Evaluation of a Brief Intervention for Increasing Seat Belt Use on a College Campus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors evaluated a brief intervention for increasing seat belt use among the front seat occupants of cars at a junior college, in a jurisdiction with a mandatory belt use law. The intervention included public posting of performance feedback and distribution of an informational flyer to cars in target parking lot. Feedback was the display of the proportion of drivers observed wearing seat belts on the previous observation day. Seat belt use among drivers increased from 64% during the baseline phase to 71% during the intervention phase. Seat belt use among front passengers increased from 49% during the baseline phase to 67% during the intervention phase. In both cases, seat belt use at follow-up was comparable to seat belt use during the intervention phase, although a trend toward decreasing belt use was noted. Also found was higher seat belt use among females as compared with males irrespective of their front seat occupant status (driver or passenger). Effects of the intervention are discussed in the context of increasing seat belt use in a hardcore nonuser population of predominantly young adults.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it