:
1. 31.1 51.2 51.3 51.4 51.5 61.6 62. , , 72.1 72.1.1 92.2
112.2.1 122.3 142.4 - 153. 194. , , 214.1 214.2 234.3 -75255. 275.1
275.1.1 275.1.2. 295.1.3. 315.1.4 335.2 355.2.1 355.2.2 375.2.3
395.3 415.3.1 415.3.2 435.3.3 455.3.4 475.3.5 495.4 515.4.1 515.4.2
536. 567. 588. 619. 6368
1.
, , , , . , , . , .
, , . , , .
. , , , .
. 50%. , . , , , - 50%, 70%. . , .
. , : ? , e .
, . . , . . . .
4 (Redelmeier & Tibshirani, 2001), (Strayer, Drews and
Crouch, 2006).
1. 2. , 50 km/h 14 28 . 50 km/h , . 25% . .
, , . , . (Andersson Nilsson, 1981), , (, 2008), .
. , . , .
, . , , . .
1.1
, , , . , , , , .
1.2
, , , , , , 50 km/h (), 80 km/h ( ) 120 km/h () .
1.3
, , , , , , , , . , , , , .
1.4
() : () 16. 2014. ( ) 18. 2014. Na E-75 () 26. 2014.
13:30 18:45h, 13:45 18:10h, 16:15 19:20h.
1.5
, ( , ). , . , , , 3,5 t . .
1.6
. , . , , . , . , j . , , , . , , .
2. , ,
, . , , , . , , .
, . . . . , , .
. , . . .
, . , .
2.1
SARTRE 3 2002. 2003. 97% , , 91%. , ( ), 62% 99%.
SARTRE 3 , , . , , (84%), (79%), (74%) (67%).
, (96%), (65%). , ( 80%) , , , , , , , , ( 40%).
SARTRE 3 , , 5% 34% .
SARTRE 3 , . 60% , , , 30%.
80% , , , . , , 50%.
2010. - 85%, 2009. 84%. (NOPUS), . (NOPUS) (National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration NHTSA).[footnoteRef:1] 2010. : [1:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811378.pdf 18.10.2014. ]
83% 2009. 85% 2010. . 81% 2009. 83% 2010. . 89% 2009. 91% 2010.
.
2.1.1
80%, 50%. .
( ), , . , 50%, DGT (Direccin General de Trfico, 1999). , 1998.
5957 (4811 1146 ). 3000 (DGT, 1998 ). , . (Dee, 1998, Reinfurt,
1996 Stewart, 1993).
1970. , 1992. . ( ) 81 85%, 50% (DGT, 1999 Yague, 2000).
, . . : , , , , , . , ( / ). ( ) (96,5%) (62,5%).
, . , . .
, . (Cunill, 2000). , . (1999) . , . , " " . .
, . , . (Sullman, 1998). .
. , .
(80-120 km/h), (40 km/h). M .
. , (Yage, 2000). (Dee, 1998, Eby, 2000 Hagenzieker, 1991). , .
, :
; ; ; .
2.2
2010. 5%, 0,9% 2009. . 2009. 5474 , 995 (18%) .[footnoteRef:2]
[2: http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cell-phone/ -
20.10.2014. ]
5,3% hands free . 20 4,2%, 16,4% 40 hands free. . (38,2%),
(31,5%), 5% . , hands free .[footnoteRef:3] [3: Cell phone
conversing while driving in New Zealand: Prevalence, risk
perception and legislation]
. . ( ), . 60,1% . , 26,9% , 57,9% . (23,7%) . .
.[footnoteRef:4] [4: Mobile phone use while driving in a sample of
Spanish university workers]
2.2.1
, , . (McKnight McKnight, 1993 Serafin, 1993) , . . , ,
(Redelmeier and Tibshirani, 1997).
. . ( ), . .
, . . 40 (Hornberry, 2001). , , . 1,5%. , (NHTSA, 2001) . , . 3%
.
, . , . (Insurance Research Council, 1997 and NHTSA, 2001) . ,
.
. 168 (40 ) . . . ( 7:00 19:00 ).
30. 12. 2001. . , . hand held . , . , . , , .
11863 . , 345 . 2,70 0,3% . . . , (75,83 4,6%) (82,8 1,6%).
hand held . , 2,7% . 7,5 . , 625000 , . 2,7% , 17000 .
. , , , . , (Eby, 2002). . , . .[footnoteRef:5] [5: David W.,
Jonathon M., Driber hand-held mobile phone use and safety belt use,
Michigan, 2002]
2.3
1976. , , 21%.[footnoteRef:6] [6: Andersson K., Nilsson G., The
effect of recommended and compulsory use of vehicle lights on road
accidents in Finland, 1976]
1981. , , 11%, 17% 21%.[footnoteRef:7] [7: Andersson K., Nilsson
G., The effect of accidents of compulsory use of running lights
during daylight hours in Sweden, Sweden, 1981]
1995. 7% 8%.[footnoteRef:8] , , , , . [8: Hollo P., Changes of
the DRL-Regulations and their Effects on Traffic Safety in Hungary,
Paper presented at the conference: Strategic Highway Safety Program
and Traffic Safety, the Czech Republic, 1995]
Elvik 2004. 25 .[footnoteRef:9] 5% 10%. 10% 15% 1996. . , 15%,
10% 5% . [9: Elvik R., Christensen P., and Olsen S., Daytime
Running Lights Interim Report 2: A Systematic Review of Effects on
Road Safety (TOI Report 668/2003). TOI, Norway, 2004]
- ( ).[footnoteRef:10] 3,9% 5,9%, 5%. [10: Knight I., Sexton B.,
Barlett R., Barlow T., Latham, D., and NcCrae I., Daytime Running
Lights (DRL): A Review of Reports from the European Commission (PR
170), 2006]
, . . NHTSA 2000. . , -8% 2% , 5% 7% 28% 29% - .[footnoteRef:11]
2005. NHTSA 2000. , . : -7,9% 5% , 3,8% 12% - - 23% 26% -
.[footnoteRef:12] [11: Tessmer, M., A Preliminary Assessment of the
Crash-Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps
(DRLs) (DOT HS 808 645), USA, 2000] [12: Tessmer, M., An Assessment
of Crash-Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Vehicle Daytime
Running Lamps (DRLs) (DOT HS 809 760), USA, 2005]
2.4 - [footnoteRef:13] [13: Motorcycle and moped helmets.
http://www.swov.nl/rapport /Factsheets/UK/FS_Helmets.pdf]
. 42% . a 1972, 1975. . , 25% 13% /. . . .
. . . . , , , . 1960- . , . ?
60 , 60 80 . 1800, 1100. 15-19 . , 20-54 , 25-34 . . , . , .
?
, . 2.1. . / (13%) (27%). , , .
2.4. ?
, , . : /, ( ). /. , , . , , . , , . . .
?
, R22-05 : ,
?
. 61 , , 61% . 42%.
. 1500 g .
, . . . ?
1972. , . , .
, 1975. , . 1984. 100% , 1996. 99% 86% . 2002. 91% 74% . . . 96%
84% 2008. .
. . 2% , 13% .
2008. 90% , 87% , 60% . 2002. .
ECE R22-05 . . 61%, 69%.
, . .
3.
, , , , 16. , 18. 26. 2014. . , .
50 km/h, 80 km/h 120 km/h.
. . , . . (-75), . .
() . , , , , .
: , , ( 3.) (4 12.). (, , ), . 1 2. , , .
. (, ), . 1 2. .
. (, ), . 1 2. .
. (, ), . 2.
, , , , Microsoft Office Excel v. 2013. , , , , . .
4. , ,
() , , . 600 , 100 100 .
4.1
16. 2014. . , .
( 4.1.1) 600 , 539 , 52 , 430 , 100 176 6 60 .
4.1.1.
539524301006
615481707654
60060060017660
( 4.1.2) 45 , 6 , 10 , 2 10 .
4.1.2.
> 3.5t
456102
948448
54545410
a ( 4.1.3) 100 83 , 14 , 4 , .
4.1.3.
831440
1786963
1001001003
4.1.4. 26 3 30 , 4 33 4 12 .
4.1.4.
34-12
264
429
3033
4.1.5. 31 , 30 36 , .
4.1.5.
31307
560
36367
4.1.6. 16 , 17 19 , .
4.1.6.
16172
320
19192
4.2
18. 2014. . , .
( 4.2.1) 600 , 559 , 37 , 475 , 233 321 8 178 .
4.2.1.
559374752338
4156312588170
600600600321178
( 4.2.2) 63 , 5 , 5 , .
4.2.2.
> 3.5t
63550
462628
6767678
a ( 4.2.3) 100 92 , 5 , 1 , .
4.2.3.
92510
895991
1001001001
4.2.4. 11- 3 12 , 2 41 4 12 .
4.2.4.
34-12
112
139
1241
4.2.5. , 12 14 , .
4.2.5.
14121
020
14141
4.2.6. , , .
4.2.6.
25258
000
25258
4.3 -75
(-75) 26. 2014. . , .
( 4.3.1) 600 , 562 , 87 , 545 , 203 269 8 113 .
4.3.1.
562875452038
385135566105
600600600269113
( 4.3.2) 95 , 11 , 23 , 8 18 .
4.3.2.
> 3.5t
9511238
5897710
10010010018
a ( 4.3.3) 77 70 , 6 , 3 , .
4.3.3.
70630
771743
7777773
4.3.4. 26 3 30 , 4 33 4 12 .
4.3.4.
34-12
216
319
2425
, 24. 102. : , , , . 1. 50 km/h.
4.3.6. , , .
4.3.6.
24245
000
24245
5.
, .
5.1
5.1.1
90,8% 545 , , 430 , 71,7% ( 5.1.1). , 203 75,5%, 56,8% 100 .
5.1.1.
430475545100233203688
1701255576886654170105
60060060017632126960178113
5.1.1.
. (H) : , . = 32,6 > = 9,488, H, , . .
. (H1) : , . = 19,41 > = 9,488, H1, , .
. (H2) : , . = 1,69 < = 9,488, H2, , .
5.1.2. ,
%%%%%%%%%
71,7%79,2%90,8%56,8%72,6%75,5%10%4,5%7,1%
28,3%20,8%9,2%43,2%27,4%24,5%90%95,5%92,9%
100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%
5.1.2.
5.1.2. , 6 10%, 8 4,5%, 8 7%. , .
5.1.2.
23% 23 , 5 7,5% .
, 44,4% 8 , 0% 8 .
. (H3) : 3,5t , . = 6,91 < = 9,488, H3, , .
. (H4) : 3,5t , . = 5,86 > = 9,488, H4, 3,5t , .
5.1.3.
>3,5
105232-8
4462778810
546710010818
5.1.3. 3,5t
, .
5.1.4.
>3,5
%%%%%%
18,5%7,5%23%20%0%44,4%
81,5%92,5%77%80%100%55,6%
100%100%100%100%100%100%
5.1.4. 3,5t
5.1.3.
. , 100 4 , 4%, , 4%, 1%, , . .
5.1.5.
413000
969974313
10010077313
5.1.5.
. (H5) : , . = 1,998 < = 9,488, H5, , .
. (H6) : , . = 0 < = 9,488, H6, , .
5.1.6.
4%1%3,9%0%0%0%
96%99%96,1%100%100%100%
100%100%100%100%100%100%
5.1.6.
5.1.3. , , . , . , .
5.1.4
, . ( 5.1.4.) ( 3 .), , 4 12 , . , 5.1.4. 3 (86,7%), (91,7%)
(87,5%).
5.1.7.
3 4 -12
261121426
413293919
301224334125
5.1.7.
. (H7) : 3 , . = 0,202 < = 9,488, H7, 3 , .
. (H8) : 4 12 , . = 5,32 < = 9,488, H8, 4 12 , .
5.1.8.
3 4 -12
86,7%91,7%87,5%12,1%4,9%24%
13,3%8,3%12,5%87,9%95,1%76%
100%100%100%100%100%100%
5.1.8.
4 12 . 4,9% , 24% .
5.2
5.2.1
87 , 37 .
5.2.1.
523787
548563513
600600600
5.2.1.
. (H9) : , . = 24,87 > = 9,488, H9, , .
5.2.2.
8,7%6,2%14,5%
%%%
100%100%100%
5.2.2.
14,5%, 8,7%, 6,2%.
5.2.2
11 6 , 5 .
5.2.3.
>3,5
6511
486289
5467100
5.2.3.
. (H10) : 3,5t , . = 0,27 < = 9,488, H10, 3,5t , .
5.2.4.
>3,5
11,1%7,5%11%
88,9%92,5%89%
100%100%100%
5.2.4. 3,5t
, , , 3,5. 11,1% 11%, 7,5%.
5.2.3
14 100 (14%). 5 100 (5%), 6 77 (7,8%).
5.2.5.
1456
869571
10010077
5.2.5.
. (H11) : , . = 5,983 < = 9,488, H11, , .
5.2.6.
14%5%7,8%
86%95%92,2%
100%100%100%
5.2.6.
5.2.6. , , .
5.3
5.3.1
562 93,7% , . 539 89,8%.
5.3.1.
539559562
614138
600600600
5.3.1.
. (H12) : , . = 7,66 < = 9,488, H12, , .
5.3.2.
89,8%93,2%93,7%
10,2%6,8%6,3%
100%100%100%
5.3.2.
, . , , . .
5.3.2
95 95% , . 45 83,3%.
5.3.3.
>3,5
456395
945
5467100
5.3.3. 5.3.1. 3,5t
. (H13) : 3,5t , . = 6,97 < = 9,488, H13, 3,5t , .
5.3.4.
>3,5
83,3%94%95%
16,7%6%5%
100%100%100%
5.3.4. 3,5t
, . .
5.3.3
92 92% , . 83 83%. 90,9% 70 77 .
5.3.5.
839270
1787
10010077
5.3.5.
. (H14) : , . = 5,88 < = 9,488, H14, , .
5.3.6.
83%92%90,9%
17%8%9,1%
100%100%100%
5.3.6.
, .
5.3.4
31 86,1% , .
5.3.7 , 50 km/h.
5.3.7.
3114-
50-
3614-
5.3.7.
. (H15) : , . = 2,16 < = 7,815, H15, , .
5.3.8.
86,1%100%-
13,9%0%-
100%100%-
5.3.8.
, .
5.3.5
16 84,2% , .
5.3.9.
162524
300
192524
5.3.9.
. (H16) : , . =8,08 < = 9,488, H16, , .
5.3.10.
84,2%100%100%
15,8%0%0%
100%100%100%
5.3.10.
.
5.4
5.4.1
, . 30 83,3%, 14 12 . 85,7%. , .
5.4.1.
3012-71-
62-00-
3614-71-
5.4.1.
. (H17) : , . = 0,037 < = 7,815, H17, , .
. (H18) : , . = 0 < = 7,815, H18, , .
5.4.2.
83,3%85,7%-100%100%-
16,7%14,3%-0%0%-
100%100%-100%100%-
5.4.2.
. . .
5.4.2
17 19 , . .
5.4.3.
172524285
200000
192524285
5.4.3.
. (H19) : , . = 5,3 < = 9,488, H19, , .
. (H20) : , . = 0 < = 9,488, H20, , .
5.4.4.
89,5%100%100%100%100%100%
10,5%0%0%0%0%0%
100%100%100%100%100%100%
5.4.4.
. , .
6.
6.1.1.
, , a ?Pearson- 2 :
= 32,6 > = 9,488:
= 19,41 > = 9,488:
= 1,69 < = 9,488
, .
, 3.5t a ?Pearson- 2 :
= 6,91 < = 9,488:
= 5,86 < = 9,488
.
, ?Pearson- 2 :
= 1,998 < = 9,488:
= 0 < = 9,488
.
?Pearson- 2 3 :
= 0,202 < = 9,4884 12 :
= 5,32 < = 9,488
3 , 4 12 .
?Pearson- 2 :
= 24,87 > = 9,488
.
3.5t ?Pearson- 2 :
= 0,27 < = 9,488
3.5t.
?Pearson- 2 :
= 7,66 < = 9,488
.
3.5t ?Pearson- 2 :
= 6,97 < = 9,488
3.5t.
?Pearson- 2 :
= 5,88 < = 9,488
.
?Pearson- 2 :
= 2,16 < = 7,815
.
?Pearson- 2 :
= 8,08 < = 9,488
.
, ?Pearson- 2 :
= 0,037 < = 9,488:
= 0 < = 9,488
.
, ?Pearson- 2 :
= 5,3 < = 9,488:
= 0 < = 9,488
.
7.
. , , . , .
. , , , , :
, , , , . : ; ; ; , ; ; () , ; () ; ; , ; , ; : ; , ; ; . , , ,
. :
, , , ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (facebook, twitter...); ; ; , ; , , , ;
.
. , , , , . , .
, : ; ; ; ; , , , ; . . . . , . . , , .
8.
, , , , , , , . , , , . . , , .
71,7%, 79,2%, 90,8%. 18,5%, 7,5%, 23%. 4%, 1%, 3,9%. 3 86,7%,
91,7%, 87,5%, 4 12 12,1%, 4,9%, 24%.
56,8%, 72,6%, 75,5%. 20%, 0%, 44,4%. , 0%. 10%, 4,5%, 7,1%.
80% . . .
8,7%, 6,2%, 14,5%. 11,1%, 7,5%, 11%. 14%, 5%, 7,8%.
, . . .
89,8%, 93,2%, 93,7%. 83,3%, 94%, 95%. 83%, 92%, 90,9%. 86,1%,
100%, . 84,2%, 100%.
, , . .
83,3%, 85,7%, . 89,5%, 100%. 100%, . , 100%. , , .
. , , . , .
9.
[1] , " ", . 41/2009, 53/2010 101/2011.[2] Cell phone conversing
while driving in New Zealand: Prevalence, risk perception and
legislation.[3] Mobile phone use while driving in a sample of
Spanish university workers.[4] David, W., Jonathon, M., (2002).
Driber hand-held mobile phone use and safety belt use, Michigan.[5]
Andersson, K., Nilsson, G., (1976). The effect of recommended and
compulsory use of vehicle lights on road accidents in Finland.[6]
Andersson, K., Nilsson, G., (1981). The effect of accidents of
compulsory use of running lights during daylight hours in Sweden,
Sweden.[7] Hollo, P., (1995). Changes of the DRL-Regulations and
their Effects on Traffic Safety in Hungary, Paper presented at the
conference: Strategic Highway Safety Program and Traffic Safety,
the Czech Republic.[8] Elvik, R., Christensen, P., and Olsen, S.,
(2004). Daytime Running Lights Interim Report 2: A Systematic
Review of Effects on Road Safety (TOI Report 668/2003). TOI,
Norway. [9] Knight, I., Sexton, B., Barlett, R., Barlow, T.,
Latham, D., and NcCrae, I., (2006). Daytime Running Lights (DRL): A
Review of Reports from the European Commission (PR 170).[10]
Tessmer, M., (2000). A Preliminary Assessment of the Crash-Reducing
Effectiveness of Passenger Car Daytime Running Lamps (DRLs) (DOT HS
808 645), USA.[11] Tessmer, M.,(2005). An Assessment of
Crash-Reducing Effectiveness of Passenger Vehicle Daytime Running
Lamps (DRLs) (DOT HS 809 760), USA.[12] Cunill, M., (2000).
Increasing safety-belt use in Spanish drivers: a field test of
personal prompts, Spanish.[13] Cunill, M., Gras, M., Planes, M.,
Oliveras, C., Sullman, M., (2003). An insvegation of factors
redusing seat belt use amongst Spanish drivers and pesengers on
urban roads, Spain.[14] Hallett, C., Lambert, A., Regan, M.,
(2011). Cell phone conversing while driving in New Zealand:
Prevalence, risk perception and legislation, New Zealand.[15] Seat
belt use in 2010-Overall results.
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811378.pdf 18.10.2014. .[16] Car
accident-cell phone.
http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cell-phone/ - 20.10.2014.
e.[17] Motorcycle and moped helmets. http://www.swov.nl/rapport
/Factsheets/UK/FS_Helmets. Pdf - 22.10.2014. e.
4.1.1. 21 4.1.2. 21 4.1.3. 22 4.1.4. 22 4.1.5. 22 4.1.6. 23
4.2.1. 23 4.2.2. 233 4.2.3. 24 4.2.4. 24 4.2.5. 24 4.2.6. 25 4.3.1.
25 4.3.2. 255 4.3.3. 26 4.3.4. 26 4.3.6. 26 5.1.1. 277 5.1.2. , 29
5.1.3. 300 5.1.4. 311 5.1.5. 322 5.1.6. 333 5.1.7. 344 5.1.8. 355
5.2.1. 366 5.2.2. 366 5.2.3. 377 5.2.4. 38 5.2.5. 39 5.2.6. 400
5.3.1. 411 5.3.2. 422 5.3.3. 433 5.3.4. 444 5.3.5. 455 5.3.6. 466
5.3.7. 477 5.3.8. 48 5.3.9. 49 5.3.10. 500 5.4.1. 511 5.4.2. 522
5.4.3. 533 5.4.4. 544 6.1.1.
..................................................................................................................................56
2.4. 16 5.1.1. 288 5.1.2. 29 5.1.3. 3,5t300 5.1.4. 3,5t311
5.1.5. 322 5.1.6. 333 5.1.7. 344 5.1.8. 355 5.2.1. 366 5.2.2. 377
5.2.3. 388 5.2.4. 3,5t39 5.2.5. 400 5.2.6. 411 5.3.1. 422 5.3.2.
433 5.3.3. 5.3.1. 3,5t444 5.3.4. 3,5t455 5.3.5. 466 5.3.6. 477
5.3.7. 488 5.3.8. 49 5.3.9. 500 5.3.10. 511 5.4.1. 522 5.4.2. 533
5.4.3. 544 5.4.4. 555
2 |
