Mobile Phones A Utiliser Absolument

THINK!
Road Safety Campaign Evaluation Post evaluation of June 2009 Mobile Phone campaign Report
July 2009
Prepared for: Department for Transport Prepared by: Helen Angle Sarah Bone Emily Goddard Emma Johns BMRB Social Research Telephone: 020 8433 4397 Email: Helen.Angle@bmrb.co.uk Part of BMRB Limited (British Market Research Bureau) BMRB/HA/45108903
BMRB is ISO9001 accredited, and is certified as working to the requirements of MRQSA/BS7911 market research quality standards
Copyright: survey findings and deliverables are normally intended for use within the Client's organisation or its consultants and other associate organisations such as advertising agencies. Should the Client intend wider circulation of the survey findings and deliverables, the Client should inform BMRB prior to such disclosure and agree the form and content with BMRB. The client should acknowledge BMRB as the source of the information with wording acceptable to BMRB.
Table of Contents
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 2 2.1 2.2 Introduction ...................................................................................... 1 Background ..................................................................................... 1 Research objectives and method ......................................................... 1 Arrangement of this report................................................................. 2 Management summary and recommendations ........................................ 3 Campaign awareness ........................................................................ 3 Campaign communication .................................................................. 3 2.2.1 Communication from Split Screen TV ad........................................ 3 2.2.2 Communication from Concentratin radio ad ................................... 4 2.2.3 Attitudes towards use of mobile phones whilst driving ...................... 4 2.3 3 3.1 Conclusions and recommendations ...................................................... 5 Campaign awareness .......................................................................... 6 Spontaneous awareness of advertising or publicity about using mobile phones
whilst driving ........................................................................................... 6 3.2 Proven recall .................................................................................... 7 3.2.1 What was said examples............................................................ 9 3.3 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 Prompted recognition of Mobiles campaign ..........................................10 Campaign communication...................................................................15 Communication of the Split Screen TV ad...........................................15 Communication of the Concentratin radio ad ......................................19 Believed main message of the ads......................................................22 4.3.1 Main message of TV ad ...............................................................23 4.3.2 Main message of radio ad ............................................................23 4.4 Thoughts or feelings about the ads.....................................................24 4.4.1 Thoughts or feelings about the TV ad ............................................25 4.4.2 Thoughts or feelings about the radio ad .........................................26
5 5.1 5.2
Attitudes towards use of mobile phones whilst driving.............................27 Agreement with statements about mobile phones and driving ................27 Perceived likelihood of getting caught by police ....................................33
APPENDICES ...........................................................................................35 APPENDIX A: SAMPLE PROFILE ..................................................................35 Driving status..........................................................................................35 Commercial radio listenership ....................................................................36 APPENDIX B - SAMPLING METHOD .............................................................37 APPENDIX C: WEIGHTING PROCEDURES .....................................................38 APPENDIX D: QUESTIONNAIRE ..................................................................40
Copyright: survey findings and deliverables are normally intended for use within the Client's organisation or its consultants and other associate organisations such as advertising agencies. Should the Client intend wider circulation of the survey findings and deliverables, the Client should inform BMRB prior to such disclosure and agree the form and content with BMRB. The client should acknowledge BMRB as the source of the information with wording acceptable to BMRB.
Index of Charts
Chart 3a: Where seen/heard advertising and publicity about using mobile phones whilst driving (prompted).................................................6 Chart 3b: What remember about advertising/ publicity for drivers using mobile phones whilst driving (unprompted) .................................8 Chart 3c: Chart 3d: Chart 3e: Chart 3f: Table 4a: Total prompted recognition of mobiles campaign over time .....11 Prompted recognition of Split Screen TV ad over time............12 Prompted recognition of Concentratin radio ad .........................13 Prompted recognition of online THINK! Driving Challenge ..........14 Which of the following do you personally feel about the Split Screen TV ad (prompted) all vs. target group over time..........16 Table 4b: Which of the following do you personally feel about the Split Screen TV ad (prompted) by key subgroups ........................................18 Chart 4a: Which of the following do you personally feel about the
Concentratin radio ad (prompted).............................................20 Table 4c: Which of the following do you personally feel about the Concentratin radio ad (prompted) total sample and key subgroups ..............21 Chart 4b: Chart 4c: Chart 4d: Chart 4e: Chart 5a: Main message of mobile phones Split Screen TV ad ..................23 Main message of mobile phones Concentratin radio ad .............24 Thoughts or feelings about Split Screen TV ad ..........................25 Thoughts or feelings about Concentratin radio ad .....................26 Agreement with statement A driver who is talking on a mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving ..............................27 Chart 5b: Agreement with statement Talking on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a *crash........................28 Chart 5c: Agreement with statement If I called someone and realised they were driving I would hang up ....................................................29 Chart 5d: Agreement with statement A driver who is writing a text on a mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving ..................30
Chart 5e:
Agreement with statement Writing a text on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash ...............31
Chart 5f:
Agreement with statement A driver who is reading a text on a mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving ..................32
Chart 5g:
Agreement with statement Reading a text on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash ...............33
Chart 5h:
Likelihood of someone using a mobile phone whilst driving being caught by the police ....................................................................34
Chart A1: Chart A2:
Driving Status .............................................................................35 How often listen to commercial radio..........................................36
1
1.1
Introduction
Background
The THINK! Road Safety publicity campaign was launched in 2000, as part of the Governments road safety strategy, Tomorrows roads: safer for everyone. The strategy set out targets to reduce road casualties in Great Britain by 50% for children and 40% overall between 2000 and 2010. A mix of engineering, enforcement and education measures are used to help meet these targets, of which the THINK! Road safety publicity campaign forms part. The THINK! campaign aims to encourage all road users to recognise that its the small things they do that can lead to crashes on the road and that there are simple steps they can take to reduce their risk to themselves and others. THINKs power is that it fosters an attitude of shared responsibility. THINK! campaign priorities are identified by the Department for Transports publicity team in collaboration with policy officials in Road User Safety Division. They are chosen because they account for the highest number of road casualties and it is felt that they will benefit most from coordinated national publicity.
1.2
Research objectives and method

In July 2006 BMRB Social Research took over the evaluation of the THINK! campaigns. This report focuses on research carried out in June 2009. This research wave was a post stage evaluation for the mobiles campaign. Fieldwork ran from the 4th June to 10th June 2009. Interviews were conducted using BMRBs Omnibus survey. This is a survey that is run each week by BMRB, with different clients placing questions onto a common questionnaire, and sharing the costs of fieldwork and analysis. All results are confidential to the individual client. Interviews were conducted in-home, using Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) by fully trained members of BMRBs own fieldforce, working under supervision. The sample was drawn by means of Random Location sampling (see appendices for further details). In total 1,998 interviews were conducted with those aged 15+ in England and Wales. Data were weighted to be representative of the population. Only weighted data are shown in this report. In February 2007, there was a change to the legislation surrounding the usage of hand held mobile phones whilst driving. The penalty for using a hand held phone was increased from a 30 fine to a 60 fine, and in addition three points on the licence. Campaign activity originally took place from January to March 2007 in order to raise awareness of the new penalties and of the dangers of using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving, particularly extending responsibility to the caller rather than placing the
1 BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009
onus simply on the driver. The latest mobile phones activity served to highlight the one year anniversary of the legislation change and to continue to remind and raise further awareness of the penalties and of the dangers of picking up the phone whilst driving. The latest burst of the campaign involved the same TV ad as used at the campaign launch - Split Screen, and one new radio ad Concentratin. In June 2009 two additional media sources were tracked DJs talking on the radio, and the Think! Driving Challenge. The Think! Driving challenge is an online game which requires participants to perform multiple tasks while in a simulated driving experience to prove the point you cannot fully concentrate on driving if youre concentrating on other things, such as talking on a mobile phone. At the launch, and in March 2008, other radio ads were used which were not used at the latest burst Siren, Two things at once and Conversation, as well as press and online ads (which were not tracked previously). The aims of this wave of research were to measure: Awareness and recognition of the Mobiles campaign Awareness of the change in legislation for using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving Attitudes towards use of mobile phones whilst driving Communication of the campaigns key messages
A pre stage measure took place in October 2006 and the initial post stage measure in April 2007, after the launch of the campaign in January to March 2007. June 2009 is the 3rd wave of post stage Mobiles research. Where relevant, comparisons are made with the findings from previous waves.
1.3
Arrangement of this report

Following this introduction is a management summary of the findings. The main body of the report provides a detailed commentary, illustrated by summary tables and charts. Appendices contain details of the sampling method, weighting, the sample profile and the questionnaires. Data have been supplied in separate volumes. In charts and tables - denotes 0 and * denotes a proportion of less than half of one per cent, but more than 0.
BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009
2
2.1
Management summary and recommendations
Campaign awareness
Two thirds of respondents (61%) recalled seeing or hearing something about using mobile phones whilst driving in any campaign source. Over half had seen a TV ad (54%), while fewer had heard something on a radio ad (16%). The ads were correctly recalled by just over a quarter of respondents who claim to have seen or heard a campaign advert. When asked to describe what they had seen or heard, the majority of respondents recalled a campaign message such as Dont use a mobile phone whilst driving (17%). While just over one in ten described an executional feature of the ad with the most common mention being Husband talking on the phone to wife whilst driving / crashes car (12%). There has been a significant drop in the spontaneous recall of this key executional feature of the Split screen TV ad since the previous campaign burst (21% down to 12% at latest wave). After prompting, eight in ten respondents (84%) recognised the Split Screen TV ad. Two in ten respondents recognised the Concentratin radio ad (18%), with a significantly higher proportion of men claiming to recognise the ad (23% of men compared with 16% of women). A quarter of respondents recalled seeing the THINK! Driving Challenge online (24%), with two in five respondents between the ages of 15-29 years having seen something related to this (39%).
2.2
Campaign communication
2.2.1 Communication from Split Screen TV ad

When asked to express their thoughts or feelings about Split Screen, the main responses were shocked/ scared/ horrified/ surprised (23%). It was also described as an effective advert that gets the message across. The main message of Split Screen was thought to be simply dont use a mobile phone whilst driving (59%). However, it is encouraging that almost a quarter of respondents (22%) said the message was that you shouldnt call someone who is driving, or that you should hang up if this is the case. It is clear that respondents were engaged with this ad, as the top response when prompted was to say it sticks in my mind, stated by half (52%). Furthermore, four in ten (39%) found it shocking and two in ten (18%) said theyd talk about it with others. Almost half of respondents (44%) agreed with the key message that you dont have to be driving to cause a crash.
2.2.2 Communication from Concentratin radio ad

The radio ad appears to have less shock value overall compared to the Split Screen TV advert. The thought or feeling mentioned most often in association with the radio ad is that you shouldnt text whilst driving, with 13% of those who had heard the ad before mentioning this. In addition, just over one in ten respondents mentioned that you shouldnt use a mobile phone whilst driving. The next most frequently mentioned points were that the ad gets the message across (12%) and that it is good or effective (11%). The main message of the Concentratin ad was thought to be dont send text messages whilst driving, mentioned by half of respondents (45%). This was followed by the more general statement dont use a mobile phone whilst driving (36%). When prompted, a quarter (25%) of all respondents agreed that this ad sticks in their mind. This being the most common response might suggest that the ad is still engaging, but not to the levels of the TV execution. A quarter of respondents (23%) agreed that the radio ad made them realise that using a mobile phone to text whilst driving would make them more likely to have a crash. Those aged 1529 were significantly more likely to agree with this statement compared with those in older age groups (30%).
2.2.3 Attitudes towards use of mobile phones whilst driving

Agreement that talking on a mobile phone whilst driving was likely to impair concentration and make you more likely to crash was, again, almost universal. Amongst subgroups women were more likely to strongly agree that both of these consequences were likely, as were those aged 55+ when compared with all younger age groups and those in social grades C2DE. Over eight in ten respondents agreed they would hang up if they realised they had called someone whilst driving. Women were more likely to strongly agree with this, as were those over the age of 45 and heavy TV viewers. Texting and driving was considered to affect concentration and increase your chances of a crash more so than talking on a mobile phone. No disagreement was found across both the writing and reading a text measures. The only differences were found amongst strength of agreement. Younger respondents (aged 15-29) were less likely to strongly agree than those older than them. Interestingly drivers were more likely to strongly agree on the dangers of texting and driving than non drivers. Also, those who had seen at least one of the ads were more likely to strongly agree.
Belief in getting caught by the police whilst using a mobile phone has decreased in likelihood since the initial post stage in April 07. Just a quarter believe they are likely to get caught by the police whilst using a phone in June 09 (35% in April 2007). Younger respondents, aged 15-29, were most likely to believe they would get caught, as were those in the C2DE social grades and non-drivers.
2.3
Conclusions and recommendations

Overall campaign awareness has seen a steady decline since the high level of awareness achieved at the original post stage of research conducted in April 2007. The lower levels achieved at the latest stage may be attributed to the smaller media mix running at the latest campaign burst indicating that strength of the campaign lies in high saturation levels as well as impact of the ads themselves. The Split Screen TV ad continues to be the driving force behind the mobiles campaign, with its longevity playing a key role. Unprompted recall of the TV ad at the latest burst focused primarily on the broader campaign messages, rather than executional features as in previous waves. This could indicate that with repeated viewing the messages are now resonating more deeply with the audience. The ad itself is still considered engaging by the audience who continue to find it shocking despite the fact it has been on air for quite some time. However, the ad is no longer considered as memorable which could be an indication of its impending wear-out. Overall, women appear to respond more positively to the campaign and are more likely to agree with all attitudinal statements considering the dangers of talking on a mobile phone whilst driving. This could be due to the emotional nature of the TV ad and the fact it is the female character who is the offender in the scene. In addition, the target audience of younger people are not responding as positively to the ad, possibly due to the age of the actors portrayed or greater resistance to the message. The lower level of involvement of men is a key consideration for audience engagement on future campaigns. The radio ad Concentratin was less memorable than the TV ad overall and had fewer respondents stating that it sticks in their mind. Of those who recalled hearing this ad, a fairly high number found it confusing or irritating - this may be eroding delivery of the message. Despite this, there is almost universal acceptance of the fact that texting In order to optimise the effects of the mobile campaign, while driving is dangerous.
police need to be visibly reinforcing the key messages during campaign time and between burst to ensure consistent levels wave on wave.
Campaign awareness
This section looks at the overall awareness of the mobiles campaign. Firstly, spontaneous awareness of the media sources used in the current mix, and then top of mind recall of advertising or publicity about using mobile phones whilst driving is assessed. Respondents were then prompted with the ads from the latest burst of the campaign - Split Screen TV ad, Concentratin radio ad and an online THINK! Driving Challenge - in order to measure recognition of the executions.
3.1
Spontaneous awareness of advertising or publicity about using mobile whilst driving
phones
In order to measure awareness of the campaign sources, as well as other sources of publicity, respondents were shown a list and asked if they had seen or heard anything about using mobile phones whilst driving in any of these ways. Chart 3a compares responses with data from the pre stage in October 2006 and the first post stage in April 2007. Chart 3a: Where seen/heard advertising and publicity about using
mobile phones whilst driving (prompted)

%
61
ANY CAMPAIGN SOURCE
64
78
TV ad
29 26
TV news
51 48 36
54 56
55 53
26
National newspaper
42 43
Radio ad
16 18 11 13 16 18 19
25
Local newspaper
8
Radio programme
14 15 13
Other TV programme
Poster hoarding
4
Road signs
6 7 6 6 7 6 6 7 7
Jun-09 Mar-08 Apr-07 Oct-06
5 3
Base: All respondents - Oct 06 (2,102), Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), June 09 (1,998)
All mentions of 7% or above
Overall campaign awareness experienced a further dip from previous levels with 61% of respondents having seen or heard something about using mobile phones whilst driving in any of the listed sources. This has fallen slightly since March 2008 results (64%). Although the overall level of campaign awareness is lower at this wave, the June campaign burst included a smaller media mix than previously. The original post stage saw 8 in 10 respondents aware of something in a media source, however there were additional elements to the media mix used at that time such as press and online advertising which have not been included at the latest campaign burst. TV ad continues to be the most commonly recalled source of advertising or publicity (54%) about using a mobile phone while driving. The next most commonly mentioned sources were TV news and national newspaper by a quarter of respondents each (26%). Although these two media account for the next most commonly mentioned sources of advertising or publicity, these received significantly fewer mentions in this wave of research compared to previous waves. This can be accounted for by the fact this source was not utilised in the media mix at the latest wave, however these findings could possibly indicate general mentions of the issue have decreased in these media as well. On par with March 2008 findings, recall of radio adverts as a source of advertising or publicity for mobile phone use while driving is 16% (compared to 18% in March 2008). Like the previous burst, only one radio ad was used during the latest launch. There was a significant drop in mentions of radio programming as a source of advertising or publicity with only 8% mentioning this media, versus 14% of respondents mentioning this option in the previous wave. One in twenty said they had seen something at the cinema about using mobile phones whilst driving (5% - up one percent from previous waves), although this source was not utilised at the latest campaign. The most recent campaign burst saw those respondents aged 30 44 as the most likely people to recall having seen or heard something in any campaign source (71%). Men within this age group were significantly more likely then men in other age groups to recall the campaign (73%). While men aged 30 44 (27%) along with women aged 15 29 (26%) are most likely to recall the radio ad as the campaign source, there is less differentiation amongst respondents based on age or gender for spontaneous recall of the TV ad. Those with children in the household are significantly more likely to recall both the TV ad and the radio ad as campaign sources (TV ad - 60% with children compared with 52% without / Radio ad - 23% with children compared with 13% without).
3.2
Proven recall
Respondents who recalled seeing or hearing anything about the use of mobile phones whilst driving in any of the campaign sources used at the latest burst (TV ad and radio
advert) were asked to describe what they recalled. This was used to measure spontaneous, or top of mind, recall of the THINK! Mobiles campaign. Responses were recorded verbatim and later categorised. As can be expected with an open ended question, a wide range of responses were given. Chart 3b shows responses mentioned by at least 4% of respondents. Chart 3b: What remember about advertising/ publicity for drivers
using mobile phones whilst driving (unprompted)
Dont use mobile phone whilst driving Using a mobile phone whilst driving is dangerous/ causes accidents/ death Husband talking on phone to wife whilst driving/ crashes car Man/someone crashes while driving / on phone / texting Wife/ woman rings husband/man on his mobile phone Other mentions of fines Its illegal/a crime to use a mobile phone whilst driving Accident / crash - general Shock/ shocking/ hard hitting
7% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4%
17% 15% 12%
Proven recall: Any mentions of THINK! Mobiles campaign Proven recall: Any mentions of Split Screen TV ad Proven recall: Any mentions of Concentratin radio ad Any mention of penalties Other Nothing Dont know Base: All who mention a campaign source (1,221)
5% 3% 12% 4% 10% 19%
28%
There was a significant decrease in proven recall of the Split screen TV ad from the previous burst in March 2008 (from 31% to 19%). Those who accurately recalled the Split screen TV ad most commonly described the ad by its broader message, rather than by executional descriptions. When asked what was remembered about the publicity and advertising for drivers using mobile phones whilst driving, respondents most commonly stated, Dont use a mobile phone whilst driving (17%) or Using a mobile phone whist driving is dangerous / causes accidents / death (15%). In terms of executional descriptions of the TV ad itself, the most common mention was Husband talking on phone to wife whilst driving / crashes car (12%). This key identifier of the ad does not appear to resonate with audiences as well as it has in previous waves as spontaneous mention of this executional feature has decreased significantly from 21% in March 2008 to 12% at the latest wave. Now that the TV ad is further along in the campaign lifecycle, this change could indicate that with repeated viewing, the message is
now resonating more strongly with those who have seen the ad than it has previously, although recall of the ad and specific executional features is lower overall. Women were only slightly more likely to successfully recall the TV ad (20%, compared with 18% of men) unlike the previous wave, this difference is no longer significant. There are also no longer any significant differences between age groups, social grade or drivers of cars/vans vs. non-drivers for proven recall of this campaign burst. The Concentratin radio ad achieved lower proven recall (spontaneous recall), with just four per cent saying something which could be directly attributable to this ad.
3.2.1 What was said examples

Some examples of descriptions of the ads which were given by respondents are provided below.
Theres a lady ringing her husband on his way homeneeds something shocking to stop idiots" Dont do itkill the conversation The lady ringing her husband on the mobile and she asks is he still there and there has been an accident and it says kill the conversation or something The wife on the phone causing the crash by phoning her husband who was driving A guy driving home on his phone to his wife, he crashes whilst on the phone and she is left calling his name. conversation I can remember the advert where they are chatting about nonsense and then the phone goes dead because they have crashed so you know when they are driving they should hang up An ad where wife phones husband whilst he is driving - he was distracted and killed in a collision" "Hear the crash and it just goes dead" An ad about a guy talking out loud while sending a text then there was a crash The radio one, the crash of the car when theyre not concentrating at the end of the advert The tag line is as soon as you know their driving, kill the
Texting it as he does it and spells the whole advert Horrible one when he is texting whilst driving and can cause accidents Dont text and drive He is doing a text and it goes bad and it says dont text while driving Dying for a textman crashes when texting
3.3
Prompted recognition of Mobiles campaign

In order to accurately measure awareness of the campaign, respondents were shown all of the executions, and asked if they had seen or heard them before. Chart 3c shows total prompted recognition of the latest burst of the mobiles campaign, compared with the initial burst of the mobiles legislation campaign in April 2007 and the follow-up burst in March 2008.
10
Chart 3c:
Total prompted recognition of mobiles campaign over time
86 80
225 300 191 TVRs TVRs TVRs
84
82
78
Apr-07 Mar-08 Jun-09
58
%
44 29 24 16 19
Not included in previous bursts
*1
Any ad TV ad
*2
Radio Driving Challenge (Online)
NOTE: 2007 & 2008 Ads focused on Mobile legislation change, 2009 ads did not have this specific focus
Prompted recognition of THINK! Mobile ads
Two radio ads shown in April 07: * 1 = Conversation * 2 = T wo things at once In March 08: Siren In June 09: Concentratin
Base: All respondents: Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), June 09 (1,998)
Overall, the Mobiles campaign achieved 84% prompted recognition at this burst, a slight decrease from the previous burst of the campaign. Results by individual media showed that the TV ad continues to be the driving force behind awareness of the total campaign at this latest burst with eight in ten recognising the TV ad when prompted (78%). Overall, women aged 30-44 were particularly likely to recognise the ad, significantly more so then their male counterparts of the same age (84% vs. 77%). Only two in ten respondents recognised the Concentratin radio ad when prompted (19%), with a significantly higher proportion of men claiming to recognise the ad (23% of men compared with 16% of women). With the highest level of recognition of the radio ad overall, it is men aged 30-44 that are significantly more likely to recognise the radio ad, particularly when compared to females within the same age group (34% vs. 18%). group). The THINK! Driving Challenge on the Internet was seen by a quarter of respondents (24%), with those between the ages of 15-29 years being significantly more likely to
Both men and women aged 15-29 were also particularly likely to recall the radio
ad when prompted (32% of men compared with 30% of women in this age younger
have seen something relating to the Driving Challenge (39%). children versus 19% of those without).
Those with children in
the household were also more likely to have seen something online (32% of those with
The Yahoo! website and Facebook were the top-two named websites where respondents saw something related to the THINK! Driving Challenge (at 17% each among those recognising the logo). MSN Messenger was also identified as a campaign source with 14% of respondents citing this website specifically when prompted. Chart 3d shows prompted recognition of the TV ad Split Screen. Chart 3d: Prompted recognition of Split Screen TV ad over time
225 TVRs 300 TVRs 191 TVRs
Seen Split Screen TV ad
58 82 78
Not seen ad
42 18 22
Apr 07
Mar 08
Jun 09
Base: All respondents: Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), June 09 (1,998)
The Split Screen ad was shown on TV only at the latest burst and did not feature in cinema as well. The ad ran on TV from the 4th to the 17th May 2009. In March 2008, the Split Screen TV ad was recognised by over eight in ten (82%) respondents a significant increase from its launch in April 2007 when it was recognised by 58%. The initial increase in the recognition of the TV ad at the March 08 burst may have benefited from support from the cinema ad, which was not included during the latest campaign burst. There has been a slight drop in prompted recognition from the latest burst with 78% of respondents claiming to recognise the TV ad this time round.
Unsurprisingly, heavier TV viewers were more likely to recognise the Split Screen TV ad (84% of those watching TV for 29 hours or more a week falling to 70% of those watching for 14 hours or less). There is no longer a significant difference between the proportion of drivers and non-drivers recognising the ad. Chart 3e shows prompted recognition of Concentratin radio ad played from 4th 31th May 2009, compared with the Siren ad launched in 2008 and Conversation and Two things at once radio ads from the campaign launch in 2007. Chart 3e: Prompted recognition of Concentratin radio ad
Heard radio ad
17 30 46 42 29
19
Not heard
83 70 54 58 70
81
Conversation Apr 07
Two things at once Apr 07
Siren Mar 08
Concentratin Jun 09
Siren Mar 08
Concentratin Jun 09
All commercial radio listeners

Base: Apr 07: All commercial radio listeners (1,357) Mar 08: All respondents (1,997) / All commercial radio listeners (1,258) Jun 09: All respondents (1,998) / All commercial radio listeners (1,124)
All adults
Two in ten of all respondents recognised the Concentratin radio ad (19%), with recognition increasing significantly to nearly six in ten among those who listen to commercial radio over 15 hours a week (56%). recalled hearing the ad. When considering all adults, recognition was significantly higher amongst those with children in the household (25% compared with 16% of those without) and amongst those who use the Internet (22% versus 12% for those who do not use the Internet). The latest burst of the campaign also featured within the media mix the online THINK! Driving Challenge. Chart 3f.
Of commercial radio listeners, 30%
Prompted recognition of the THINK! Driving Challenge is shown in
Chart 3f:
Prompted recognition of online THINK! Driving Challenge
Seen THINK! Driving Challenge online
24
%
76
Not seen
Jun 09
Base: All respondents: Jun 09 (1,998)
The THINK! Driving Challenge is a simulated driving experience during which users are required to carry out tasks such as indicating when they are asked a question by a mobile phone caller and counting points based on the colour of pedestrians t-shirts seen while driving. Two in ten respondents recognised having seen the THINK! Driving Challenge on the Internet (24%), a good proportion given it was advertised online only. Significantly more people aged 15 29 had seen the Challenge online (39%), with a relatively even split between males and females within this age group (42% males / 37% females). Those aged 45+ were significantly less likely to have seen the THINK! Driving Challenge online. The Driving Challenge was promoted on such websites as Yahoo!, Facebook, MSN Messenger, Kontraband and Orange mobiles. Those aged 15-29 were most likely to identify Facebook (29%) and MSN Messenger (19%) as the websites where they saw something relating to the THINK! Driving Challenge.
14
Campaign communication
This section looks at the main messages, and thoughts and feelings surrounding the mobiles campaign, both spontaneous and prompted.
4.1
Communication of the Split Screen TV ad

Directly after being shown the Split Screen TV ad, all respondents were shown a series of communication statements, and asked which they personally felt applied to the advert. Table 4a shows responses to prompted statements about the television advert. Although not a specific target for this campaign, the general communication target for THINK! of younger males is shown separately as they tend to exhibit the behaviour of using a mobile phone whilst driving more frequently than others. The shading indicates a significant difference between the men aged 15-29 sub-group and the all adults sample.
15
Table 4a:
Which of the following do you personally feel about the Split Screen TV ad (prompted) all vs. target group over time All adults Apr 07 Mar 08 (1,997) % 57 48 Jun 09 (1,998) % 52* 42* Target group: men 1529 Apr 07 (202) % 54 32 Mar 08 (191) % 51 44 Jun 09 (195) % 58 36
* indicates significant change from March 08 It sticks in my mind It made me realise you dont have to be driving to have an accident/ cause a crash I found it shocking Its going to make me think twice about talking on the phone to someone who is driving Its going to make me think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving I like this ad Its the sort of ad I would talk about with other people It made me think about my own driving Its aimed at people like me It told me something new I found it irritating Im tired of seeing it Its not right to have this kind of ad on TV I found it confusing
(2,065) % 51 41
37 N/A
39 N/A
39 38
38 N/A
43 N/A
39 43
27
32
29*
34
48
41
24 19 14 9 5 4 N/A 2 2
26 22 15 11 6 3 2 2 1
25 18* 18* 10 5 2* 2 2 2
22 13 15 12 4 6 N/A 2 1
17 17 15 11 5 3 4 2 2
16 11 18 11 8 3 3 1 *
In terms of targeting, one in ten people agreed the TV ad was aimed them (10%, stable from March 08). However, the target group of men aged 15-29 were no more likely to think this (11%). Just one in twenty agreed the ad contained new information for them (5% said it told them something new; this has been stable over time).
16
Linked to engagement with the ad are enjoyment and whether the ad is likely to be discussed with other people. A quarter of respondents agreed that they liked the ad (25%) and two in ten said they would talk about it with others (18%, a significant decrease from 22% in March 2008). Men aged 15-29 were significantly less likely than all adults to say they liked the ad (16%) and were also less likely to discuss the ad with other people (11%). Four in ten respondents (39%, no significant difference for men aged 15-29) were emotionally engaged by the ad, finding it shocking. This is usually a measure that can be linked with ad memorability. For both the total sample and the target group, agreement that the ad was shocking at this campaign burst was at a similar level to March 2008, and to the 2007 launch level. Half (52%) of respondents stated that the ad stuck in their minds, decreasing significantly from nearly six in ten (57%) in March 2008. There was no significant change among men aged 15-29 (58%) from the previous wave and this age group did not differ significantly from all adults. The two key aims of the TV ad were to make people think before they use a mobile phone whilst driving, and to make people realise that the caller has a responsibility as well as the driver in their actions. Around four in ten adults (42%) agreed that the ad made them realise that they do not need to be driving to cause a crash (i.e. the caller has a responsibility). One in four men aged 15-29 also reported this (36%). Of the total sample three in ten agreed that the ad would make them think twice about using their mobile phone before driving (29%, steady from the previous year). Men aged 15-29 were significantly more likely to agree with this, with four in ten (41%) agreeing. Four in ten adults also agreed with the statement its going to make me think twice about talking on the phone to someone who is driving (38%). A similar proportion of men aged 15-29 year olds also agreed (43%).There was a significant increase for agreement with the statement It made me think about my own driving, significant amongst all adults (18%). There was no significant increase in agreement with this statement amongst men aged 15-29. Only small proportions of respondents found the ad irritating (2%), confusing (2%) or thought that the ad should not be shown (2%). These measures have remained stable over time, and there were no significant differences to be seen for men aged 15-29. As a measure of wear out, one of the prompted statements questioned whether people were tired of seeing the ad. Just 2% were tired of it, which has remained steady since 2008. Table 4b shows agreement with communication statements amongst drivers in different sub groups at the latest wave. The shading indicates significant differences between adjacent subgroups.
17
Table 4b: Which of the following do you personally feel about the Split Screen TV ad (prompted) by key subgroups
* indicates significant difference in subgroup from total
Total
All car/van/d rivers (1,287)
All non car/van/d rivers (711)
All aged 15-29
All other ages
All men
All women
(1,998)
(411)
(1,587)
(894)
(1,104)
% It sticks in my mind It made me realise you dont have to be driving to cause a crash I found it shocking Its going to make me think twice about talking on the phone to someone who is driving Its going to make me think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving I like this ad It is the sort of ad I would talk about with other people It made me think about my own driving Its aimed at people like me It told me something new I found it irritating Im tired of seeing it Its not right to have this kind of ad on TV I found it confusing None of these 52 42
% 52 43
% 53 38*
% 56 39
% 50* 41
% 49* 39*
% 55 44*
39
37*
43*
41 45*
37* 36*
34* 36
44* 41*
38
40*
36
29
32*
20*
38*
25*
29
28
25 18
26 18
22* 19
15* 14*
27* 19*
27 16*
23* 21*
18
23*
6*
16
18
20*
15*
10 5 2 2 2 2 4
12* 4* 2 2 1* 1* 4
6* 7* 3* 2 2 2 4
10 6 2 3 1 1 3
10 5 2 2 2 2 4
11 6 4* 2 2 2 5*
10 4* 1* 2 2 1 3*
18
Drivers (52%) and non-drivers (53%) were equally likely to feel that the TV ad sticks in their mind. There was also no difference between drivers and non-drivers in their likelihood to talk about the ad with other people (18% and 19% respectively). Nondrivers were significantly more likely than car or van drivers to find the TV ad shocking (43% of non-drivers agreed compared with 37% of drivers). Drivers, however, were significantly more likely to enjoy the TV ad (26% agreed that they liked the ad compared with 22% of non-drivers). The ad communicates to drivers more strongly than non-drivers; despite it aiming to talk to both drivers and non-drivers about the implications of using a mobile phone whilst driving. Drivers were significantly more likely to agree that the ad made them realise that you dont have to be driving to cause an accident (43%, compared with 38% of non-drivers) and also that it was aimed at people like them (12%, compared with 6% of non-drivers). Unsurprisingly, drivers were also more likely to agree that the ad would make them think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving (32%, compared with 20% of non-drivers). Those aged 15-29 were significantly more likely than older respondents to agree that the ad would make them think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving (38% vs. 25%) and also that the ad would make them think twice about talking on the phone to someone who is driving (45% of 15-29s, 36% of all other ages). This is encouraging, as it is younger drivers that are most likely to be exhibiting this behaviour. Younger respondents were however less likely to enjoy the ad; only 15% said that they liked it, compared with 27% of those aged 30 and over. Those aged 30 and over were also significantly more likely to discuss the advert with others, with two in ten (19%) agreeing with this compared with 14% of 15-29s. Women were more likely than men to engage with the ad, with 55% agreeing that it sticks in their mind compared with 49% of men, and 44% of women finding it shocking compared with 34% of men. Women were also more likely to discuss it with other people (21%, compared with 16% of men). Furthermore, women were significantly more likely to take out the key message that you dont have to be driving to cause an crash. However, men found it more enjoyable; 27% of men said that they liked it, compared with 23% of women.
4.2
Communication of the Concentratin radio ad

As with the TV ad, directly after being shown the Concentratin radio ad all respondents were shown a series of communication statements relating to it, and asked which they personally felt applied to the ad. Chart 4a shows agreement with these communication statements. There is no comparison over time as this is the first time the Concentratin ad was played.
19
Chart 4a:
Which of the following do you personally feel about the
Concentratin radio ad (prompted)
It sticks in my mind It made me realise that using my mobile to text whilst driving would make me more likely to have a crash It's going to make me think twice about using a mobile whilst driving I like this ad I found it confusing It is the sort of ad I would talk about with other people I found it irritating It made me think about my own driving It's aimed at people like me It told me new I'm tired of hearing it
25% 23% 17% 16% 15% 10% 9% 9% 8% 5% 2% % those agreeing with statement about 'Concentratin' radio ad 10% 14%
Don't know Nothing
Base: All respondents (1,998)
In terms of impact, a quarter (25%) of respondents agreed that the advert sticks in their mind, 16% liked it and one in ten (10%) said that theyd talk about it with other people. However, one in ten (9%) found it irritating and 15 per cent thought that it was confusing. A quarter (23%) agreed that the radio ad made them realise that using a mobile to text whilst driving would make them more likely to have a crash and 17% per cent stated that it would make them think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving. Around one in ten (8%) felt the ad was aimed at someone like them and a similar number (9%) said it made them think about their own driving. Table 4c shows agreement with communication statements amongst different sub groups. The shading indicates significant differences between the adjacent subgroups.
20
Table
4c: Which of the following do you personally feel about the Concentratin radio ad (prompted) total sample and key subgroups
Total All comm.. radio listeners (1,124) All car/van drivers All non car/van drivers All aged 15-29 All other ages All men All women
* indicates significant difference in subgroup from total
(894) (1,287) (711) (411) (1,587) (1,104)
(1,998)
% It sticks in my mind It made me realise that using my mobile phone to text whilst driving would make me more likely to have a crash Its going to make me think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving I like this ad I found it confusing It is the sort of ad I would talk about with other people I found it irritating It made me think about my own driving Its aimed at people like me It told me something new Im tired of hearing it None of these 25 23
% 31* 29*
% 24 24
% 27 19*
% 31* 30*
% 23* 20*
% 24 23
% 26 22
17
23*
19*
12*
26*
14*
19*
15*
16 15 10 9 9 8 5 2 14
19* 16 12* 10 12* 10* 5 2 12*
16 15 9* 9 12* 8 4* 1* 15
16 15 11 9 3* 7 8* 3* 12
12* 13 10 10 9 14* 7* 3 9*
17 16 10 9 9 6* 5 1* 16*
17 15 9 11* 10 10* 6 1* 14
14* 16 11 8 8 6* 5 2 14
21
Commercial radio listeners were significantly more likely than respondents in general to report that the radio advert sticks in their mind (31%). They were also more likely to state that the advert made them realise that texting while driving can cause a crash (29%), and that it would make them think twice about using a mobile whilst driving (23%). Commercial radio listeners also tended to enjoy the ad more, with two in ten liking the ad (19%, compared with 16% of all respondents), and were more likely to state that they would talk about it with others (12%). Unsurprisingly, car/van drivers were more likely than non-drivers to agree that the ad would make them think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving (19% compared with 12% of non-drivers). Drivers were also significantly more likely to agree with the statement it made me realise that using my mobile phone to text whilst driving would make me more likely to have a crash, with a quarter (24%) of drivers agreeing with this compared with 19 per cent of non-drivers. Drivers were also much more likely to agree that it made them think about their own driving (12%). Non-drivers, however, were significantly more likely than drivers to report that the ad told them something new (8% of non-drivers, compared with 4% of drivers). As with the TV ad, those aged 15-29 were less likely to report that they liked the radio ad (12%) than older respondents (17%). Young people (15-29) were more inclined than the older age groups to think that the ad is aimed at someone like them (14%, compared with 6% for those aged 30 and over). People aged 15-29 were also more likely to agree that it made them realise that using a mobile phone to text whilst driving would make them more likely to have a crash, with a third (30%) stating this, compared with 20% for all other ages. A quarter of 15-29s also agreed that it would make them think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving (26%) whilst just 14% of those in other age groups agreed. Men were more likely than women to have found the ad irritating, with one in ten stating this (11%). Men were also more likely than women to agree that the advert was aimed at someone like them, with one in ten (10%) reporting this compared with 6% of women. Women were less likely than men to state that the advert would make them think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving (15% compared with 19%).
4.3
Believed main message of the ads

After seeing or hearing the ads onscreen, respondents who had seen or heard the TV and/or radio ads before were asked to express what they felt was the main message of each. Responses were recorded verbatim by interviewers and later coded.
22
4.3.1 Main message of TV ad

Chart 4b shows what respondents thought the main message of the Split Screen TV advert to be. Responses to this question were varied and answers given by at least 2% of respondents are shown. Chart 4b: Main message of mobile phones Split Screen TV ad
Dont use a mobile phone whilst driving/ stop using a mobile phone whilst driving Dont call someone who is driving/ hang up Using a mobile phone whilst driving is dangerous/ causes accidents/ death Dont (do it)
Cant concentrate properly on driving if using a mobile phone/ will be distracted/ cant concentrate on two things at once
59% 50% 22% 23% 10% 10% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2009 2008
Both parties are responsible The consequence of using a mobile phone whilst driving
None Other Dont know
*
2% 1% 1% 2%
Base: All who recognise the TV ad: March 2008 (1,654), June 2009 (1,538)
Six in ten (59%) who recognised the TV ad gave the main message as dont use a mobile phone whilst driving in the latest wave, which is an increase from half of respondents (50%) in March 2008. One in five (22%) said the message was that you shouldnt call someone who is driving, or you should hang up if this is the case, which has remained steady from the previous wave. One in ten (10%) talked about using a phone whilst driving being dangerous, or that it could cause accidents or death.
4.3.2 Main message of radio ad

Chart 4c shows what respondents who had heard the Concentratin radio advert before thought the main message was. All statements mentioned by 2% or more of respondents are included.
23
Chart 4c:
Main message of mobile phones Concentratin radio ad
Dont send text messages whilst driving Dont use a mobile phone whilst driving/ stop using a phone whilst driving Using a mobile phone whilst driving is dangerous/ causes accidents/ death Makes you think Cant concentrate on driving whilst using you mobile phone/ on two things at once/ will be distracted Be careful/ drive carefully/ take care - general
45% 36% 8% 3% 3% 2%
Other Nothing Dont know
2% 1% 2%
Base: All who recognise the radio ad (350)
Almost half (45%) of those who recognised the radio ad were able to give the specific message as being dont send text messages whilst driving. The next most commonly stated message was dont use a mobile phone whilst driving, stated by 36% of respondents. Similar to the TV ad, there were mentions that using a mobile phone whilst driving is dangerous and could cause accidents or death; this being referred to by one in ten (8%) of those who had heard the radio ad before.
4.4
Thoughts or feelings about the ads

In order to gain reactions to the ads, all respondents who had seen the TV ad before were asked to describe what thoughts or feelings occurred to them when they saw it. This was repeated with the radio ad. Responses were recorded verbatim by interviewers and later coded.
24
4.4.1 Thoughts or feelings about the TV ad

Respondents were asked what thoughts or feelings, if any, they had when seeing the TV ad. Responses to this question were varied and answers given by at least 3% of respondents are shown in Chart 4d. Chart 4d: Thoughts or feelings about Split Screen TV ad
23%
Shocked/ scared/ horrified/ surprised Good/ effective ad Makes you think/ gets the message across Shouldnt use a mobile phone whilst driving/ it is wrong Shouldnt call someone who is driving/ should hang up Sad/ sympathetic/ upsetting/ disturbing True/Realistic Hard-hitting/ makes an impact/ hits home It is very dangerous/ causes accidents/ can kill people This could really happen/ it could happen to me Sick/Sickening Its easily done/only takes a split second
17% 9% 9% 9% 8% 8% 7% 8% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 3% 7% 6% 12% 13%
5%
10%
2009 2008
Other None Dont know
2% 1% 3% 1% 1%
7%
Base: All who recognise the TV ad: March 2008 (1,654), June 2009 (1,538)
The reactions to the TV ad are encouraging; it appears to be having the desired effect. The most common feelings evoked by the ad were those of shock, fear, horror or surprise, mentioned by a quarter (23%) of respondents, which has increased from one in five (17%) in March 2008. One in ten (9%) stated that the advert is good or effective and 9% also made a general comment that the ad makes you think or gets the message across. However, the number of respondents reporting each of these has reduced significantly since 2008. The number of people commenting that the ad is hard hitting has also fallen significantly to 4% (10% in 2008). This could indicate wear-out of the ad.
25
4.4.2 Thoughts or feelings about the radio ad

Chart 4e shows respondents unprompted thoughts or feelings regarding the
Concentratin radio advert. All statements mentioned by 3% or more of respondents are included. Chart 4e: Thoughts or feelings about Concentratin radio ad
Shouldnt text whilst driving Shouldnt use mobile phone whilst driving/ it is wrong Makes you think/ gets message across Good/ effective ad Confused about the ad at first Shocked/ scared/ horrified/ surprised Its very dangerous/ causes accidents/ can kill people Only stupid people text whilst driving Cant concentrate on driving if using mobile phone Not relevant to me/I do not use a mobile when driving
13% 13% 12% 11% 10% 6% 6% 4% 3% 3%
Other Nothing Dont know
5% 5% 3%
Base: All respondents who recognise radio ad (350)
The radio ad had less shock value than the TV ad and this comes across in how people talked about it. Only one in twenty (6%) mentioned that it was shocking. The thoughts or feelings most often mentioned in relation to the radio ad were that you shouldnt text whilst driving and you shouldnt use a mobile phone whilst driving with 13% of those who had heard the ad before making these points. One in ten (12%) talked about the ad getting the message across and being good or effective (11%). However, one in ten (10%) stated that they were confused by the radio ad at first.
26
Attitudes towards use of mobile phones whilst driving

This section looks at respondents attitudes towards mobile phone use whilst driving, firstly by using a number of statements, and also looking at perceived likelihood of getting caught.
5.1
Agreement with statements about mobile phones and driving

In order to look at attitudes towards the use of hand held mobile phones whilst driving, all respondents were asked to state their agreement with a series of statements. These have been asked at each wave to track agreement over time. The first statement, as shown in Chart 5a, was a driver who is talking on a mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving. This was a key message of the campaign. Chart 5a: Agreement with statement A driver who is talking on a
mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving
Strongly agree
83
83
83
81
Slightly agree
Neither
Slightly disagree Strongly disagree
13
12
11
13
2 2
Oct 2006
2 3
Apr 2007
3 2 1
Mar 2008
3 1 1
Jun 2009
Base: All respondents - Oct 06 (2,102), Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), Jun 09 (1,998)
Eight in ten respondents strongly agreed a driver talking on their mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving (81%), 95% agreed overall. Less than one in twenty expressed disagreement meaning there was very little change in attitude from March 2008 to June 2009. There were some subgroup differences in June 2009. Women were more likely to strongly agree with this, but no more likely to agree overall when compared with men
(84% compared with 79%). Those aged 55 and over were more likely to strongly agree when compared with younger respondents (86% of 55+, 79% of those 16-54 years old); possibly because young people may not relate to the situation of the couple in the ad so well. As were those in the C2DE social grade (86% compared with 78% of ABC1s). The second statement stated even more clearly the risks of talking on a mobile phone whilst driving talking on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash. Until June 2009 this statement has read talking on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of an accident. This was changed to emphasize the severity but it appears to have had little impact on the results. Chart 5b: Agreement with statement Talking on a mobile phone whilst
driving greatly increases the chance of a *crash
Strongly agree
85
85
84
82
Slightly agree
Neither
12
11
11
11
2 1
Oct 2006
2 2
Apr 2007
3 1 1
Mar 2008
3 1 1
Jun 2009
*worded accident until June 09

Again there were no significant changes across the four waves of research. However, agreement was almost universal at the pre stage (97%), and it has remained at this high level (95%). Eight in ten respondents agreed strongly in June 2009 with 11% agreeing slightly. As in March 2008, this provides little room for improvement. The main subgroup differences were similar to chart 5a. Those aged 55 and over were more likely to strongly agree (86% compared with 80% of those aged 55 and under). Again, those in social grades C2DE were more likely to strongly agree (86% of C2DEs compared with 79% of ABC1s). There were no differences between car and van drivers and non-car and van drivers (95% and 96% respectively).
Another key message of the Mobiles campaign is that you dont have to be in a car to cause an accident i.e. the responsibility does not just fall upon drivers, but those who call someone who may be driving, this message is especially prominent in the Split screen TV ad. The final statement explored attitudes towards this responsibility, with the statement If I called someone and realised they were driving, I would hang up. Chart 5c: Agreement with statement If I called someone and realised
they were driving I would hang up
64 73
Strongly agree
75
73
16
15
Slightly agree
Neither
11 6 3
Oct 2006
15
16
6 5 1
Apr 2007
5 3 1
Mar 2008
6 4 1
Jun 2009
In October 2006 it was identified that there was more room for improvement for this statement. Eight in ten respondents agreed (80%) in October 2007, which has risen to 88% of respondents in June 2009. The strength of agreement has remained consistent since the first post stage in April 2007 (73% in April 2007, 75% in March 2008 and 73% in June 2009 agreed strongly). Around one in twenty disagreed overall across all three post waves; falling from almost one in ten at the October 2006 pre stage (9%). Women were more likely to agree with this statement and therefore the ads core message once you know they are driving, kill the conversation with eight in ten strongly agreeing (79% compared with 66% of men) and 92% agreeing overall (compared with 85% of men). There is clearly a difference between the two sexes, perhaps men feel like it wont happen to them, or women could be relating more to the female character in the ad who calls her partner. There is a divide amongst the age groups again here in those strongly agreeing with the statement. With no major differences in overall agreement, it was the older groups who were more likely to
strongly agree with this statements in June 2009 (91% of 45+ compared with 86% of 15-44s). Unlike the other statements there were no real differences between the social grades in chart 5c. Those who claimed to watch over 29 hours of TV per week were more likely to strongly agree, but no more likely to agree overall (77% compared 70% of those who watch 28 hours or less). This is possibly because of heavy exposure to the message in the TV to hang up the phone if the other person is driving. In June 2009 the radio ad focussed on reaching out to those who text and drive. The message of the ad was that you cant concentrate on two things at once, so you should not text and drive as you could crash or end up with penalties should you get caught. In response to this attitudinal measures were added at this wave to track attitudes to texting and driving. Chart 5d shows attitudes towards writing a text and concentrating on driving. Chart 5d: Agreement with statement A driver who is writing a text on
a mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving
Strongly agree
%
94
Slightly agree Neither
4 1
Agreement at this statement is almost universal (99% agreeing). Interestingly all 35-54 year olds agree that this impairs your concentration when driving. The 15-29 year olds are slightly less likely to strongly agree than those older (90% compared with 96% of those over 30), although overall agreement was very similar with 98% of 15-29s agreeing compared with near enough 100% of those 30 and over. This may be due to the popularity of texting amongst young people. This age groups seems broadly more aware of the dangers of texting and driving than talking on a mobile phone whilst driving
(94% agreeing when talking on the phone compared with 100% when texting whilst driving). There are also differences between the strength of agreement amongst those who drive a car or a van and those who do not (96% of drivers agreeing compared with 90% of those who dont drive a car or van). The radio was focussed on texting and driving but there were no differences between those who had heard the radio ad and those who had not (99% respectively). However, those who had seen at least one of the ads were broadly more likely to agree strongly than those who had not seen or heard any of the ads (95% compared with 90%). In addition to the statement at chart 5d respondents were asked whether they felt writing a text message whilst driving would make them more likely to have a crash. Chart 5e shows the results below. Chart 5e: Agreement with statement Writing a text on a mobile phone
whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash
Strongly agree
94

5 1
Again the proportion of those agreeing was almost universal (99%), and can be compared with just 95% of respondents agreeing that talking on the phone whilst driving would make you more likely to have a crash. As in chart 5d there were few differences between overall agreement across the age groups, however the strength of agreement is again slightly lower for the youngest age groups (88% of 15-29s compared with 96% of those aged 30+). It is possible the younger group are more used to texting and do not see it as much different to talking on a phone, however it is clear those older are very much against the idea.
Those who drive a van or car were again more likely to strongly agree with this statement than those who do not (96% compared with 91% of non car/van drivers). It is possible they are more likely to recognise the consequences of executing this task, it must however be noted there wasnt any real difference in overall agreement. As with the previous statement there were no real differences amongst those who had or had not heard the radio ad about texting and driving (99% respectively). However those who had seen at least one of the elements of the campaign were more likely to strongly agree that writing a text whilst driving increases the chance of a crash (95% compared with 89% of those who had not seen or heard an ad). Finally respondents were asked about reading a text whilst driving to gauge whether this behaviour was viewed differently to writing a text and driving. Chart 5f shows results for whether a driver who is reading a text on a mobile phone can concentrate properly on driving. Chart 5f: Agreement with statement A driver who is reading a text on
a mobile phone cant properly concentrate on driving
Strongly agree
93

6 1
Results for this statement were similar to previous statements about texting and driving. Those aged 15-29 were less likely to strongly agree with that reading a text and driving impairs concentration on the road (87% of 15-29 year olds compared with 94% of those aged 30+).
32
Those who had seen any of the ads in the campaign were more likely to strongly agree that reading a text whilst driving would impact on concentration (94% compared with 88% of those who had not seen any of the ads). Chart 5g shows the results when asking about agreement that reading a text on a mobile phone greatly increases the chance of a crash. Chart 5g: Agreement with statement Reading a text on a mobile phone
whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash
Strongly agree
92
7 1
Almost all adults agreed that reading a text increases the likelihood of a crash whilst driving (99%), with the remaining 1% neither agreeing nor disagreeing. The pattern forming from the previous text-related statements remains here with 15-29 years old less likely to strongly agree (86% compared with 94% of over 30s). The differences between those who drive a car or van and those who dont remain with 94% of those who drive a car or van strongly agreeing (compared with only 89% of those who do not).
5.2
Perceived likelihood of getting caught by police

A key message of the previous THINK! campaign radio ad Siren is enforcement i.e. drivers using hand held mobile phones will get caught by the police. Although this is not a key message of the Concentratin radio ad from the latest campaign burst, respondents were still asked questions regarding their perceived likelihood of getting caught by the police for using a mobile phone whilst driving.
Chart 5h shows responses to the question how likely or unlikely do you think someone using a hand held mobile phone whilst driving is to be caught by the police? Responses are also shown for both drivers and non-drivers. This question was not asked at the pre stage. Chart 5h: Likelihood of someone using a mobile phone whilst driving
being caught by the police
Very likely
10
6 20
10 25
5 23
Fairly likely
25
23
27 31
Fairly unlikely
42 42
45
42
48 39 35
Very unlikely
22
26
28
29
30
21
24
All Apr 07
All Mar 08
All Jun 09
Drivers Mar 08
Drivers Jun 09
Non drivers Non drivers Mar 08 Jun 09
Base: All respondents - Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), Jun 09 (1,998)
A quarter of respondents felt they were likely to get caught by the police (26%) in June 2009. This is a drop from the three in ten in March 2008 (30%). This decline has been steady since the initial post stage in April 2007 (35%). There are some differences between March 2008 and June 2009 for both drivers (car / van drivers) and non-drivers but separately these are not significant. This is somewhat concerning as it is possible police presence is not supporting the threat of penalties. There were also differences by age and social grade. Younger respondents were more likely to believe that people would be caught for using a mobile phone (39% of 15 to 29 year olds saying this was likely, compared with 22% of those 30 and older). Those in social grades ABC1s were less likely to believe that drivers would be caught (23% saying likely, compared with 31% of C2DEs). Car / van drivers (22%) were less likely to believe they would get caught when compared with non-drivers (36%).
34
APPENDICES APPENDIX A: SAMPLE PROFILE

Driving status
In order to identify drivers, all respondents were asked whether they drove a car, van or motorcycle at least once a month. Chart A1: Driving Status
Yes - car/van mainly for leisure use
58%
56% 51% 56%
Yes - car/van equally for work/leisure use
7%
7% 10% 6%
Yes- car/van mainly for work use
5%
4% 5% 6% Jun-09 Mar-08 Apr-07 Oct-06
Yes - motorbike mainly for leisure use Yes - motorbike equally for work/leisure use No don't drive nowadays
1%
1% 1% 1%
1% 1%
32%
33% 34% 36%
Base: All respondents - Oct 06 (2,102), Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), June 2009 (1,998)
Almost seven out of ten respondents were drivers of a car, van or motorcycle (68%), which is consistent with previous research waves. Over half of all drivers use a car or van mainly for leisure use (58%), with one in ten using a car or van equally for work and leisure use (7%), and one in twenty (5%) drove a car or van mainly for work. As at previous waves, men were more likely to be drivers (76% compared with 61% of women), as were those in the higher social grades (77% of ABC1s, compared with 57% of C2DEs).
35
Commercial radio listenership

Commercial radio listenership is shown in the following chart. Chart A2: How often listen to commercial radio
More than 15 hours a week
5 to 15 hours per week
7% 15% 41%
Do not listen to commercial radio
37%
Less than 5 hours a week
Up slightly from the previous wave, four in ten respondents (41%) did not listen to commercial radio stations. Just less than four in ten (37%) were defined as light listeners (less than 5 hours per week), 15% were medium listeners (5 to 15 hours) and less than one in ten (7%) were heavy commercial radio listeners (more than 15 hours per week).
36
APPENDIX B - SAMPLING METHOD

The sampling technique used in this survey is a tightly controlled form of random location sampling developed within BMRB, and is the basis of most consumer surveys which BMRB conducts. The aim of random location sampling is to eliminate the more unsatisfactory features of quota sampling without incurring the cost and other penalties involved in conducting surveys according to strict probability methods. One of the principal advantages of probability techniques of sampling is that selection of respondents is taken from the hands of interviewers. In conventional quota sampling, on the other hand, interviewers are given quotas to fill, usually from within specified administrative areas. When, for example, an interviewer is asked to complete a quota of AB respondents, she will tend to go to a part of the district where she knows such individuals to be available. AB individuals living in mixed social class areas will have little chance of inclusion. This and similar defects lead to biases which are concealed by superficial agreements between sample profiles and accepted standard statistics. The principal distinguishing characteristic of random location sampling, as operated by BMRB, is that interviewers are given very little choice in the selection of respondents. Respondents are drawn from a small set of homogenous streets, selected with probability proportional to population after stratification by their ACORN characteristics and region. Quotas are set in terms of characteristics which are known to have a bearing on individuals' probabilities of being at home and so available for interview. Rules are given which govern the distribution, spacing and timing of interviews. The sample of areas takes as its universe all sample units (groups of Census 2001 Output Areas, on average, 300 households) in Great Britain. Output areas are stratified in the following manner: (i) (ii) (iii) Standard Region Within Standard Region - by Acorn type Within Standard Region by County and ITV Region
Thus, the design is single stage, using direct selection of appropriate groups of Output areas, rather than taking streets at random from larger units such as wards or parishes.
37
APPENDIX C: WEIGHTING PROCEDURES

The data are weighted to ensure that demographic profiles match those for all adults in Great Britain aged 15 or over. A rim weighting technique is used in which target profiles are set for eight separate demographic variables. of the sample is balanced in terms of the targets set. The actual weights applied thus vary slightly between surveys; precise figures for specific cases are available from BMRB if required. The computer system then allocates a weight to each individual such that the overall composition
Target Weights Applied: Sex 1: Men Women without children Women with children % 48.39 32.20 19.41
Sex 2: Men working full time Men not working full time Women working at all Women not working at all 26.04 22.35 24.10 27.51
Age within Sex

Men % Women %
16 - 24 25 - 34 34 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65+
7.87 8.00 9.30 7.80 7.03 8.39
7.67 8.06 9.45 7.93 7.25 11.25
38
Social Grade within Sex

Men % Women %
AB C1 C2 D E
12.92 13.28 11.28 7.79 3.12
12.45 15.62 9.63 8.36 5.55
Standard Region
% Scotland North West North Yorks/Humber East Midlands East Anglia South East Greater London South West Wales West Midlands 8.71 10.80 5.23 8.62 7.36 3.89 19.62 12.78 8.78 5.07 9.12
(Source of profile data: BMRB Target Group Index, 2005 and NRS, 2005)
39
APPENDIX D: QUESTIONNAIRE
THINK! Mobiles June 2009 - FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE

H664ab - JN: 45108305 - 4th - 10th June 2009 - 01 Jun 2009 Quanquest v2.1 - QAL v2.2bmrb13 - CAPI
H664ab
INTERVIEWER: PLEASE SHOW SCREEN UNTIL OTHERWISE INSTRUCTED
q664a1 Do you drive a car, van or motorcycle nowadays, at least once a month? Yes, a car or van mainly for leisure/personal use Yes, a motorcycle mainly for leisure/personal use Yes, a car or van for work/business use Yes, a motorcycle for work/business use Yes, a car or van equally for leisure/business use Yes, a motorcycle equally for leisure/business use No, don't drive nowadays ^s Don't Know
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Y
(108)
40
q664a2 Can I just check, have you seen or heard anything about drivers using their mobile phones whilst driving in any of these ways? INTERVIEWER: PLEASE PUT "_" AROUND OTHER ANSWERS TYPED IN National newspaper Local newspaper TV advert TV plays/soaps TV news Other TV programmes Radio advert Radio programme Magazine Cinema Poster on bus Poster hoarding Indoor poster Signs at garages/service areas Road signs Through the internet/a website Leaflet/booklet picked up In the post/through the letterbox At school In the pub/beermats On backs of lorries In stores Radio DJ's talking about it Don't Know No Other 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 Y X 0 (109)
(110)
(111)
(109)
Other specify...
(112 - 115)
IF q664a2 = TV advert OR q664a2 = Radio advert OR website OR q664a2 = Radio DJ's talking about it THEN ASK: q664a3
q664a2 = Through the internet/a
41
q664a3 What do you remember about the publicity and/or advertising for drivers using their mobile phones whilst driving? (116 - 119)
Don't Know End of Filter i664a
(116)
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements......
a664
... (IF NECESSARY SAY: How much do you agree or disagree with this statement?) Strongly agree Slightly agree Neither agree nor disagree Slightly disagree Strongly disagree Don't Know 1 2 3 4 5 Y (120)
This question is repeated for the following loop values: - A driver who is talking on a mobile phone can't properly concentrate on driving - Talking on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash - If I called someone and realised they are driving, I would hang up - A driver who is writing a text on a mobile phone can't properly concentrate on driving - Writing a text on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash - A driver who is reading a text on a mobile phone can't properly concentrate on driving - Reading a text on a mobile phone whilst driving greatly increases the chance of a crash A total of 7 iterations occupying columns (120) to (126)
INTERVIEWER: PLEASE DO NOT SHOW SCREEN UNTIL OTHERWISE INSTRUCTED
42
q664a6 What do you think the current penalty is for using a hand-held mobile phone whilst driving? INTERVIEWER: PLEASE TYPE "_" AROUND OTHER ANSWERS TYPED IN A fine (general mention) A {#a330 fine A {#a360 fine Points on driving licence Verbal warning Written warning Don't Know Other 1 2 3 4 5 6 Y 0 (128)
Other specify...
(129 - 132)
INTERVIEWER: PLEASE SHOW SCREEN UNTIL OTHERWISE INSTRUCTED
Q664A7 How likely or unlikely do you think it is that someone using a hand-held mobile phone whilst driving will get caught by the police? Very likely Fairly likely Fairly unlikely Very unlikely Don't Know 1 2 3 4 Y (133)
q664a9 Have you seen this ad on TV? INTERVIEWER: PRESS ALT + V TO PLAY AD Yes No Don't Know 1 2 Y (136)
IF q664a9 = Yes THEN ASK: q664a0, q664b1
43
q664a0 What thoughts or feelings, if any, occurred to you when you saw this advert? PROBE: What else? (137 - 140)
Don't Know
(137)
q664b1 What do you think is the main message of the advertising I just showed/played to you? (141 - 144)
Don't Know End of Filter i664b
(141)
44
q664b2 Here are some things that other people have said about the ad I have just shown you. Which of these do YOU personally feel about the advert? Please mention all that you agree with. It told me something new I'm tired of seeing it It made me think about my own driving It's aimed at people like me I found it confusing I found it irritating It sticks in my mind It's the sort of ad I would talk about with other people I like this ad It's not right to have this kind of ad on TV It's going to make me think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving I found it shocking It made me realise you don't have to be driving to cause a crash It's going to to make me think twice about talking on the phone to someone who is driving Don't Know None of these 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 (146) (145)
1 2 3
4 Y X
(145)
q664b3 Have you heard this ad on the radio? INTERVIEWER: PRESS ALT + P TO PLAY AD Yes No Don't Know 1 2 Y (147)
IF q664b3 = Yes THEN ASK: q664b4, q664b5
45
q664b4 What thoughts or feeling, if any, occurred to you when you saw this advert? PROBE: What else? (148 - 151)
Don't Know
(148)
q664b5 What do you think was the main message of the radio ad I just played to you? (152 - 155)
Don't Know End of Filter I664C
(152)
q664b6 Here are some things that other people have said about the ad I have just played you. Which of these do YOU personally feel about the advert? Please mention all that you agree with. It told me something new It made me think about my own driving It's aimed at people like me I found it confusing I found it irritating It sticks in my mind It's the sort of ad I would talk about with other people I like this ad I'm tired of hearing it It's going to make me think twice about using a mobile phone whilst driving It made me realise that using my mobile to text whilst driving would make me more likely to have a crash Don't Know None of these
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
(156)
(157)
1 Y X
(156)
q664b7 Have you seen anything relating to the THINK! Driving Challenge on the internet? Yes No Don't Know 1 2 Y (158)
IF q664b7 = Yes THEN ASK: q664b9
q664b9 Which website was that on? Facebook MSN Messenger Orange Yahoo Kontraband Other website Don't Know End of Filter i664d 1 2 3 4 5 6 Y (159)
q664b8 How often do you listen to commercial radio stations? By that I mean radio stations that play adverts. Do not listen to commercial radio Less than 5 hours a week 5 - 15 hours a week More than 15 hours a week Don't Know 1 2 3 4 Y (160)
47
IF q664b8 = Less than 5 hours a week OR than 15 hours a week THEN ASK: q664b10
q664b8 = 5 - 15 hours a week OR
q664b8 = More
q664b10
Which, if any, of these radio stations do you listen to? Kiss Talk Sport Choice FM Galaxy Absolute Radio Don't Know None of these 1 2 3 4 5 Y X (161)
End of Filter i664e
48

Mobile Phones A Utiliser Absolument

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mobile Phones A Utiliser Absolument

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THINK!

Chart A1: Chart A2:

Driving Status .............................................................................35 How often listen to commercial radio..........................................36

Research objectives and method

Arrangement of this report

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Management summary and recommendations

2.2.1 Communication from Split Screen TV ad

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

2.2.2 Communication from Concentratin radio ad

2.2.3 Attitudes towards use of mobile phones whilst driving

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Conclusions and recommendations

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Spontaneous awareness of advertising or publicity about using mobile whilst driving

mobile phones whilst driving (prompted)

Jun-09 Mar-08 Apr-07 Oct-06

All mentions of 7% or above

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

using mobile phones whilst driving (unprompted)

17% 15% 12%

All mentions of 4% or above

3.2.1 What was said examples

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Prompted recognition of Mobiles campaign

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Total prompted recognition of mobiles campaign over time

225 300 191 TVRs TVRs TVRs

Apr-07 Mar-08 Jun-09

Prompted recognition of THINK! Mobile ads

Base: All respondents: Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), June 09 (1,998)

Those with children in

Seen Split Screen TV ad

Base: All respondents: Apr 07 (2,065), Mar 08 (1,997), June 09 (1,998)

Two things at once Apr 07

All commercial radio listeners

Of commercial radio listeners, 30%

Prompted recognition of the THINK! Driving Challenge is shown in

Prompted recognition of online THINK! Driving Challenge

Seen THINK! Driving Challenge online

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Communication of the Split Screen TV ad

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

All car/van/d rivers (1,287)

All non car/van/d rivers (711)

All aged 15-29

All other ages

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Communication of the Concentratin radio ad

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Which of the following do you personally feel about the

Concentratin radio ad (prompted)

Don't know Nothing

Base: All respondents (1,998)

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

* indicates significant difference in subgroup from total

(894) (1,287) (711) (411) (1,587) (1,104)

19* 16 12* 10 12* 10* 5 2 12*

BMRB Report THINK! Post Mobiles June 2009

Believed main message of the ads