<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Examining Attribution of Fault in Fatal &amp; Serious Injury Crashes between Drivers and Vulnerable Road Users</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2625585</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Traffic crashes killing or severely injuring pedestrians and bicyclists have increased dramatically in the past 10 years in the US. Research has found media and police narratives to play a strong role in shaping public opinion around strategies to prevent crashes involving vulnerable road users (VRUs), including whether those narratives attribute blame to the VRU victim. In California, following a crash, data are collected by law enforcement officers who make a determination of the “party most at fault.” Concerns exist as to whether fault in crash report data is over-attributed to VRUs, but no systematic research has assessed this.   We will utilize 2016-2023 electronically reported California Crash Reporting System data to identify the presence of a crash witness at each fatal or serious injury (FSI) single-vehicle/VRU crash, under the hypothesis that fault is more accurately attributed when a witness is present. Because VRU victims involved in FSI crashes with a motor vehicle are often unconscious, in transport to a hospital, or deceased at the time of the crash investigation, only the driver’s perspective is incorporated into police reports in the absence of a witness, while the presence of a witness provides additional and, we hypothesize, more objective information. The specific research question is: is the presence of a witness associated with a higher probability that the driver will be named at fault in FSI crashes between a driver and a VRU compared to crashes between a driver and a VRU when no witness is present?  We will use logistic regression to estimate the probability of the driver being attributed fault in crashes where a witness was present compared to crashes with no witness. If the probability is higher when a witness is present, we will discuss the likelihood that this implies that fault is systemically over-attributed to the VRU when there is no witness vs. other explanations. We will control for neighborhood and investigate if the effect of a witness on attribution varies according to reporting agency, victim attributes, or victim mode.  The overall goal will be to estimate minimum correction factors and 95% confidence intervals for VRU-involved crashes so statistics on attribution of fault can be adjusted for future research or in policy settings.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 15:03:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2625585</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>