental group went through behavioral road safety training which included the techniques outlined above. The control group received theoretical road safety instruction. The children in this group played with toy automobiles and pedestrians. During the play, they were given explanations about the most important rules for pedestrians. The pretest (observation of behavior) was carried out with two conditions: (1) The child was asked to cross the street to meet the administrator of the test. (2) The administrator of the test played ball with a child in a park. During the game, he threw the ball into the street, so that the child had a chance to run after it. Among other things, stopping and orientation at the kerb and line of vision were recorded (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). After the training program was completed, the same test (posttest) was repeated to check the effectiveness of the training. The results of the pilot study show that systematic behavioral training for traffic situations can cause significant changes from pretest to posttest after only a few training sessions (8
Road safety education of preschool children
261
sessions). With the exception of the group of 7-year-olds, the experimental groups showed in all instances greater improvement than the control groups. The group of 7-year-olds proved that theoretical instruction (control group) has a significant influence on the behavior in traffic situations. At this developmental stage, children are better able to control their behavior in a cognitive manner. The effectiveness of the behavioral training became most apparent in situations where the children's attention was distracted by the ball game. Out of the 29 children that were trained, 28 stopped at the kerb before running after the ball. Only one 3-year-old child did not stop. Of the control group, only 11 of the 29 children stopped at the kerb, and 8 of these were in the two highest age brackets. Similar results were noted with the orientation at the kerb (see Table 2). These results confirm those of other studies, in which it was found that children who received a behavioral training were better able to handle in real life traffic situations than those children who had only received theoretical instruction (e.g. Colborne, 1971). The evaluation of the objectives resulted in some changes of the program. It turned out that some of the objectives, such as stopping the line of vision, etc., were too difficult for 3- and 4-year-olds, while other objectives, such as keeping on the inner side of a sidewalk proved too easy for the older children. This led to a first revision of the matrix of learning objectives. (b) Pilot study II The central point of this study was the question as to what extent specific materials such as leaflets and videofilms can help parents train their children for traffic situations. For this purpose, 74 parents and their children were assigned to an experimental group (parents train the children themselves) and a control group (children were trained by psychologists). The assignment was made on the basis of a pretest and various socioeconomic criteria. The parents were prepared and schooled for the training in two sessions, where a video film was shown. In this film, parents demonstrated the training stops with their children. A discussion during the session was to supply impetus and criticism, and to uncover problems that might arise from the training or the training instructions. In order to test the success of the training, all children in both groups were observed under
Table 2. Results of pre- and posttest of 58 children aged 3 to 7 (number of children who fulfilled criteria) Observation Group
without
distraction
)retest
posttest
pretest
posttest
13
28
5
28
17
29
8
29
s t o p at the line of vision
O
25
0
13
look to the left and to the r i g h t at the line of vision
4
27
5
21
13
20
9
11
16
20
7
12
O
6
0
I
2
13
3
8
Behavior
stop kerb behavioral training n = 29
look to the r i g h t a n d to the left at the k e r b
stop kerb
theoretical
instruction n = 29
at the
at the
l o o k to the r i g h t and to the left at I the k e r b stop a t line of vision
with
distraction
the
look to the left and to the r i g h t at the line of vision
262
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
=
o 0
0
~
0
~
0
~'~
.~
~.~
~
~ ~
o
~
o
o
~ o
o un
.~_
~=
-~
e,n
0
~
0
0
¢'~
o
.~
~ o
~ o~ =
~=_ "~,
o
o
~
~
~
0
~
~.
,, .~ ~.
~
~:~
~= ~
o
~
.,-t
~
o
,,~
o
o
4.J
=~
~,1
-~~=
0
~ ~.~
~,.
.~
~
®
.
t~
~
.
.
~~ ° ~.
~
"~"
.
0
~
~ ' ~
"~'
~-~
o °~ I~ ~
~-~
co
0
~1 0
0
o~
O~ en
o ~
.,'t ~
~o
~Oo
--4 .,-4 r-
~
~
~o .;,.t . ~
o~= ~=-~ o~ ~=
o .~
Road safety education of preschool children
263
normal and distracting conditions before and after the training and 6 weeks after the pretest. As was the case with pilot study I, this study proved that a systematic behavioral training of children between 3 and 7 years can cause great pre- and posttest changes. A comparison of the two groups showed that parents can improve the performance of their child nearly as well as psychologists (see Table 3). Only with the group of 6-year-oids, there was a significant difference in favor of the children trained by the psychologists. A double check with the parents allows the conclusion that, although they were not able to use the training methods as effectively as the psychologists, they were definitely at an advantage with respect to the conditions of training, since they could, for instance, choose the best time for the training. This is emphasized by the fact that the success of the parents training efforts is closely connected with the extent to which the training methods are understood and realized in practice. Furthermore, there is a positive connection between the motivation of the parents (expressed by the frequency of the training) and the success of the training. Pilot study II showed that parents really are able to produce positive changes in the child's behavior in traffic situations. At the same time, however, it became apparent that the success of a parent training is dependent on the quality of the training instructions and on the motivation of the parents. The results of this study made it necessary to reevaluate and revise the matrix of objectives. (c) Pilot study III The purpose of this study was the trial and further improvement of the training for road safety on the basis of pilot studies I and II. For this reason, 64 parents with children aged 3 to 7 were divided into two groups, according to the results of a pretest and to socioeconomic criteria. Psychologists closely observed the experimental group during the training and gave feedback to the parents. This group was compared with a control group of parents who had received only theoretical instructions, but were neither observed nor advised. The purpose of the feedback through the psychologists during the training was to make it easier for the parents to assimilate the methods and objectives and to deal directly with any difficulties they encountered. During two training sessions, a shortened version of the video film of pilot study II was shown and improved training instructions were distributed. The parents were also asked for comments on the materials used. As in the two previous studies, the children were observed before and after the training in two specific situations. In addition, in order to validitate the standarsized observations, a secret (hidden) observation of the children was conducted. The effectiveness of realistic behavioral training was proved by this pilot study as well (see Table 4). It was surprising to note that the behavior of the children at the line of vision (improvement up to 49%) improved more than the behavior at the kerb (up to 25%). This might be explained by the fact that many mothers and their children considered the exercise "stop at the kerb" too easy. They therefore proceeded more quickly to the more difficult exercises (training at the line of vision), which were repeated more often. The parents' motivation for carrying out the training program was extremely high, and all mothers completed the program. The frequency and intensity of the exercises was not less with the control group than with the experimental group, although the experimental group was under a stronger "exercise compulsion" due to the presence of an observer. Again, a positive relation between intensity of exercises and success of the training could be noted. Parents clearly are able to improve the learning process of their children with the aid of the training program. (d) Pilot study IV Unlike the previous pilot studies, this study was not planned as a comparative evaluation, but rather as an analysis of problems encountered by the parents during the training. We proceeded from the assumption that an experimental procedure should be supplemented by a field study which enables the researchers to conduct intensive discussions with parents about training content, objectives and methods. Thirty seven parents with children between the age of 3 and 7 participated in this project. Some of the most important results are listed below: Objectives: It turned out that some of the objectives placed too heavy a demand on the
264
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
younger children and that others were too easy for the older children. As the other pilot studies had shown already, the number of objectives had to be reduced to approximately 10--15 if they were to be applied successfully by the parents. Methods of road safety training: Observation showed that parents were able to apply the behavioral training techniques successfully. Difficulties: Problems in the training primarily were a result of lack of motivation on the part of the child. Some parents requested improved instructions for training. In general, the parents rated the training extremely positively in all pilot studies. Even if the realization of the objectives and application of techniques in the program presented difficulties in some cases, most parents were convinced of the usefulness of the training program. In particular, the participants explained, that they had gained a better understanding of the problems and felt more secure in dealing with the behavior of their child in traffic situations. The pilot studies on the effectiveness of the training program were so promising that the government of Baden-Wiirttemberg decided to extend the Tiibingen road safety program and to conduct a full scale test in the entire state of Baden-Wiirttemberg, bearing the costs for this project. From January to May 1978, the 3rd television program ran a TV campaign to inform parents of 2-7-year-olds about the training program. In addition, the Ministry of the Interior published a brochure accompanying the television program which was distributed in all kindergartens to parents of preschool children. At the end of this preparatory process, the training program was evaluated in detail. TIlE FINAL TRAINING PROGRAM (a) Introduction to the training: The Tiibingen road safety program is a media package which consists of a film showing the training stages (model film for parents) and a brochure which gives concrete instructions as to what to do in the different stages. The different stages are not tailored to a specific age. The individual differences in the various age groups are so pronounced that a differentiation of this kind cannot serve a realistic purpose. It is much more important to determine what kind of traffic situation the child can actually handle and what it cannot do yet. If, for example, the child has already mastered the behavioral objectives of the second stage, it can start directly with the third training stage. The learning objectives are structured hierarchically and parents should only proceed to the next objective when the child has completely mastered the previous objective. The training program can be used within the framework of parent-teacher meetings in Kindergarten or school or brought to the attention of parents via an institutional medium, such as television. The film, however, is an integral part of the program which always has to be used in the training. In the first step of the training the parents are told how to assess the pedestrian behavior of their child. Parents are requested to fill out a questionnaire and answer questions about the behavior of their child in various traffic situations. The answers are then double checked by systematic observation in order to make them more objective. Finally, the child has to be observed in a real traffic situation to select the appropriate training stage. This observation should be made twice: (a) observation of the child when it concentrates on the traffic: the child is told to cross the road alone as well as it is able to (back and forth), (b) observation of the child when other children or a game are distracting its attention from the traffic. On a test sheet specially designed for this purpose, the parents describe the behavior of their child as it crosses and recrosses the street, how it behaves at the kerb or line of vision (stopping and orientation). On the basis of this behavior assessment parents are asked to select the relevant exercises from a total of 4 training stages. The actual training for road safety begins with the selection of the relevant training stage. (b) The training stages
The first training stage. This training stage can be conducted with children between the age of 2 and 3. The child learns that it has to walk on the inner side of the sidewalk, next to the buildings, and not on the kerb side. It also has to learn to always stop at the kerb, even if its attention is distracted by friends, games or animals. The second training stage. Children from the age of 4 onwards can participate in this training stage. The children have to learn to cross the street alone at a point where their vision is not
Road safety education of preschool children
~z
~
265
tt~ ~o
~
t~ o~
oo
5
~
-
o~ t~
~o
e~
tn
~N
~.o
o~
~o
o~
~ o~ ~
~
~
266
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
obstructed by park.ed vehicles. They should stop at the kerb, look to the left, to the right and again briefly to the left, to make sure that the road is free, and then cross the street quickly but without running. This behavioral sequence should also be done with the child's attention distracted. At this training stage, the children also learn how to cross the street at a traffic light and a pedestrian crossing. The third training stage. This stage is designed for children of 5 years or more. The child has to learn how to cross the street from a point between parked vehicles. It has to learn to go to the line of vision, to look to the left, to the right and to the left again. It should cross only when the street is clear, i.e. if no car is in sight. This behavioral sequence should become so ingrained that the child will always follow it, even if distracted by games, friends, etc. The fourth training stage. This training stage is meant for 5-7 year old children. The child has to learn to safely make its way to school or kindergarten without the help of the parehts. Furthermore, it has to learn to plan its route independently and to select the safest places for crossing the street. It also has to learn to deal with special problems, such as defect traffic lights, construction sites, etc. The final evaluation of the training program. A comprehensive research project served to make the final evaluation of our parent training program (Limbourg and Gerber, 1c79). The pedestrian behavior of 658 children between 3 and 6 years of age was observed (pretest). The children had to cross a road 4 times under different attentional conditions (with and without distracting stimuli). The results of this pretest showed that 90% of the observed children crossed the road quickly without stopping at the curb and without looking to the left and to the right. This behavior pattern was labeled as "unsafe". In order to improve the pedestrian behavior of the observed children our behavioral training program was applied to them. The behavioral training program consisted of a film (30 minutes) and an instruction booklet for parents. Both set various behavioral learning objectives and demonstrate how to reach them. The film shows model parents carrying out the behavioral modification program with their children in different traffic situations. The booklet includes pictures from this film with training instructions for the parents. The training experiment was carried out with the 658 "pretest-children", four groups of approximately 168 children each. The children were matched on the basis of age, sex and social status of their parents. The urban characteristics of the living area were controlled as well. The experimental design included two experimental and two control groups: Experimental group I: behavioral training applied by children's mothers while being observed by psychologists. Experimental group H: the same as group I but without observation by psychologists. Control group III: mothers only saw a film and were given a booklet that showed road safety problems in childhood--i.e, placebo treatment. Control group IV: no treatment at all. All four groups were observed three times: (a) pretest (b) posttest (after four weeks of training) (c) follow up (four months after the posttest). The analysis of variance of the safety scores showed a highly significant effect of the behavioral training on the pedestrian behavior of the two experimental groups (see Table 5). It could be shown that the results of the behavioral training program depended upon the age of the children, the training quality and the training frequency. The follow up study showed that safety scores dropped in all groups but still were higher in the two experimental groups than in the control groups. This program was applied first in the state of Baden-Wiirttemberg in 1978 and then was applied all over West Germany in 1980.
REFERENCES Bailey N., The developmentof motorabilitiesdueingthe first three years. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Development l, 1-26. 1935. Bandura A., Principles o[ Behavior Modification. Holt,Rinehartand Winston,New York, 1969. Bandura A., GrusecJ. E. and MenloveF., Observationallearningas a functionof symbolizationand incentiveset. Child Development 37, 499-506, 1966. Bongard A. and WinterfeldU., Verkehrswissenund Verkehrsver-standnis bei 5- bis 6]iihrigen Kindern. Bundesanstaltfi.ir Strassenwesen: UrdaU-und SicherheitsforschungStrassenverkehr,Heft 13, K61n1977. Colborne H.. Two Experiments on Methods o[ Training Children in Road Sa[eiy. Eeport LR 403, Transport and Road Research Laboratory,1970.
Road safety education of preschool children
267
Cratty B. J., Perceptual and Motor Development in Infants and Children• Mcmillan, New York, 1970. Finlayson H. M., Children's Road Behavior and Personality. TRRL-Report TN 739, 1972. Finlayson H. M., Personality Changes of Children's Perception of Cues of Danger. University of Highfield, Dept. of Psychology, Southampton, 1972. Fischer H. and Cohen A. S., Leistrungsm6glichkeiten yon Kindern ira Strassenverkehr. Bericht zum Forschungsprojekt 7509 der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, K61n 1978. Fisk A. and Cliffe H., The Effects of Teaching the Green Cross Code to Young Children. Department of the Environment, TRRL Report SR 168 UC. Crowthorne, 1975. Gelfand D. M. and Hartmann D. P., Child Behavior: Analysis and Thereapy. Pergamon, New York, 1975. Gerber D., Huber O. and Limbourg M., Verkehrserziehungira Vorschulalter. Bericht der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, K61n, 1977. Gorges R., Die Schwierigkeiten der Lernzielbeschreibung--Ans~itze tier Verkehrserziehung im Vorschulalter. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 2, 3-8, 1972. • Gorges R., Bauerfeld F. and Schlagel T., Examination of traffic behavior of children at the age of five to seven. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 1, 1976. Grayson G. B., The Hampshire Child Pedestrian Accident Study• TRRL Report LR 668, Department of the Environment, Crowthorne, 1975. Giinther R. and Limbourg M., Dimensionen der Verkehrswelt yon Kindern. Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen. Reihe Unfall- und Sicherheitsforschung Strassenverkehr Heft 4, 13-80, 1976. Heinrich C. and Langosch I., Einfluss der Informiertheit auf das Verhalten yon Kindern im Strassenverkehr. Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen. Reihe Unfall. und Sicherheitsforschung Strassenverkehr. Heft 4, 81-172, K61n 1976. Hilgard E. R. and Bower G. H., Theories of Learning. Meredith, New York, 1966. Kaiser A., Verkehrsp~idagogik--wissenschaftsorganisatorische Massnehmen der Lehrerbildung insbesondere im Hochschulbereich. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 1, 30.-32, 1974. Knightning F. A., Colborne H. V. and Grayson G. B., A Pilot Study of Child Pedestrians in an Residential Area. TN 736 Transport and Road Research Laboratory, 1972. Kogan N., Cognitive Styles in Infancy and Early Childhood. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1976. Kroj G. and Pfafferott I., Empirische Grundlegung der Verkehrserziehung. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 3, 5-15, 1975. Limbourg M., Das Verhalten von ~9j~ihrigen Kindern bei tier Strasseniiberquerung. Zeitschrift fiir Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie 23, 666--677, 1976. Limbourg, M. and Gerber D., Das Verhalten yon 3- bis 7j/ihrigen Kindern bei der Strasseniiberquerung unter Ablenkungsbedingungen. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 2, 10-13, 1978. Limbourg M. and Gerber D., Das Tiibinger Elterntrainingsprogramra fiir die Verkehrserziehung yon Kindern im Vorschulalter. Bericht der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, 1979. Limbourg M. and Gerber D., Effizienzkontrolle des Tiibinger Verkehrstrainings. Bericht der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, Tiibingen, 1979. Limbourg M. and Giinther R., Erleben und Verhalten yon 4- bis 9j~ihrigen Kindern im Strassenverkehr. Zeitschriyt [~r Verkehrserziehung 1, 3-9, 1977. Limbourg M., H6pfner S. and Niebling Ch., Die Stabilit~t des Verhaltens yon 4- bis 9j~ihrigen Kindern bei der Strasseniiberquerung. Zeitschriytfiir Verkehrserziehung 3, 3-8, 197L Mackwortb J. F., The development of attention• In The Development of Cognitive Processes. (Edited by V. Hamilton and M. D. Vernon. pp. 111-153. Academic Press, London 1976. Nummenmaa T., Sylv~inenM., Kotakorpi S., L~ihdeniemiE., Orell R., Riekkinen F., Ruuhilehto K., Toivoi T. and Thoti R. L., Preschool Child in Urban Traffic. Report 68, University of Tampere, Tampere, 1972. Nummenmaa T., Ruuhilehto K. and Syv/inen M., Traffic Education Program for Preschool Aged Children and Children Starting School. Report 17, Liikenneturva, Helsinki, 1975. OECD Special Research Group on Pedestrian Safety Report. United Kingdom Transport and Road Research Laboratory. Crowthorne, Berkshire, 1978. Older S. J. Grayson G. B., Perception and Decision in the Pedestrian Task. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, Supplementary Report 49, UC, 1974. Rothengatter J. A., Traffic training of children, a literature review on the basis of an instructional model. Verkeerskundig Studiecentrura. Report VK 77-05, University of Groningen, 1977. Routledge D., Repetto-Wright R. and Howarth C., The exposure of young children to accident risk as pedestrians. Ergonomics 17, 457--:480, 1974. Sandels S., Why are children injuried in traffic? The Skandia Report II, Stockholm, 1974. Sandels S., Children in Traffic. Elek, London, 1975. Sandels S., Young children in tra$c. Brit. J. Educational Psych. 40, 11I-116, 1970. Schulte W. and Biischges G., Strassenverkehrsbeteiligung yon Kindern und Jugendlichen. Abschlussbericht zum Forschungsprojekt 7411 der Bundesanstalt for Strassenwesen, K61n, 1976. Seemann W. and Sachsenmaier, M., Eine EIternschule zur Verkehrserziehung. Miinchen: ADAC-Verlag, 1974. Skinner B. F., Science and Human Behavior. Macmillan, New York, 1953. Sulzer-Azaroff B. and Mayer G. R., Applying Behavior Analysis Procedures with Children and Youth. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1977. Turnure J. E.. Children's reactions to distractors in a learning situation. Developmental Psychology 2, 115--122, 1970. Tyler R. W., Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction• University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1950. Van der Molen H. H., Observational studies of children's road crossing behavior: a review of the literature• In Proceedings of the International Conference on Pedestrian Safety. (Edited by A. S. Holchen). MichloI-Publ. House Technion, Haifa, 1977. Vinje M. P.. Children As Pedestrians: Abilities and Limitations. Draft paper for the OECD Workshop on Pedestrian Road Safety Education. 1978. Winkler W., Sicherheitstraining ira Vorschulalter: Zur Theorie und Praxis der vorschulischen Verkehrserziehung. Braunschweig: Rot-Gelb-Griin Verlag, 1974. Witkin H. A.. The problem of individuality in development. In Perspectives in Psychological Theory (Edited 'by B. Kaplan and S. Wapner). Essays in Honor of Heinz Werner. New York: International Universities Press. Inc. 6, 335-36l. 1960.
0001-4575/g11030255-13102.00]0 Copyright © 1981 Pergamon Press Ltd
A PARENT TRAINING PROGRAM FOR THE ROAD
SAFETY EDUCATION OF PRESCHOOL CHILDRENt MARIA LIMBOURGand DIETERGERBER Universityof Tiibingen,Tubingen,FederalRepublicof Germany Al~traet--A main goal of the research project reported in this paper was the developmentand the evaluation of a road safety training program for preschoolchildren on the basis of behavioral learning theories and empiricalresearch findings. This training program was tested in four pilot studies with 233 children and finallyevaluatedwith658 children,age 3---6.Withthis program,parentsof childrenbetweenthe age of 2 and 7 learn how to teach their childrensafe pedestrianbehavior.The trainingprogramis a media package whichconsistsol a filmpresentingthe learningobjectivesand the trainingmethodsand a brochure giving concrete instructions about the training process. Both the film and the brochure describe the exercises whichthe parents shouldpracticewith their childrendirectlyin real trafficsituations.
INTRODUCTION A number of accident studies conducted during the past years has pointed out that children in the age group of approximately 6--8 years have an extremely high road accident rate as pedestrians (OECD Report, 1978). Nevertheless, children are allowed to participate in traffic as pedestrians at a very early age (Sandels, 1970, 1975; Routledge et al., 1974; Schulte and Biischges, 1976; Heinrich and Langosch, 1976). Road safety education should therefore begin at the earliest possible age. The responsibility during the first phase of road safety education lies mostly with the parents. Moreover, parents are usually in the best position to instruct their children directly---on the way to kindergarten, while shopping or when they are taking them for a walk. For these reasons the aim of this research project was to develop and evaluate a road safety training program for preschool children which can be conducted by the parents themselves. Our parent training program is intended to teach parents of approximately 3-7 year old children methods they can use for the road safety education of their children. The children have to learn in particular how to behave safely as pedestrians. The general acknowledgement of the necessity of traffic education for preschool children has resulted in several teaching programs (Gerber et al., 1977; Rothengatter, 1977). Unfortunately these programs had only a limited empirical and theoretical basis. Most of these programs have never been evaluated. Instead, the objective of our study has been to develop a road safety training program on the basis of learning theories and empirical research findings. This training program was tested in four pilot studies with 233 children, age 2-7, and their parents, and finally evaluated with 658 children age 3-6 and their mothers. During the development of the project, both the learning objectives and the training methods were constantly improved (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). The final road safety program, its empirical and theoretical basis and its evaluation will be described in detail.
THE EMPIRICAL BASIS OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM In order to select the learning objectives and the training methods for a road safety training program we had to perform a task analysis (Kroj and Pfafferott, 1975; Van der Molen, 1976; OECD-Report, 1978). This task analysis was made on the basis of the empirical findings about (a) children's traffic behavior, (b) the actual participation of children in traffic (exposure) (c) the abilities and skills that are relevant for traffic participation, (d) the ability of parents from various social backgrounds to teach their children safe road behavior and the parents, own needs, interests and their attitude towards road safety education. tThis research project was supportedby the Ministryof Transportation(Researchproject No. 7511-1;Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen.Cologne.West Germany). 255
256
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
(a) The tra~c behavior of children The road behavior of children was studied by the method of observation in several studies (Finlayson. 1972; Nummenmaa et al., 1972; Knightning et al., 1972; Grayson 1975; Sandels, 1975; Gorges et al., 1976; Limbourg, 1976; Limbourg et al., 1977, 1978). The results of these studies show differences in the road crossing behavior of the children depending upon their age: Most of the 3-5 years old children cross the road quickly without stopping at the kerb or at the line of vision (between parked cars) and without looking aroung before crossing. The 6-7 years old children stop at the kerb and look around before crossing, but they do not stop to look around at the line of vision. Their behavior becomes more unsafe when they are distracted from the traffic situation by games, friends, animals, etc. The majority of the 8-9 years old children cross the road safely, they stop at the kerb and at the line of vision, and also look around before and during the crossing. These results show that children behave rather unsafely in traffic until the age of 8 years. (b) The trajfic participation of preschool children In order to gain informations about the participation of children in traffic we interviewed 846 parents in Stuttgart and surroundings about kind and extent of their children's traffic participation. As in the studies by Schulte and Bfisches (1976) and Bongard and Winterfeld (1977), the children in our random sample increasingly went to and got back from school without their parents the older they got: 2.5% of the 3-year olds, 12.5% of the 4-year-olds, 20.7% of the 5-year-olds, 57.7% of the 6-year-olds and more than 90% of the 7-year-olds went to and back from school without their parents. Although playing in the street represents an extremely great danger to the children, nearly 20% of them do play in the street (Schulte and Biischges, 1976). In our questionnaire, the parents indicated that 14% of the 3-year-olds, 28.7% of the 4-year-olds, 24.5% of the 5-yearolds, 37.7% of the 6-year-olds and 29.2% of the 7-year-olds were allowed to play in the street. These figures show clearly the extent to which children of preschool age participate in traffic and also show how large the potential danger is. This becomes even more obvious when one considers the following fact. Approximately 50% of the 846 parents indicated, when asked about "near accidents", that their child had been endangered in traffic at least once because it had behaved incorrectly. The reasons stated for the child's incorrect behavior were primarily the inability to concentrate if anything happened to distract its attention. The evaluation of the parents' answers confirms the accident statistics. In general, children are particularly endangered when their attention is diverted by games, friends, etc. A behaviorally oriented safety training, therefore, has to pay special attention to such conditions as diversion (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). (c) Children's abilities and limitations in tragic A number of studies in child development have pointed out that children, until the age of 6 years, have very little control over their attention and almost no regulatory mechanism to inhibit impulses that arise (Witkin, 1960; Kogan, 1976; Mackworth, 1976: Turnure, 1970; Fischer and Cohen. 1978). From 7 years on cognitive regulatory mechanisms appear more and more, but they are not fully developed until the age of 11 or 12 years. This makes small children very unreliable in traffic unless they can be trained to react to relevant roadway characteristics automatically (Vinj& 1978). Behavioral training seems to be the best method for teaching children safe pedestrian behavior (Cratty, 1973, Bailey, 1974; Gelfand and Hartmann, 1975). (d) Parents as agents for road safety education It has frequently been pointed out that parents play an important role in influencing the road safety education of preschool children (Kaiser, 1974; Seemann and Sachsenmeier, 1974; Winkler, 1974; Nummenmaa et al. 1975), but there are only very few specific studies about using parents as agents for road safety instruction (Bongard and Winterfeld, 1977; Giinther and Limbourg, 1976; Gorges, 1972). The following questions have to be answered in this connection: (a) Do parents feel responsible for the road safety education of their children? Are
Road safetyeducationof preschool children
257
they prepared to participate in parent training programs for road safety education? (b) Are parents interested in road safety education? (c) How effective is the instruction by the parents? (d) What are the expectations (goals, training methods, etc.) parents place on road safety programs? In order to answer these questions, we distributed a questionnaire to 846 parents with children the age of 3-7 in Stuttgart and surroundings. In this study 90% of the parents interviewed were of the opinion that it is mainly the responsibility of the parents to prepare their children for traffic situations. Within the family, it is predominantly the mother who is actively engaged in the road safety education of the children (88%). Seventy eight percent of parents stated that their child received road safety instruction at home; 46% of the parents believe, that children should be prepared for traffic situations starting at the age of 4; 27% think that 3 years is the right age. Unfortunately, most parents do not train their children systematically and continuously, but only at times when they happen to think of it. This is mostly the case when the parents take the child shopping (38%), on the way to school or kindergarten (25%), or when they take the child for a walk (22%). Eightynine percent parents rely totally on common sense when preparing their children for road safety. The parents showed great interest in participating in a parent training program for road safety education: 81% of parents with 3-year-olds, 85% of parents with 4-year-olds, 74% of parents with 5-year-oids, 69% of parents with 6-year-oids, and 58% of parents with 7-year-olds declared themselves willing to take part in such a training program. Since there are no empirical data available about road safety education at the home of the child, particular emphasis was placed on this area in the questionnaire. The results showed that parents do in fact use some effective techniques in road safety education. "Demonstrating the proper behavior" (72.3%) and "praising the child for correct behavior", are however, complemented by less promising methods, such as "general information" (71.1%), "describing the dangers" (75.2%) (Limbourg and Giinther, 1977). Parents showed a preference to carry out road safety education in real traffic situations (98.6% of parents interviewed ) and much less frequently at home (only 26% play traffic games with their children). However, the parents instructions in a traffic situation concerned mainly on the acquisition of rules, such as learning the traffic signs. Nonetheless, it is a very good sign that parents prefer to instruct their children about road safety when the child is confronted directly with a real traffic situation. The expectation that parents can systematically employ the techniques described above is therefore quite realistic. It is essential that parents be introduced particularly to the merits of systematic training and the values of behavioral techniques. A parent training program for road safety education can only be successful if it fulfills the parents' expectations. Normative expectations, goals, techniques, etc. of the training should correspond to those of the parents, if possible. For this reason, it is important to know the parents' attitude toward safety education in general, to have an idea of their aims in this respect, their needs, etc. The majority of the mothers were of the opinion that a systematic road education will lead to (a) a reduction in children's traffic accidents (80.2%), (b) an improvement in the child's traffic behavior (91%), (c) traffic participation of the child at an earlier age (70.1%), (d) better memorization of traffic rules by the child (96.3.%.) (e) greater self confidence, less fear of traffic (88.2%). Road safety education is expected to be closely oriented towards generally accepted standards, such as traffic rules for pedestrians (94.1%). The consequences of our parent study for the development of an training program are: (a) Mothers show great willingness to accept the main responsibility for road safety education of preschool children and to participate in training programs. (b) The indications that parents care about good road safety education are there; their efforts have to be supported and instruction should be extended, intensified and approached more systematically. (c) The expectations the parents put into a safety training program are appropriate and realistic. All in all, they correspond very closely to our own concept. THE THEORETICAL BASIS OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM Most traffic education programs focus on knowledge and use cognitive training methods (Gerber et al., 1978). These cognitive methods may increase the traffic knowledge of small children, but they do not change their behavior (Giinther and Limbourg, 1976; Vinj& 1978). In
258
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
order to modify the behavior of children in traffic, it is necessary to use behavioral training methods (Cratty, 1973; Bailey, 1974; Gelfand and Hartmann, 1975; Sulzer-Azaroff and Mayer, 1977; Rothengatter, 1977). Therefore, the theoretical basis of the program is behavioral learning theory. Consequently, the theory of operant conditioning by Skinner (1953) and the theory of social learning by Bandura (1969) are of the greatest importance. According to Skinner, most learning processes are governed by the consequences which are the results of actions (learning through success or failure): the reinforcement of a reaction increases the probability that the reaction will recur. Those techniques derived from Skinner's theory of operant conditioning are particularly suitable for changing the behavior of small children. The techniques of positive reinforcement are particularly useful to develop the desired behavior in a child (Hilgard and Bower, 1966). With this technique, the positive reinforcements. such as praise and reward, become contingent, i.e. they are placed in a systematic relation to the behavior that is to be built up. An additional operant technique, which is applied in our program, is chaining of behaviors. This method serves to develop more complex behaviors in the child which are required, e.g. when crossing a road. Such a complex chain of behaviors like road crossing consists of a sequence of elementary behaviors: stopping at the kerb, looking to the left, looking to the right, looking to the left again, etc. Another technique which is very important in the program is stimulus control (stimulus discrimination). This technique works with differential reinforcement and is used to set the stage for responding. The discriminative stimuli in our program are environmental cues like traffic lights, sidewalks, kerbs. These cues have to achieve control over the child's behavior. This technique is used for developing behaviors such as "stopping at the kerb", "cross when the light turns green", "stopping at the line of vision", "cross when the road is clear". Another important operant technique is stimulus generalization. The child must learn to transfer one kind of behavior acquired in a certain traffic situation to others that are similar. The training therefore should be conducted not only in the child's neighborhood, but repeated in surroundings the child is not familiar with. According to Bandura's Social Learning Theory, modeling procedures are particularly suitable to introduce the desired behavior and to enlarge the behavioral repertoire. In this learning process, the child observes a model which acts the way the child has to learn and it soon learns to show the new behavior itself. Therefore, parents participating in this training program are taught to reflect on their own (model) behavior and to show adequate model behavior within the training program. The parents are requested to demonstrate the correct behavior in road traffic to their children at all times. In addition, according to the findings of Bandura et al. (1%6), it is extremely important that parents verbalize their model behavior simultaneously in order fo focus the attention of their children on the relevant model behavior. Finally, the importance of positive reinforcement of the child's imitative behavior by the parents is emphasized. THE LEARNING OBJECTIVES OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM (a) The learning objectives for the children Since the aim of our training program is to modify the pedestrian behavior of children, the learning objectives are either behavioral or operationalized in terms of behavior. In order to determine the learning objectives for the training program a task analysis was made. Every learning objective combines a specific content (e.g. kerb, parked vehicles, cross sections, etc.) with a specific behavior (e.g. stop, look right-left, etc.) (Tyler, 1970). However, this two-dimensional matrix proved too limited, since it does not include one of the most important factors which causes accidents, i.e. the distraction of the child through games or friends, etc. Many authors have emphasized the problems arising out of the child's total absorption in his games (Sandels, 1974), its small attention span (Grayson, 1972) and its propensity for distraction at preschool age (Limbourg and Giinther, 1977). If a child's attention is diverted, it behaves much more irrationally than would be the case if it were to concentrate on the traffic situation (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). These findings have to be included in a training program. Distraction, however, can neither be classified as content (a traffic situation the child has to cope with) nor as behavior in a traffic situation. It is an
Road safety education of preschool children
259
aggravating condition. For that reason, we have changed Tyler's two dimensional objective matrix to a three dimensional model. The third dimension describes the condition which modifies the final behavior. Although there are a number of aggravating conditions (rain, ice, noise, etc.), we have concentrated entirely on the condition of distraction. This decision was based on the results of research about the behavior of children in traffic situations (task analysis). Proceeding from Tyler's matrix of objectives, we have collected as many contents, i.e. situation, the child could encounter in traffic, as possible (e.g. kerbs, parked vehicles, pedestrian crossings, cross sections, etc.). From this collection of contents we selected those which have to be considered essential for mastering traffic situations. We intend to call these contents "elementary". Those contents which are tied to very specific environmental conditions (e.g. streets without a sidewalk, streetcar rails, with cars parked on the sidewalk, etc.) have not been taken into consideration, since they present no problems to the majority of parents. Following this, an analysis of these situations with respect to the behavior they demand from the pedestrian was made. For this, we followed to some extent the study of Older and Grayson (1974). Thus we arrived at a collection of behaviors that are required in traffic. Finally, the two dimensions (situation and behavior) were combined. Then the third dimension (aggravating condition = distraction) was added. Every objective therefore consists of three individual elements: (a) situation, (b) behavior and (c) distraction. These learning objectives were then arranged hierarchically in the order of difficulties they present to children. In order to judge the degree of difficulties the learning objectives present, we used the results from accident analysis, behavior observation, studies on traffic participation, etc., as well as studies about children's abilities (perception, motor control, etc.). The objectives arrived at are summarized in Table 1. (b) The learning objectives/or the parents On the basis of the objectives and training methods chosen for the training program, we arrived at the following objectives for the parents: Objective 1: The parents must learn to determine the objectives for their children independently The requirements to be met by a training program for road safety education vary greatly and depend on a number of factors, such as the traffic situation in the neighborhood, the behavior of the child in traffic situations, the age of the child, etc. For that reason, we considered it not feasible to determine the objectives for the training on the basis of one single factor, such as the age of the child. Rather, we thought it necessary to enable and train the parents so that they can determine the objectives for the training of their child themselves. Applying the techniques of behavior modification (Schulte, 1974), parents should be encouraged to do the following on
Table 1. The learning objectives of the road safety training program training stage I
I. walk at the inner side of sidewalk 2. Stop at kerb
training stage II
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
look to the left and to the right at the kerb cross the road straight ahead cross the road quickly but w i t h o u t rmnning cross over at traffic lights while the light is green crossing over at zebra crossing for pedestrian: give a signal by extending the arm 8. crossing over at zebra crossing for pedestrian: wait until the cars stop before crossing over 9. select zebra crossing for p e d e s t r i a n or traffic light to cross the road
Fraining stage III
IO. stop at the line of vision 11. look to the left, to the right and to the left at the line of vision
Training stage IV
12. walk alone to the kindergarten,
school etc.
260
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
their own: (a) an analysis of the child's behavior in traffic (with the aid of a test sheet which refers to the child's behavior) (b) observation of child's behavior in traffic (with observation sheet), (c) the selection of the learning objectives. Objective 2: Parents must learn to apply training methods correctly (a) Parents should at all times demonstrate the correct behavior to their children. (b) Parents should always explain loud and clearly what they are doing. (c) Parents should reward their children for correct behavior in traffic situations. Objective 3: Parents must learn to check the effectiveness of the safety training Parents should be able to evaluate whether the objectives aimed at have been realized or not (Kroj and Pfafferott, 1975). To carry out this effectiveness check, the technique of behavior observation mentioned above is used. The parents observe their child in various traffic situations on different occasions. This observation will show whether the child has mastered the behavior it has practiced and whether it remains stable, i.e. whether the child reacts in the same way permanently. The effectiveness check should be continuous, i.e. it must be applied at every stage of the training. The data on the behavior thus collected will at the same time serve as a starting point for determining the next objectives.
DEVELOPMENT AND TRIAL RUN OF THE PARENT TRAINING PROGRAM FOR ROAD SAFETY EDUCATION
The training program is the result of a long process of development and trial. In the course of this process, we have conducted four pilot studies. These studies served to test: 1. objectives 2. training methods 3. employment of parents as agents for road safety education 4. the use of various media for the orientation of parents (film, pamphlet, parent teacher meeting). In the following, the four pilot studies are briefly described (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). (a) Pilot study I The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of behavioral techniques for teaching safe pedestrian behavior to 3-7 year old children. Beyond that, various objectives in the matrix of learning objectives were to be evaluated. Fifty eight children from 3 to 7 years old (approximately I0 per group) were matched on the basis of a pretest (observation of behavior), and then placed at random in an experimental group or a control group. Other matching criteria were age, sex and social status of the parents. The experimental group went through behavioral road safety training which included the techniques outlined above. The control group received theoretical road safety instruction. The children in this group played with toy automobiles and pedestrians. During the play, they were given explanations about the most important rules for pedestrians. The pretest (observation of behavior) was carried out with two conditions: (1) The child was asked to cross the street to meet the administrator of the test. (2) The administrator of the test played ball with a child in a park. During the game, he threw the ball into the street, so that the child had a chance to run after it. Among other things, stopping and orientation at the kerb and line of vision were recorded (Limbourg and Gerber, 1978). After the training program was completed, the same test (posttest) was repeated to check the effectiveness of the training. The results of the pilot study show that systematic behavioral training for traffic situations can cause significant changes from pretest to posttest after only a few training sessions (8
Road safety education of preschool children
261
sessions). With the exception of the group of 7-year-olds, the experimental groups showed in all instances greater improvement than the control groups. The group of 7-year-olds proved that theoretical instruction (control group) has a significant influence on the behavior in traffic situations. At this developmental stage, children are better able to control their behavior in a cognitive manner. The effectiveness of the behavioral training became most apparent in situations where the children's attention was distracted by the ball game. Out of the 29 children that were trained, 28 stopped at the kerb before running after the ball. Only one 3-year-old child did not stop. Of the control group, only 11 of the 29 children stopped at the kerb, and 8 of these were in the two highest age brackets. Similar results were noted with the orientation at the kerb (see Table 2). These results confirm those of other studies, in which it was found that children who received a behavioral training were better able to handle in real life traffic situations than those children who had only received theoretical instruction (e.g. Colborne, 1971). The evaluation of the objectives resulted in some changes of the program. It turned out that some of the objectives, such as stopping the line of vision, etc., were too difficult for 3- and 4-year-olds, while other objectives, such as keeping on the inner side of a sidewalk proved too easy for the older children. This led to a first revision of the matrix of learning objectives. (b) Pilot study II The central point of this study was the question as to what extent specific materials such as leaflets and videofilms can help parents train their children for traffic situations. For this purpose, 74 parents and their children were assigned to an experimental group (parents train the children themselves) and a control group (children were trained by psychologists). The assignment was made on the basis of a pretest and various socioeconomic criteria. The parents were prepared and schooled for the training in two sessions, where a video film was shown. In this film, parents demonstrated the training stops with their children. A discussion during the session was to supply impetus and criticism, and to uncover problems that might arise from the training or the training instructions. In order to test the success of the training, all children in both groups were observed under
Table 2. Results of pre- and posttest of 58 children aged 3 to 7 (number of children who fulfilled criteria) Observation Group
without
distraction
)retest
posttest
pretest
posttest
13
28
5
28
17
29
8
29
s t o p at the line of vision
O
25
0
13
look to the left and to the r i g h t at the line of vision
4
27
5
21
13
20
9
11
16
20
7
12
O
6
0
I
2
13
3
8
Behavior
stop kerb behavioral training n = 29
look to the r i g h t a n d to the left at the k e r b
stop kerb
theoretical
instruction n = 29
at the
at the
l o o k to the r i g h t and to the left at I the k e r b stop a t line of vision
with
distraction
the
look to the left and to the r i g h t at the line of vision
262
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
=
o 0
0
~
0
~
0
~'~
.~
~.~
~
~ ~
o
~
o
o
~ o
o un
.~_
~=
-~
e,n
0
~
0
0
¢'~
o
.~
~ o
~ o~ =
~=_ "~,
o
o
~
~
~
0
~
~.
,, .~ ~.
~
~:~
~= ~
o
~
.,-t
~
o
,,~
o
o
4.J
=~
~,1
-~~=
0
~ ~.~
~,.
.~
~
®
.
t~
~
.
.
~~ ° ~.
~
"~"
.
0
~
~ ' ~
"~'
~-~
o °~ I~ ~
~-~
co
0
~1 0
0
o~
O~ en
o ~
.,'t ~
~o
~Oo
--4 .,-4 r-
~
~
~o .;,.t . ~
o~= ~=-~ o~ ~=
o .~
Road safety education of preschool children
263
normal and distracting conditions before and after the training and 6 weeks after the pretest. As was the case with pilot study I, this study proved that a systematic behavioral training of children between 3 and 7 years can cause great pre- and posttest changes. A comparison of the two groups showed that parents can improve the performance of their child nearly as well as psychologists (see Table 3). Only with the group of 6-year-oids, there was a significant difference in favor of the children trained by the psychologists. A double check with the parents allows the conclusion that, although they were not able to use the training methods as effectively as the psychologists, they were definitely at an advantage with respect to the conditions of training, since they could, for instance, choose the best time for the training. This is emphasized by the fact that the success of the parents training efforts is closely connected with the extent to which the training methods are understood and realized in practice. Furthermore, there is a positive connection between the motivation of the parents (expressed by the frequency of the training) and the success of the training. Pilot study II showed that parents really are able to produce positive changes in the child's behavior in traffic situations. At the same time, however, it became apparent that the success of a parent training is dependent on the quality of the training instructions and on the motivation of the parents. The results of this study made it necessary to reevaluate and revise the matrix of objectives. (c) Pilot study III The purpose of this study was the trial and further improvement of the training for road safety on the basis of pilot studies I and II. For this reason, 64 parents with children aged 3 to 7 were divided into two groups, according to the results of a pretest and to socioeconomic criteria. Psychologists closely observed the experimental group during the training and gave feedback to the parents. This group was compared with a control group of parents who had received only theoretical instructions, but were neither observed nor advised. The purpose of the feedback through the psychologists during the training was to make it easier for the parents to assimilate the methods and objectives and to deal directly with any difficulties they encountered. During two training sessions, a shortened version of the video film of pilot study II was shown and improved training instructions were distributed. The parents were also asked for comments on the materials used. As in the two previous studies, the children were observed before and after the training in two specific situations. In addition, in order to validitate the standarsized observations, a secret (hidden) observation of the children was conducted. The effectiveness of realistic behavioral training was proved by this pilot study as well (see Table 4). It was surprising to note that the behavior of the children at the line of vision (improvement up to 49%) improved more than the behavior at the kerb (up to 25%). This might be explained by the fact that many mothers and their children considered the exercise "stop at the kerb" too easy. They therefore proceeded more quickly to the more difficult exercises (training at the line of vision), which were repeated more often. The parents' motivation for carrying out the training program was extremely high, and all mothers completed the program. The frequency and intensity of the exercises was not less with the control group than with the experimental group, although the experimental group was under a stronger "exercise compulsion" due to the presence of an observer. Again, a positive relation between intensity of exercises and success of the training could be noted. Parents clearly are able to improve the learning process of their children with the aid of the training program. (d) Pilot study IV Unlike the previous pilot studies, this study was not planned as a comparative evaluation, but rather as an analysis of problems encountered by the parents during the training. We proceeded from the assumption that an experimental procedure should be supplemented by a field study which enables the researchers to conduct intensive discussions with parents about training content, objectives and methods. Thirty seven parents with children between the age of 3 and 7 participated in this project. Some of the most important results are listed below: Objectives: It turned out that some of the objectives placed too heavy a demand on the
264
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
younger children and that others were too easy for the older children. As the other pilot studies had shown already, the number of objectives had to be reduced to approximately 10--15 if they were to be applied successfully by the parents. Methods of road safety training: Observation showed that parents were able to apply the behavioral training techniques successfully. Difficulties: Problems in the training primarily were a result of lack of motivation on the part of the child. Some parents requested improved instructions for training. In general, the parents rated the training extremely positively in all pilot studies. Even if the realization of the objectives and application of techniques in the program presented difficulties in some cases, most parents were convinced of the usefulness of the training program. In particular, the participants explained, that they had gained a better understanding of the problems and felt more secure in dealing with the behavior of their child in traffic situations. The pilot studies on the effectiveness of the training program were so promising that the government of Baden-Wiirttemberg decided to extend the Tiibingen road safety program and to conduct a full scale test in the entire state of Baden-Wiirttemberg, bearing the costs for this project. From January to May 1978, the 3rd television program ran a TV campaign to inform parents of 2-7-year-olds about the training program. In addition, the Ministry of the Interior published a brochure accompanying the television program which was distributed in all kindergartens to parents of preschool children. At the end of this preparatory process, the training program was evaluated in detail. TIlE FINAL TRAINING PROGRAM (a) Introduction to the training: The Tiibingen road safety program is a media package which consists of a film showing the training stages (model film for parents) and a brochure which gives concrete instructions as to what to do in the different stages. The different stages are not tailored to a specific age. The individual differences in the various age groups are so pronounced that a differentiation of this kind cannot serve a realistic purpose. It is much more important to determine what kind of traffic situation the child can actually handle and what it cannot do yet. If, for example, the child has already mastered the behavioral objectives of the second stage, it can start directly with the third training stage. The learning objectives are structured hierarchically and parents should only proceed to the next objective when the child has completely mastered the previous objective. The training program can be used within the framework of parent-teacher meetings in Kindergarten or school or brought to the attention of parents via an institutional medium, such as television. The film, however, is an integral part of the program which always has to be used in the training. In the first step of the training the parents are told how to assess the pedestrian behavior of their child. Parents are requested to fill out a questionnaire and answer questions about the behavior of their child in various traffic situations. The answers are then double checked by systematic observation in order to make them more objective. Finally, the child has to be observed in a real traffic situation to select the appropriate training stage. This observation should be made twice: (a) observation of the child when it concentrates on the traffic: the child is told to cross the road alone as well as it is able to (back and forth), (b) observation of the child when other children or a game are distracting its attention from the traffic. On a test sheet specially designed for this purpose, the parents describe the behavior of their child as it crosses and recrosses the street, how it behaves at the kerb or line of vision (stopping and orientation). On the basis of this behavior assessment parents are asked to select the relevant exercises from a total of 4 training stages. The actual training for road safety begins with the selection of the relevant training stage. (b) The training stages
The first training stage. This training stage can be conducted with children between the age of 2 and 3. The child learns that it has to walk on the inner side of the sidewalk, next to the buildings, and not on the kerb side. It also has to learn to always stop at the kerb, even if its attention is distracted by friends, games or animals. The second training stage. Children from the age of 4 onwards can participate in this training stage. The children have to learn to cross the street alone at a point where their vision is not
Road safety education of preschool children
~z
~
265
tt~ ~o
~
t~ o~
oo
5
~
-
o~ t~
~o
e~
tn
~N
~.o
o~
~o
o~
~ o~ ~
~
~
266
M. LIMBOURGand D. GERBER
obstructed by park.ed vehicles. They should stop at the kerb, look to the left, to the right and again briefly to the left, to make sure that the road is free, and then cross the street quickly but without running. This behavioral sequence should also be done with the child's attention distracted. At this training stage, the children also learn how to cross the street at a traffic light and a pedestrian crossing. The third training stage. This stage is designed for children of 5 years or more. The child has to learn how to cross the street from a point between parked vehicles. It has to learn to go to the line of vision, to look to the left, to the right and to the left again. It should cross only when the street is clear, i.e. if no car is in sight. This behavioral sequence should become so ingrained that the child will always follow it, even if distracted by games, friends, etc. The fourth training stage. This training stage is meant for 5-7 year old children. The child has to learn to safely make its way to school or kindergarten without the help of the parehts. Furthermore, it has to learn to plan its route independently and to select the safest places for crossing the street. It also has to learn to deal with special problems, such as defect traffic lights, construction sites, etc. The final evaluation of the training program. A comprehensive research project served to make the final evaluation of our parent training program (Limbourg and Gerber, 1c79). The pedestrian behavior of 658 children between 3 and 6 years of age was observed (pretest). The children had to cross a road 4 times under different attentional conditions (with and without distracting stimuli). The results of this pretest showed that 90% of the observed children crossed the road quickly without stopping at the curb and without looking to the left and to the right. This behavior pattern was labeled as "unsafe". In order to improve the pedestrian behavior of the observed children our behavioral training program was applied to them. The behavioral training program consisted of a film (30 minutes) and an instruction booklet for parents. Both set various behavioral learning objectives and demonstrate how to reach them. The film shows model parents carrying out the behavioral modification program with their children in different traffic situations. The booklet includes pictures from this film with training instructions for the parents. The training experiment was carried out with the 658 "pretest-children", four groups of approximately 168 children each. The children were matched on the basis of age, sex and social status of their parents. The urban characteristics of the living area were controlled as well. The experimental design included two experimental and two control groups: Experimental group I: behavioral training applied by children's mothers while being observed by psychologists. Experimental group H: the same as group I but without observation by psychologists. Control group III: mothers only saw a film and were given a booklet that showed road safety problems in childhood--i.e, placebo treatment. Control group IV: no treatment at all. All four groups were observed three times: (a) pretest (b) posttest (after four weeks of training) (c) follow up (four months after the posttest). The analysis of variance of the safety scores showed a highly significant effect of the behavioral training on the pedestrian behavior of the two experimental groups (see Table 5). It could be shown that the results of the behavioral training program depended upon the age of the children, the training quality and the training frequency. The follow up study showed that safety scores dropped in all groups but still were higher in the two experimental groups than in the control groups. This program was applied first in the state of Baden-Wiirttemberg in 1978 and then was applied all over West Germany in 1980.
REFERENCES Bailey N., The developmentof motorabilitiesdueingthe first three years. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Development l, 1-26. 1935. Bandura A., Principles o[ Behavior Modification. Holt,Rinehartand Winston,New York, 1969. Bandura A., GrusecJ. E. and MenloveF., Observationallearningas a functionof symbolizationand incentiveset. Child Development 37, 499-506, 1966. Bongard A. and WinterfeldU., Verkehrswissenund Verkehrsver-standnis bei 5- bis 6]iihrigen Kindern. Bundesanstaltfi.ir Strassenwesen: UrdaU-und SicherheitsforschungStrassenverkehr,Heft 13, K61n1977. Colborne H.. Two Experiments on Methods o[ Training Children in Road Sa[eiy. Eeport LR 403, Transport and Road Research Laboratory,1970.
Road safety education of preschool children
267
Cratty B. J., Perceptual and Motor Development in Infants and Children• Mcmillan, New York, 1970. Finlayson H. M., Children's Road Behavior and Personality. TRRL-Report TN 739, 1972. Finlayson H. M., Personality Changes of Children's Perception of Cues of Danger. University of Highfield, Dept. of Psychology, Southampton, 1972. Fischer H. and Cohen A. S., Leistrungsm6glichkeiten yon Kindern ira Strassenverkehr. Bericht zum Forschungsprojekt 7509 der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, K61n 1978. Fisk A. and Cliffe H., The Effects of Teaching the Green Cross Code to Young Children. Department of the Environment, TRRL Report SR 168 UC. Crowthorne, 1975. Gelfand D. M. and Hartmann D. P., Child Behavior: Analysis and Thereapy. Pergamon, New York, 1975. Gerber D., Huber O. and Limbourg M., Verkehrserziehungira Vorschulalter. Bericht der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, K61n, 1977. Gorges R., Die Schwierigkeiten der Lernzielbeschreibung--Ans~itze tier Verkehrserziehung im Vorschulalter. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 2, 3-8, 1972. • Gorges R., Bauerfeld F. and Schlagel T., Examination of traffic behavior of children at the age of five to seven. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 1, 1976. Grayson G. B., The Hampshire Child Pedestrian Accident Study• TRRL Report LR 668, Department of the Environment, Crowthorne, 1975. Giinther R. and Limbourg M., Dimensionen der Verkehrswelt yon Kindern. Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen. Reihe Unfall- und Sicherheitsforschung Strassenverkehr Heft 4, 13-80, 1976. Heinrich C. and Langosch I., Einfluss der Informiertheit auf das Verhalten yon Kindern im Strassenverkehr. Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen. Reihe Unfall. und Sicherheitsforschung Strassenverkehr. Heft 4, 81-172, K61n 1976. Hilgard E. R. and Bower G. H., Theories of Learning. Meredith, New York, 1966. Kaiser A., Verkehrsp~idagogik--wissenschaftsorganisatorische Massnehmen der Lehrerbildung insbesondere im Hochschulbereich. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 1, 30.-32, 1974. Knightning F. A., Colborne H. V. and Grayson G. B., A Pilot Study of Child Pedestrians in an Residential Area. TN 736 Transport and Road Research Laboratory, 1972. Kogan N., Cognitive Styles in Infancy and Early Childhood. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1976. Kroj G. and Pfafferott I., Empirische Grundlegung der Verkehrserziehung. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 3, 5-15, 1975. Limbourg M., Das Verhalten von ~9j~ihrigen Kindern bei tier Strasseniiberquerung. Zeitschrift fiir Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie 23, 666--677, 1976. Limbourg, M. and Gerber D., Das Verhalten yon 3- bis 7j/ihrigen Kindern bei der Strasseniiberquerung unter Ablenkungsbedingungen. Zeitschrift fiir Verkehrserziehung 2, 10-13, 1978. Limbourg M. and Gerber D., Das Tiibinger Elterntrainingsprogramra fiir die Verkehrserziehung yon Kindern im Vorschulalter. Bericht der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, 1979. Limbourg M. and Gerber D., Effizienzkontrolle des Tiibinger Verkehrstrainings. Bericht der Bundesanstalt fiir Strassenwesen, Tiibingen, 1979. Limbourg M. and Giinther R., Erleben und Verhalten yon 4- bis 9j~ihrigen Kindern im Strassenverkehr. Zeitschriyt [~r Verkehrserziehung 1, 3-9, 1977. Limbourg M., H6pfner S. and Niebling Ch., Die Stabilit~t des Verhaltens yon 4- bis 9j~ihrigen Kindern bei der Strasseniiberquerung. Zeitschriytfiir Verkehrserziehung 3, 3-8, 197L Mackwortb J. F., The development of attention• In The Development of Cognitive Processes. (Edited by V. Hamilton and M. D. Vernon. pp. 111-153. Academic Press, London 1976. Nummenmaa T., Sylv~inenM., Kotakorpi S., L~ihdeniemiE., Orell R., Riekkinen F., Ruuhilehto K., Toivoi T. and Thoti R. L., Preschool Child in Urban Traffic. Report 68, University of Tampere, Tampere, 1972. Nummenmaa T., Ruuhilehto K. and Syv/inen M., Traffic Education Program for Preschool Aged Children and Children Starting School. Report 17, Liikenneturva, Helsinki, 1975. OECD Special Research Group on Pedestrian Safety Report. United Kingdom Transport and Road Research Laboratory. Crowthorne, Berkshire, 1978. Older S. J. Grayson G. B., Perception and Decision in the Pedestrian Task. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, Supplementary Report 49, UC, 1974. Rothengatter J. A., Traffic training of children, a literature review on the basis of an instructional model. Verkeerskundig Studiecentrura. Report VK 77-05, University of Groningen, 1977. Routledge D., Repetto-Wright R. and Howarth C., The exposure of young children to accident risk as pedestrians. Ergonomics 17, 457--:480, 1974. Sandels S., Why are children injuried in traffic? The Skandia Report II, Stockholm, 1974. Sandels S., Children in Traffic. Elek, London, 1975. Sandels S., Young children in tra$c. Brit. J. Educational Psych. 40, 11I-116, 1970. Schulte W. and Biischges G., Strassenverkehrsbeteiligung yon Kindern und Jugendlichen. Abschlussbericht zum Forschungsprojekt 7411 der Bundesanstalt for Strassenwesen, K61n, 1976. Seemann W. and Sachsenmaier, M., Eine EIternschule zur Verkehrserziehung. Miinchen: ADAC-Verlag, 1974. Skinner B. F., Science and Human Behavior. Macmillan, New York, 1953. Sulzer-Azaroff B. and Mayer G. R., Applying Behavior Analysis Procedures with Children and Youth. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1977. Turnure J. E.. Children's reactions to distractors in a learning situation. Developmental Psychology 2, 115--122, 1970. Tyler R. W., Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction• University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1950. Van der Molen H. H., Observational studies of children's road crossing behavior: a review of the literature• In Proceedings of the International Conference on Pedestrian Safety. (Edited by A. S. Holchen). MichloI-Publ. House Technion, Haifa, 1977. Vinje M. P.. Children As Pedestrians: Abilities and Limitations. Draft paper for the OECD Workshop on Pedestrian Road Safety Education. 1978. Winkler W., Sicherheitstraining ira Vorschulalter: Zur Theorie und Praxis der vorschulischen Verkehrserziehung. Braunschweig: Rot-Gelb-Griin Verlag, 1974. Witkin H. A.. The problem of individuality in development. In Perspectives in Psychological Theory (Edited 'by B. Kaplan and S. Wapner). Essays in Honor of Heinz Werner. New York: International Universities Press. Inc. 6, 335-36l. 1960.