<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.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>PROBLEM DRIVERS: AN EVALUATION OF FOUR TREATMENT PROGRAMS AND THE USE OF QUESTIONNAIRE MATERIAL FOR PREDICTING SUCCESS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/109081</link>
      <description><![CDATA[OVER 700 DRIVERS WHO HAD RECENTLY ACCUMULATED BAD DRIVING RECORDS WERE RANDOMLY ASSIGNED TO FOUR DIFFERENT DRIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS. EACH DRIVER FILLED OUT A SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS PROGRAM. SIX MONTHS AFTER THE END OF EACH PROGRAM, THE RECORDS OF ALL PARTICIPATING DRIVERS WERE ANALYZED TO DETERMINE IF THE DRIVER HAD MAINTAINED A CLEAR RECORD DURING THAT TIME. THE RELATIVE SUCCESS/FAILURE RATES OF THE PROGRAM WERE COMPARED. A PROGRAM WHICH COMBINED MINIMUM INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL WITH PROGRESSIVE EASING OF LICENSE RESTRICTIONS PROVED TO BE MOST SUCCESSFUL IN THE SIX-MONTH PERIOD (67% SUCCESS). THE SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE'S 60 ITEMS WERE ANALYZED TO DETERMINE THEIR ABILITY TO PREDICT SUCCESS FOLLOWING TREATMENT (1) FOR THE TOTAL GROUP OF DRIVERS AND (2) FOR THE DRIVERS IN EACH OF THE FOUR PROGRAMS. TEN ITEMS WERE SIGNIFICANT PREDICTORS OF SUCCESS FOR ALL PARTICIPANTS, WHILE A SEPARATE SET OF ITEMS (RANGING FROM THREE TO FIVE PER TREATMENT GROUP) WAS ASSOCIATED WITH SUCCESS OR FAILURE AFTER A PARTICULAR PROGRAM. THE RESULTS INDICATE THE RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMBINING TREATMENT AND RESTRICTIVE MEASURES IN PROGRAMS FOR DRIVER IMPROVEMENT, AND THE PROMISE OF GREATER SUCCESS WITH SUCH PROGRAMS IF METHODS ARE DEVELOPED TO ASSIGN EACH PROBLEM DRIVER TO THE TYPE OF TREATMENT FROM WHICH HE IS MOST LIKELY TO BENEFIT. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:39:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/109081</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ALCOHOLIC DRIVER: A PROPOSAL FOR TREATMENT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO PUNISHMENT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/115319</link>
      <description><![CDATA[RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE FOR PROCESSING CONVICTED DRUNK DRIVERS, WHO ARE IDENTIFIED AS ALCOHOLICS OR PROBLEM DRINKERS, THROUGH THE PENAL SYSTEM. THE THESIS IS THAT A PROGRAM CONBINING STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF PUNITIVE MEASURES WITH EDUCATIONAL AND REHABILITATION PROGRAMS WOULD GIVE THE COURTS THE NEEDED FLEXIBILITY TO SELECT THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS OF PROCESSING CONVICTED DRUNK DIRVERS THROUGH THE CRIMINAL SYSTEM. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/115319</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SHORT INDIVIDUAL DRIVER IMPROVEMENT SESSIONS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/109943</link>
      <description><![CDATA[THE EFFECTS OF SHORT INDIVIDUAL DRIVER IMPROVEMENT SESSIONS ON THE SUBSEQUENT DRIVING RECORDS OF NEGLIGENT OPERATORS WERE EVALUATED. ALSO INVESTIGATED WAS THE INFLUENCE OF AGE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THESE SESSIONS. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN IN THIS REPORT: /1/ THOSE REQUESTED TO ATTEND A HEARING HAD SIGNIFICANTLY FEWER CONVICTIONS DURING THE FIRST 12-MONTH PERIOD FOLLOWING SUCH A SCHEDULED HEARING THAN DID A CONTROL GROUP, /2/ THESE EFFECTS APPEARED TO SHRINK DURING THE SECOND 12-MONTH PERIOD TO A POINT WHERE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS WERE NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT, /3/ ACCIDENT FREQUENCY DID NOT APPEAR TO BE REDUCED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE DRIVER IMPROVEMENT HEARING, /4/ THE HEARINGS DID NOT REDUCE THE POINT COUNT OF THE NEGLIGENT OPERATOR DURING A ONE-YEAR FOLLOW-UP TO THAT OF THE AVERAGE DRIVER, /5/ THE EFFECTS OF THE HEARING WERE CONSTANT AT ALL AGE LEVELS. AMONG OTHER TOPICS DISCUSSED ARE THE EFFECTS OF ATTENDING A HEARING VERSUS MERELY RECEIVING A HEARING NOTICE AND CERTAIN LIMITATIONS IN THE FINDINGS AND RESEARCH DESIGN. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/109943</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRAFFIC LAW ENFORCEMENT: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/115332</link>
      <description><![CDATA[THE CONCEPT OF SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT ATTEMPTS TO ANALYZE WHERE AND WHEN ACCIDENTS TAKE PLACE AND WHAT THE LEADING CAUSES ARE, AND THEN FOCUS ENFORCEMENT ATTENTION IN MAJOR ACCIDENT LOCATIONS. THE CONCEPT GOES BACK 35 YEARS, BUT BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS IS NOW BEING APPLIED TO IT. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT'S TASK FORCE ON HIGHWAY SAFETY ARE DISCUSSED AS REGARDS ENFORCEMENT AND ITS EFFECTIVENESS IN IMPROVING DRIVER PERFORMANCE. THE PROBLEM OF DRINKING DRIVERS AND DRUG ADDICTED DRIVERS IS DISCUSSED. RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE DRIVER LICENSING PROCEDURES ARE MADE. /HSL/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2001 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/115332</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ENCOURAGING FULL-TIME USE OF SAFETY BELTS AMONG CURRENT PART-TIME USERS. FINAL REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/361851</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The primary experimental intervention was a specially designed brochure intended to (1) make the part-time seat belt user feel somewhat nervous about not buckling up all the time and (2) provide a means of reducing his or her anxiety: always buckling up. Further use of the brochure should be contingent on identifying and implementing cost-effective strategies to (1) increase the number of drivers who read the brochure and (2) maintain increased use over time among those initially motivated drivers.  However, the most effective means of using the brochure would be to incorporate it into a community-based seat belt campaign that relies on a variety of mutually reinforcing strategies designed to raise and then reduce low-level anxiety about riding unbuckled.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/361851</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DOES THE OPERATOR IMPACT RANGE?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/451904</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Manufacturers of electric vehicles have always contended that the driving techniques of those who operate battery powered vehicles have a significant impact on the range of those vehicles.  14 regular drivers of the Chattanooga Area Regional Transportation Authority's (CARTA) electric shuttle buses were given tips on improving their driving efficiency.  Tips included: maximum use of the buses' regenerative braking capability;  avoiding "jackrabbit" starts; and efficient use of the 12-volt accessories such as windshield wipers, headlights, and defrosters. "Efficient driving techniques can lead to significant improvement in range," said ETVI President Rick Hitchcock.  We just wanted an opportunity to prove it to the drivers and those interested in operating electric vehicles. So much time is spent in the technical pursuit of greater range that the importance of the operators is often ignored. With the cooperation and effort of the CARTA operators, it was proven how important the operator is in achieving range and it demonstrated the long-term effect that the focus on efficiency has had on the CARTA drivers.  A random sampling of miles per kilowatt hour taken two and three weeks later showed that the drivers continued to drive well above their previous performance levels.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 1995 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/451904</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A HISTORY OF WASHINGTON'S GROUP DYNAMICS PROGRAMS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/109006</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A HISTORY OF THE USE OF GROUP PROGRAMS IN THE TREATMENT OF PROBLEM DRIVERS IN WASHINGTON STATE IS PRESENTED. THE PROGRAMS BEGAN IN AUGUST 1964, WITH A PILOT STUDY UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, D. C. PILOT WORK WAS CONFINED TO PIERCE COUNTY, WHERE GROUP DYNAMICS PROGRAMS WERE CONDUCTED THROUGH MARCH 1965. ALTHOUGH A NUMBER OF WEAKNESSES EXISTED IN THE TREATMENT OF CONTROL GROUPS AND THE STATISTICAL METHODS EMPLOYED, RESULTS SHOWED AN ENCOURAGING IMPROVEMENT AFTER SIX MONTHS IN THE RECORDS OF DRIVERS WHO COMPLETED THE GROUP DYNAMICS PROGRAM COMPARED TO THOSE WHO DID NOT. ON THE BASIS OF THESE RESULTS, THE PROGRAMS WERE CONTINUED IN PIERCE COUNTY AND EXPANDED TO INCLUDE KING AND SPOKANE COUNTIES IN 1966. A FOLLOW-UP ANALYSIS, CONDUCTED IN AUGUST 1966, REEXAMINED THE DRIVING RECORDS OF THE ORIGINAL TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS FROM 18 TO 24 MONTHS AFTER THE PROGRAMS WERE CONDUCTED. MORE CAREFUL DEFINITION OF TREATMENT GROUP MEMBERS, MATCHING OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS, AND CONTROL FOR ELAPSED TIME PRODUCED STATISTICAL RESULTS SHOWING LITTLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DRIVERS WHO COMPLETED THE PROGRAM AND THOSE WHO DID NOT. MEANWHILE, A REVISED RESEARCH DESIGN WAS DEVELOPED. IT INSURED GREATER COMPARABILITY BETWEEN TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUP MEMBERS BY REQUIRING THAT CONTROL GROUP MEMBERS ALSO BE CONTACTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND ATTEND A GROUP MEETING. THE REVISED PROCEDURES WERE IN EFFECT IN THE SAME THREE COUNTIES BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1966 AND MAY 1967. ANALYSIS OF THESE DATA SHOWED DRIVING RECORD IN THE SIX MONTHS AFTER TREATMENT TO BE SLIGHTLY BETTER FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP, BUT THE DIFFERENCES WERE VERY SMALL. REVISION OF THE PROGRAM CONTENT WAS UNDERTAKEN BY DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES STAFF LATE IN 1967. THE NEW ATTITUDE MODIFICATION SESSIONS WERE IMPLEMENTED IN 1968 AND BECAME PART OF A LARGER RESEARCH PROGRAM DESIGNED TO EVALUATE FOUR SEPARATE TREATMENT PROGRAMS FOR PROBLEM DRIVERS AND TO DEVELOP A TREATMENT-PRESCRIBING QUESTIONNAIRE. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/109006</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>CONTROL OF THE NEGLIGENT DRIVER - PART III</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/114321</link>
      <description><![CDATA[THE DRIVING RECORD OF 4,034 NEGLIGENT DRIVERS WERE ANALYZED FOR A SIX YEAR PERIOD. DESCRIPTIVE VARIABLES WERE ALSO ANALYZED TO ARRIVE AT A PROFILE OF THE DRIVERS WHO REMAINED NEGLIGENT DRIVERS. THE HARDCORE NEGLIGENT DRIVER DOES NOT IMPROVE HIS DRIVING RECORD TO ANY APPRECIABLE DEGREE IN SPITE OF REPEATED DRIVER IMPROVEMENT CONTACTS. THE DRIVING RECORD OF THE OTHER NEGLIGENT DRIVERS IMPROVED OVER THE YEARS, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THESE DRIVERS DID NOT IMPROVE THEIR DRIVING RECORD TO THE POINT WHERE THEY COULD BE CALLED AN AVERAGE DRIVER. NO SIGNIFICANT DESCRIPTIVE DIFFERENCES APPEARED BETWEEN NEGLIGENT DRIVERS WHO REMAINED NEGLIGENT AND THOSE DRIVERS NO LONGER CLASSIFIED AS SUCH. NEGLIGENT DRIVERS WITH A MORE SEVERE PRIOR RECORD TENDED TO COMPILE A WORSE THAN AVERAGE DRIVING RECORD DURING THE SIX YEARS AFTER THE ORIGINAL ACTION. THESE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES CAN BE USED AS PREDICTORS OF THE FUTURE DRIVING BEHAVIOR OF NEGLIGENT DRIVERS. THE POSSIBILITY IS SUGGESTED OF USING A REGRESSION ANALYSIS MODEL TO MAXIMIZE THE PREDICTABILITY OF FUTURE DRIVING BEHAVIOR AND HAVE USEFULNESS IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS AS TO THE TYPE OF ACTION MOST BENEFICIAL IN PRODUCING IMPROVED DRIVING PERFORMANCE.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/114321</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF UNIFORM DRIVER IMPROVEMENT SCHOOL-PHASE I</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/108787</link>
      <description><![CDATA[THE DEVELOPMENT OF A UNIFORM DRIVER IMPROVEMENT SCHOOL CURRICULUM TO BE USED ON AN EXPERIMENTAL BASIS IN FIVE COURT REFERRAL MULTIPLE TRAFFIC VIOLATOR SCHOOLS IS DISCUSSED. CRITERION FOR IMPROVED DRIVER BEHAVIOR WILL BE THE REDUCTION OF SUBSEQUENT VIOLATIONS AND ACCIDENTS. THIS STUDY COVERS THE ACTUAL CURRICULUM, INCLUDING COURSE CONTENT, VISUAL MATERIALS, AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROCEDURES TO BE USED. AN INSTRUCTIONAL GUIDE IS INCLUDED.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/108787</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN DRIVING RECORDS, SELECTED PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS, AND BIOGRAPHICAL DATA OF TRAFFIC OFFENDERS AND NON-OFFENDERS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/116287</link>
      <description><![CDATA[THIS PAPER PRESENTS: (1) A SYNOPSIS OF METHODS EMPLOYED IN ARRIVING AT AN ANSWER TO EACH OF FOUR SUB-PROBLEMS POSED IN THIS STUDY, ALONG WITH A SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS OF EACH, (2) THOSE CONCLUSIONS WHICH APPEAR WARRANTED ON THE BASIS OF DATA REVEALED AND STATISTICAL MEASURES OBTAINED, AND (3) RECOMMENDATIONS PERTINENT TO THE APPLICATION OF FINDINGS OF THIS STUDY, TO THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF DRIVER IMPROVEMENT CLINICS, AND TO FURTHER RESEARCH INTO DRIVING PERFORMANCE. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/116287</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A RE-EVALUATION OF GROUP DRIVER IMPROVEMENT MEETINGS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/111109</link>
      <description><![CDATA[AN EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF THE DRIVER IMPROVEMENT MEETING PROGRAM WAS UNDERTAKEN IN A CONTINUING EFFORT TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DRIVER CONTROL PROGRAMS WITHIN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES. THE MEETING AND CONTROL SUBJECTS WERE PERSONS SELECTED FOR DRIVER IMPROVEMENT MEETINGS ON THE BASIS OF THEIR AREA OF RESIDENCE AND DRIVING RECORD. THE CRITERIA WERE THAT THEY HAD ACCUMULATED A TOTAL OF FOUR NEGLIGENT OPERATOR POINTS IN THE LAST YEAR AND HAD NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONTACTED BY DMV AS PART OF THE NEGLIGENT OPERATOR CONTROL PROGRAM. REGARDING ACCIDENTS, THE ONLY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG ALL THE COMPARISONS WAS FOUND BETWEEN THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF PRIOR ACCIDENTS FOR THE MEETING AND CONTROL GROUP. AS FOR THE SUBSEQUENT DRIVING PERFORMANCE COMPARISONS, STATISTICAL TESTS INDICATED THAT ALL DIFFERENCES COULD BE ATTRIBUTED TO CHANCE. NO DIFFERENCE IN THE PROGRAMS EFFECTIVENESS WAS FOUND BETWEEN SEXES. HOWEVER, THE PROGRAM APPEARS AN EFFECTIVE MEANS OF REDUCING TRAFFIC CONVICTIONS AMONG PERSONS WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/111109</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>LINEMARKING TO RESTRICT OVERTAKING ON CURVES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/115766</link>
      <description><![CDATA[THE S.A.A. CODE 'ROAD TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES' PROVIDES FOR THE MARKING OF UNBROKEN SEPARATION LINES TO PROHIBIT OVERTAKING AT POINTS OF RESTRICTED SIGHT DISTANCE ON HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CURVES. IT DEFINES THE 'NO OVERTAKING SIGHT DISTANCE' AS 300 FT. (URBAN) AND 500 FT. (RURAL). THE ORIGIN OF THESE DISTANCES IS NOT KNOWN BUT IT IS ASSUMED THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED EMPIRICALLY. OBSERVARIONS SHOW THE NEED FOR REVISION TO SUIT MODERN CONDITIONS. SIGHT DISTANCES AND METHODS OF LINEMARKING HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED IN THE UNITED STATES, NEW ZEALAND, AND BY THE COUNTRY ROADS BOARD, VICTORIA, BOTH THEORETICALLY AND FROM PRACTICAL EXPERIMENTS. THE DEPARTMENT OF MAIN ROADS, NEW SOUTH WALES, HAS UNDERTAKEN A STUDY ON AN EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL BASIS, AND THE FINDINGS OF THIS STUDY ARE DISCUSSED IN THIS PAPER. THE ACCEPTANCE AND OBSERVANCE OF ANY SYSTEM OF SEPARATION LINEMARKING MUST RELY ON THE GOOD SENSE AND AWARENESS OF DRIVERS, ON WHOM THE ONUS TO OVERTAKE SAFETY MUST ALWAYS REST. THE MORE CLOSELY THAT LINEMARKING STANDARDS APPROACH A PRACTICE ACCEPTABLE TO DRIVERS, THE GREATER A SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY WILL BE ENGENDERED IN THE DRIVER AND THE MARKINGS WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO COMMAND HIS RESPECT. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/115766</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE OLDER DRIVER. FINAL REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/374270</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A growing percentage of all drivers are aged 55 and older.  The findings of a number of safety studies have also fostered national interest in older driver issues.  The needs and problems of Virginia drivers age 55 and older were identified in 10 focus group discussions and 100 in-depth telephone interviews.  Respondents described a number of roadway information problems, which were often attributed to a lack of advance warning signs, confusing sign content, and not enough informational redundance.  Visibility problems caused by poor sight distances, inclement weather, night, and large trucks were another major concern.  Complex driving environments created by heavy traffic, high speeds, and other factors were a problem for many older drivers.  Finally, "expectancy violations," often caused by other drivers' behavior, were a common problem.  These findings replicate those of previous studies, as does the finding that older Virginia drivers often engage in "self-regulating" behaviors.  The research on older driver interventions was also reviewed.  The evidence related to reductions in older driver accidents has been largely inconclusive; data limitations have often been a problem.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 1993 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/374270</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>NOW YOU CAN SELECT A SAFE TAXI</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/366485</link>
      <description><![CDATA[An account is given of 'Project Spear', a company set up to train taxi drivers in South Africa.  Backed by the CSIR (National Institute for Transport and Road Research), NRSC (National Road Safety Council), Department of Transport, all the taxi associations and driver training centres in the country, a programme has been compiled known as 'The Professional Minibus Taxi Driver Training Programme'.  The programme comprises four courses: perceptive driving skills, defensive driving skills, master driving skills and professional driving skills.  A network of up to 50 training centres with uniform courses is planned.  80% of training is in the vehicle and certificates are awarded with a 65% pass mark and an 80% requirement for entry into the next course. The award of a coloured decal denotes the level reached by the driver, hence commuters can judge his skill. (TRRL) (Author/TRRL)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/366485</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DRIVER DEMERIT POINT WARNING LETTER: FOCUS GROUP TESTING OF ALTERNATIVE LETTERS: FINAL REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/356141</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study was conducted in March 1989 among 85 Ontario drivers, selected to represent different segments of driving population in age, sex, educational achievement or vocational driving.  The respondents were divided into 14 small groups of 6 individuals, with each group reacting to the current warning letter and to 4 alternative versions.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 31 Aug 1991 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/356141</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>