Use of Agent-focused Language in Collision Reporting Boosts Support for Road Safety Interventions

The three versions of the news article differed in their formulations, focus and whether or not they included contextual information about the frequency of collisions, the applicable speed limit and infrastructure at the location. These differences affected how readers perceived incidents and attributed responsibility. 
In the first variant, which closely reflected the status quo of newspaper coverage of traffic crashes, the headline read "Pedestrian hit by car - dead". The use of the passive form in the headline focuses attention on the victim of the accident. This continues in the article, which does not address the driver’s responsibility, infrastructural factors such as road layout or applicable speed limits. Instead, the vehicle is named in place of the driver – a rhetorical device known as metonymy that shifts the focus away from the actor.

The second, agent-focused version of the article clearly identifies the driver as the actor. There, the headline reads: “Driver hits pedestrian – dead.” Readers were more likely to attribute responsibility to the driver in this framing; however the article still frames the event as an individual incident, without situating it within a broader systemic context.

A third variant focuses on the actor while also providing contextual information: “Driver hits pedestrian – already five pedestrians killed this year.” This framing adds further detail, including the frequency of speeding offences and the absence of a pedestrian crossing at the location. As a consequence, readers were more likely to attribute responsibility not only to the driver but also to systemic factors such as infrastructure and environmental conditions.

The results show that shifting from victim- to agent-focused language reduced pedestrian responsibility attribution from 49 to 44 percent (i.e., the proportion of readers who assigned responsibility to pedestrians). This effect was amplified when contextual information was added, with pedestrian responsibility attribution dropping to 33 percent. “Language patterns in German road traffic collision reporting – including metonymy, passive voice, reflexive verbs, and the lack of context information – systematically shift perceived responsibility toward vulnerable road users,” explains study co-author Dirk von Schneidemesser (RIFS). Conversely, the readers of the agent-focused variants attributed more responsibility to the car driver.

The researchers also asked participants about their support for infrastructural changes and awareness campaigns to improve road safety. “The responses show that contextual information increases support for structural measures such as wider footpaths and the addition of pedestrian crossings in place of parking spaces. At the same time, communication campaigns that focus on individual behaviour garner less support as the language gets more precise and context information is included,” explains von Schneidemesser. Clear and precise language, and acknowledging the systemic nature of traffic collisisons in traffic reporting could therefore play an important role in strengthening public support for proven structural safety measures.

Publication:
von Schneidemesser, D., & Caviola, H. (2025). Language matters: an experimental study of language patterns’ effects on traffic safety perceptions in Germany. Traffic Safety Research, 9, e000106. https://doi.org/10.55329/oyoz9269

More information
•    von Schneidemesser, D., Bettge, S. S., Caviola, H., Sedlaczek, A., Reisigl, M., Schindler, F., & Wirz, M. (2025). How linguistic patterns obscure responsibility in newspaper coverage of traffic crashes in German-speaking countries: an interdisciplinary study. Mobilities.  http://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2025.2534634
•    Caviola, H., Reisigl, M., Sedlaczek, A., Schindler, F., von Schneidemesser, D., Wirz, M., & Janssen, I. (2025). Unfallsprache - Sprachunfall: Leitfaden zur Berichterstattung über Kollisionen im Verkehr. RIFS Brochure.