Language matters: an experimental study of language patterns' effects on traffic safety perceptions in Germany

Traffic crashes claim over 1.19 million lives globally each year, yet public support for proven safety measures remains limited. Research suggests that media language patterns may influence public perceptions of traffic violence and policy preferences. This study replicates Goddard et al.'s (2019) experimental design study in the German context, examining how editorial patterns in crash reporting affect responsibility attribution, penalty preferences, and policy support. Using a randomized controlled experiment (N = 1,537), participants read one of three versions of a fictitious news article: status-quo language reflecting common German reporting patterns, agent-focused language avoiding victim-blaming formulations, or agent-focused plus contextual information. Results show that shifting from victim-focused to agent-focused language substantially reduced pedestrian responsibility attribution (from 48.9% to 44.4%) and increased responsibility attributed to the driver (from 43.5% to 48.1%). Adding contextual information enlarged these effects, with driver responsibility attribution reaching 54.8% and pedestrian responsibility attribution dropping to 33.2%. Contextual framing also increased support for structural interventions and reduced support for campaigns appealing to individual behavior. These findings confirm that 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. The study demonstrates that more precise language in traffic reporting can increase public support for evidence-based safety policies, suggesting an ethical imperative for improved editorial practices.