"If they say go faster or something I'll probably go faster" - peer influence upon the risky driving behaviour of young novice drivers

Purpose Young novice drivers are at considerable risk of injury on the road, and their behaviour appears vulnerable to the social influence of their friends. Research was undertaken to identify the nature and mechanisms of peer influence upon novice driver (16-25 years) behaviour to inform the design of more effective young driver countermeasures. Methods. Peer influence was explored in small group interviews (n = 21) and three surveys (n1 = 761, n2 = 1170, n3 = 390) as part of a larger Queensland-wide study. Surveys two and three were part of a six-month longitudinal study. Results Peer influence was reported from the pre-Licence to the Provisional (intermediate) periods. Young novice drivers who experienced or expected social punishments including ‘being told off’ for risky driving reported less riskiness. Conversely young novice drivers who experienced or expected social rewards such as being ‘cheered on’ by their friends – who were also more risky drivers – reported more risky driving including crashes and offences. Conclusions Peers appear influential in the risky behaviour of young novice drivers, and influence occurs through social mechanisms of reinforcement and sanction. Interventions enhancing positive influence and curtailing negative influence may improve road safety outcomes not only for young novice drivers, but for all persons who share the road with them. Among the interventions warranting further development and evaluation are programs to encourage the modelling of safe driving behaviour and attitudes by young drivers; and minimisation of social reinforcement and promotion of social sanctions for risky driving behaviour in particular.

Punishment Avoidance and Intentional Risky Driving Behaviour : What are the Implications for ‘Getting Away with it’?

Every motorised jurisdiction mandates legal driving behaviour which facilitates driver mobility and road user safety through explicit road rules that are enforced by regulatory authorities such as the Police. In road safety, traffic law enforcement has been very successfully applied to modify road user behaviour, and increasingly technology is fundamental in detecting illegal road user behaviour. Furthermore, there is also sound evidence that highly visible and/or intensive enforcement programs achieve long-term deterrent effects. To illustrate, in Australia random breath testing has considerably reduced the incidence and prevalence of driving whilst under the influence of alcohol. There is, however, evidence that many road rules continue to be broken, including speeding and using a mobile phone whilst driving, and there are many instances where drivers are not detected or sufficiently sanctioned for these transgressions. Furthermore, there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that experiences of punishment avoidance – that is, successful attempts at avoiding punishment such as drivers talking themselves out of a ticket, or changing driving routes to evade detection –are associated with and predictive of the extent of illegal driving behaviour and future illegal driving intentions. Therefore there is a need to better understand the phenomenon of punishment avoidance to enhance our traffic law enforcement procedures and therefore safety of all road users. This chapter begins with a review of the young driver road safety problem, followed by an examination of contemporary deterrence theory to enhance our understanding of both the experiences and implications of punishment avoidance in the road environment. It is noteworthy that in situations where detection and punishment remain relatively rare, such as on extensive road networks, the research evidence suggests that experiences of punishment avoidance may have a stronger influence upon risky driving behaviour than experiences of punishment. Finally, data from a case study examining the risky behaviour of young drivers will be presented, and the implications for ‘getting away with it’ will be discussed.

“I drove after drinking alcohol” and other risky driving behaviours reported by young novice drivers in Queensland, Australia

Background. Volitional risky driving behaviours such as drink- and drug-driving (i.e. substance-impaired driving) and speeding contribute to the overrepresentation of young novice drivers in road crash fatalities, and crash risk is greatest during the first year of independent driving in particular. Aims. To explore the: 1) self-reported compliance of drivers with road rules regarding substance-impaired driving and other risky driving behaviours (e.g., speeding, driving while tired), one year after progression from a Learner to a Provisional (intermediate) licence; and 2) interrelationships between substance-impaired driving and other risky driving behaviours (e.g., crashes, offences, and Police avoidance). Methods. Drivers (n = 1,076; 319 males) aged 18-20 years were surveyed regarding their sociodemographics (age, gender) and self-reported driving behaviours including crashes, offences, Police avoidance, and driving intentions. Results. A relatively small proportion of participants reported driving after taking drugs (6.3% of males, 1.3% of females) and drinking alcohol (18.5% of males, 11.8% of females). In comparison, a considerable proportion of participants reported at least occasionally exceeding speed limits (86.7% of novices), and risky behaviours like driving when tired (83.6% of novices). Substance-impaired driving was associated with avoiding Police, speeding, risky driving intentions, and self-reported crashes and offences. Forty-three percent of respondents who drove after taking drugs also reported alcohol-impaired driving. Discussion and Conclusions. Behaviours of concern include drink driving, speeding, novice driving errors such as misjudging the speed of oncoming vehicles, violations of graduated driver licensing passenger restrictions, driving tired, driving faster if in a bad mood, and active punishment avoidance. Given the interrelationships between the risky driving behaviours, a deeper understanding of influential factors is required to inform targeted and general countermeasure implementation and evaluation during this critical driving period. Notwithstanding this, a combination of enforcement, education, and engineering efforts appear necessary to improve the road safety of the young novice driver, and for the drink-driving young novice driver in particular.

The psychosocial purpose of driving and its relationship with the risky driving behaviour of young novice drivers

Background The overrepresentation of young drivers in road crashes, injuries and fatalities around the world has resulted in a breadth of injury prevention efforts including education, enforcement, engineering, and exposure control. Despite multifaceted intervention, the young driver problem remains a challenge for injury prevention researchers, practitioners and policy-makers. The intractable nature of young driver crash risks suggests that a deeper understanding of their car use – that is, the purpose of their driving – is required to inform the design of more effective young driver countermeasures. Aims This research examined the driving purpose reported by young drivers, including the relationship with self-reported risky driving behaviours including offences. Methods Young drivers with a Learner or Provisional licence participated in three online surveys (N1 = 656, 17–20 years; N2 = 1051, 17–20 years; N3 = 351, 17–21 years) as part of a larger state-wide project in Queensland, Australia. Results A driving purpose scale was developed (the PsychoSocial Purpose Driving Scale, PSPDS), revealing that young drivers drove for psychosocial reasons such as for a sense of freedom and to feel independent. Drivers who reported the greatest psychosocial purpose for driving were more likely to be male and to report more risky driving behaviours such as speeding. Drivers who deliberately avoided on-road police presence and reported a prior driving-related offence had significantly greater PSPDS scores, and higher reporting of psychosocial driving purposes was found over time as drivers transitioned from the supervised Learner licence phase to the independent Provisional (intermediate) licence phase. Discussion and conclusions The psychosocial needs met by driving suggest that effective intervention to prevent young driver injury requires further consideration of their driving purpose. Enforcement, education, and engineering efforts which consider the psychosocial purpose of the driving are likely to be more efficacious than those which presently do not. Road safety countermeasures could reduce the young driver’s exposure to risk through such mechanisms as encouraging the use of public transport.

New England Youth Speeding Project: A pilot study of young drivers and risky driving: Effective strategies for preventing speeding amongst young Australians aged 16-25 years in the New England Region

Young Australian drivers aged 17 – 25 years are overwhelmingly represented in road fatalities where speed is a factor. In the combined LGAs of Armidale Dumaresq, Guyra, Uralla and Walcha in the 5 years 1999-2003 inclusive, 43% of speeding related casualty crashes involved a young driver aged less than 25 years. This is despite the fact that the 17-25 age group account for only 25% of the driving population in this area. Young male drivers account for the majority of these crashes and also tend to have a higher number of driving offences and accrue more penalties for road traffic offences, especially speeding. By analysing data from questionnaires by male and female participants this research project has been able to evaluate road safety advertisements to determine which ones are most effective to young drivers, what features of these advertisements are effective, how males differ from females in their receptiveness and preferences for road safety advertisements and specifically how to target young people especially young men in conveying road safety messages. Finally this research project has identified factors that are important in the production of media road safety advertisements and has made recommendations for how best to convey effective road safety messages to young Australian drivers in rural areas.

Social influences on risky driving behaviours among young drivers in Oman

Young drivers represent approximately 20% of the Omani population, yet account for over one third of crash injuries and fatalities on Oman's roads. Internationally, research has demonstrated that social influences play an important role within young driver safety, however, there is little research examining this within Arab gulf countries. This study sought to explore young driver behaviour using Akers' social learning theory. A self-report survey was conducted by 1319 (72.9% male and 27.1% female) young drivers aged 17-25 years. A hierarchical regression model was used to investigate the contribution of social learning variables (norms and behaviour of significant others, personal attitudes towards risky behaviour, imitation of significant others, beliefs about the rewards and punishments offered by risky behaviour), socio-demographic characteristics (age and gender), driving experience (initial training, time driving and previous driving without supervision) and sensitivity to rewards and punishments upon the self-reported risky driving behaviours of young drivers. It was found that 39.6% of the young drivers reported that they have been involved in at least one crash since the issuance of their driving licence and they were considered ‘at fault’ in 60.7% of these crashes. The hierarchical multiple regression models revealed that socio-demographic characteristics and driving experience alone explained 14.2% of the variance in risky driving behaviour. By introducing social learning factors into the model a further 37.0% of variance was explained. Finally, 7.9% of the variance in risky behaviour could be explained by including individual sensitivity to rewards and punishments. These findings and the implications are discussed.

Understanding the psychosocial factors influencing the risky behaviour of young drivers

Young people aged 17–24 years are at high risk of being killed in road crashes around the world. Road safety interventions consider some influences upon young driver behaviour; for example, imposing passenger restrictions on young novice drivers indirectly minimises the potential negative social influences of peers as passengers. To change young driver risky behaviour, the multitude of psychosocial influences upon its initiation and maintenance must be identified. A study questionnaire was developed to investigate the relationships between risky driving and Akers’ social learning theory, social identity theory, and thrill seeking variables. The questionnaire was completed by 165 participants (105 women,60 men) residing in south-east Queensland, Australia. The sociodemographic variables of age, gender, and exposure explained 19% of the variance in self-reported risky driving behaviour, whilst Akers’ social learning variables explained an additional 42%. Thrill seeking and social identity variables did not explain any significant additional variance. Significant predictors of risky driving included imitation of the driving behaviours of, and anticipated rewards and punishments administered by, parents and peers. Road safety policy that directly considers and incorporates these factors in their design, implementation, and enforcement of young driver road safety interventions should prove more efficacious than current approaches.

Texting while driving : psychosocial influences on young people’s texting intentions and behaviour

Despite the dangers and illegality, there is a continued prevalence of texting while driving amongst young Australian drivers. The present study tested an extended theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to predict young drivers’ (17 to 24 years) intentions to [1] send and [2] read text messages while driving. Participants (N = 169 university students) completed measures of attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, intentions, and the additional social influence measures of group norm and moral norm. One week later, participants reported on the number of texts sent and read while driving in the previous week. Attitude predicted intentions to both send and read texts while driving, and subjective norm and perceived behavioural control determined sending, but not reading, intentions. Further, intention, but not perceptions of control, predicted both texting behaviours 1 week later. In addition, both group norm and moral norm added predictive ability to the model. These findings provide support for the TPB in understanding students’ decisions to text while driving as well as the inclusion of additional normative influences within this context, suggesting that a multi-strategy approach is likely to be useful in attempts to reduce the incidence of these risky driving behaviours.

The risky behaviour of young drivers : developing a measurement tool

The contribution of risky behaviour to the increased crash and fatality rates of young novice drivers is recognised in the road safety literature around the world. Exploring such risky driver behaviour has led to the development of tools like the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) to examine driving violations, errors, and lapses [1]. Whilst the DBQ has been utilised in young novice driver research, some items within this tool seem specifically designed for the older, more experienced driver, whilst others appear to asses both behaviour and related motives. The current study was prompted by the need for a risky behaviour measurement tool that can be utilised with young drivers with a provisional driving licence. Sixty-three items exploring young driver risky behaviour developed from the road safety literature were incorporated into an online survey. These items assessed driver, passenger, journey, car and crash-related issues. A sample of 476 drivers aged 17-25 years (M = 19, SD = 1.59 years) with a provisional driving licence and matched for age, gender, and education were drawn from a state-wide sample of 761 young drivers who completed the survey. Factor analysis based upon a principal components extraction of factors was followed by an oblique rotation to investigate the underlying dimensions to young novice driver risky behaviour. A five factor solution comprising 44 items was identified, accounting for 55% of the variance in young driver risky behaviour. Factor 1 accounted for 32.5% of the variance and appeared to measure driving violations that were transient in nature - risky behaviours that followed risky decisions that occurred during the journey (e.g., speeding). Factor 2 accounted for 10.0% of variance and appeared to measure driving violations that were fixed in nature; the risky decisions being undertaken before the journey (e.g., drink driving). Factor 3 accounted for 5.4% of variance and appeared to measure misjudgment (e.g., misjudged speed of oncoming vehicle). Factor 4 accounted for 4.3% of variance and appeared to measure risky driving exposure (e.g., driving at night with friends as passengers). Factor 5 accounted for 2.8% of variance and appeared to measure driver emotions or mood (e.g., anger). Given that the aim of the study was to create a research tool, the factors informed the development of five subscales and one composite scale. The composite scale had a very high internal consistency measure (Cronbach’s alpha) of .947. Self-reported data relating to police-detected driving offences, their crash involvement, and their intentions to break road rules within the next year were also collected. While the composite scale was only weakly correlated with self-reported crashes (r = .16, p < .001), it was moderately correlated with offences (r = .26, p < .001), and highly correlated with their intentions to break the road rules (r = .57, p < .001). Further application of the developed scale is needed to confirm the factor structure within other samples of young drivers both in Australia and in other countries. In addition, future research could explore the applicability of the scale for investigating the behaviour of other types of drivers.

The influence of sensitivity to reward and punishment, propensity for sensation seeking, depression, and anxiety on the risky behaviour of novice drivers : a path model

Young novice drivers are significantly more likely to be killed or injured in car crashes than older, experienced drivers. Graduated driver licensing (GDL), which allows the novice to gain driving experience under less-risky circumstances, has resulted in reduced crash incidence; however, the driver's psychological traits are ignored. This paper explores the relationships between gender, age, anxiety, depression, sensitivity to reward and punishment, sensation-seeking propensity, and risky driving. Participants were 761 young drivers aged 17–24 (M= 19.00, SD= 1.56) with a Provisional (intermediate) driver's licence who completed an online survey comprising socio-demographic questions, the Impulsive Sensation Seeking Scale, Kessler's Psychological Distress Scale, the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire, and the Behaviour of Young Novice Drivers Scale. Path analysis revealed depression, reward sensitivity, and sensation-seeking propensity predicted the self-reported risky behaviour of the young novice drivers. Gender was a moderator; and the anxiety level of female drivers also influenced their risky driving. Interventions do not directly consider the role of rewards and sensation seeking, or the young person's mental health. An approach that does take these variables into account may contribute to improved road safety outcomes for both young and older road users.

A comparison of the psychological, social, and legal factors contributing to speeding and drink driving behaviour

Within Australia, motor vehicle injury is the leading cause of hospital admissions and fatalities. Road crash data reveals that among the factors contributing to crashes in Queensland, speed and alcohol continue to be overrepresented. While alcohol is the number one contributing factor to fatal crashes, speeding also contributes to a high proportion of crashes. Research indicates that risky driving is an important contributor to road crashes. However, it has been debated whether all risky driving behaviours are similar enough to be explained by the same combination of factors. Further, road safety authorities have traditionally relied upon deterrence based countermeasures to reduce the incidence of illegal driving behaviours such as speeding and drink driving. However, more recent research has focussed on social factors to explain illegal driving behaviours. The purpose of this research was to examine and compare the psychological, legal, and social factors contributing to two illegal driving behaviours: exceeding the posted speed limit and driving when over the legal blood alcohol concentration (BAC) for the drivers licence type. Complementary theoretical perspectives were chosen to comprehensively examine these two behaviours including Akers’ social learning theory, Stafford and Warr’s expanded deterrence theory, and personality perspectives encompassing alcohol misuse, sensation seeking, and Type-A behaviour pattern. The program of research consisted of two phases: a preliminary pilot study, and the main quantitative phase. The preliminary pilot study was undertaken to inform the development of the quantitative study and to ensure the clarity of the theoretical constructs operationalised in this research. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 Queensland drivers recruited from Queensland Transport Licensing Centres and Queensland University of Technology (QUT). These interviews demonstrated that the majority of participants had engaged in at least one of the behaviours, or knew of someone who had. It was also found among these drivers that the social environment in which both behaviours operated, including family and friends, and the social rewards and punishments associated with the behaviours, are important in their decision making. The main quantitative phase of the research involved a cross-sectional survey of 547 Queensland licensed drivers. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between speeding and drink driving and whether there were any similarities or differences in the factors that contribute to a driver’s decision to engage in one or the other. A comparison of the participants self-reported speeding and self-reported drink driving behaviour demonstrated that there was a weak positive association between these two behaviours. Further, participants reported engaging in more frequent speeding at both low (i.e., up to 10 kilometres per hour) and high (i.e., 10 kilometres per hour or more) levels, than engaging in drink driving behaviour. It was noted that those who indicated they drove when they may be over the legal limit for their licence type, more frequently exceeded the posted speed limit by 10 kilometres per hour or more than those who complied with the regulatory limits for drink driving. A series of regression analyses were conducted to investigate the factors that predict self-reported speeding, self-reported drink driving, and the preparedness to engage in both behaviours. In relation to self-reported speeding (n = 465), it was found that among the sociodemographic and person-related factors, younger drivers and those who score high on measures of sensation seeking were more likely to report exceeding the posted speed limit. In addition, among the legal and psychosocial factors it was observed that direct exposure to punishment (i.e., being detected by police), direct punishment avoidance (i.e., engaging in an illegal driving behaviour and not being detected by police), personal definitions (i.e., personal orientation or attitudes toward the behaviour), both the normative and behavioural dimensions of differential association (i.e., refers to both the orientation or attitude of their friends and family, as well as the behaviour of these individuals), and anticipated punishments were significant predictors of self-reported speeding. It was interesting to note that associating with significant others who held unfavourable definitions towards speeding (the normative dimension of differential association) and anticipating punishments from others were both significant predictors of a reduction in self-reported speeding. In relation to self-reported drink driving (n = 462), a logistic regression analysis indicated that there were a number of significant predictors which increased the likelihood of whether participants had driven in the last six months when they thought they may have been over the legal alcohol limit. These included: experiences of direct punishment avoidance; having a family member convicted of drink driving; higher levels of Type-A behaviour pattern; greater alcohol misuse (as measured by the AUDIT); and the normative dimension of differential association (i.e., associating with others who held favourable attitudes to drink driving). A final logistic regression analysis examined the predictors of whether the participants reported engaging in both drink driving and speeding versus those who reported engaging in only speeding (the more common of the two behaviours) (n = 465). It was found that experiences of punishment avoidance for speeding decreased the likelihood of engaging in both speeding and drink driving; whereas in the case of drink driving, direct punishment avoidance increased the likelihood of engaging in both behaviours. It was also noted that holding favourable personal definitions toward speeding and drink driving, as well as higher levels of on Type-A behaviour pattern, and greater alcohol misuse significantly increased the likelihood of engaging in both speeding and drink driving. This research has demonstrated that the compliance with the regulatory limits was much higher for drink driving than it was for speeding. It is acknowledged that while speed limits are a fundamental component of speed management practices in Australia, the countermeasures applied to both speeding and drink driving do not appear to elicit the same level of compliance across the driving population. Further, the findings suggest that while the principles underpinning the current regime of deterrence based countermeasures are sound, current enforcement practices are insufficient to force compliance among the driving population, particularly in the case of speeding. Future research should further examine the degree of overlap between speeding and drink driving behaviour and whether punishment avoidance experiences for a specific illegal driving behaviour serve to undermine the deterrent effect of countermeasures aimed at reducing the incidence of another illegal driving behaviour. Furthermore, future work should seek to understand the factors which predict engaging in speeding and drink driving behaviours at the same time. Speeding has shown itself to be a pervasive and persistent behaviour, hence it would be useful to examine why road safety authorities have been successful in convincing the majority of drivers of the dangers of drink driving, but not those associated with speeding. In conclusion, the challenge for road safety practitioners will be to convince drivers that speeding and drink driving are equally risky behaviours, with the ultimate goal to reduce the prevalence of both behaviours.

A further exploration of sensation seeking propensity, reward sensitivity, depression, anxiety, and the risky behaviour of young novice drivers in a structural equation model

Young novice drivers constitute a major public health concern due to the number of crashes in which they are involved, and the resultant injuries and fatalities. Previous research suggests psychological traits (reward sensitivity, sensation seeking propensity), and psychological states (anxiety, depression) influence their risky behaviour. The relationships between gender, anxiety, depression, reward sensitivity, sensation seeking propensity and risky driving are explored. Participants (390 intermediate drivers, 17-25 years) completed two online surveys at a six month interval. Surveys comprised sociodemographics, Brief Sensation Seeking Scale, Kessler’s Psychological Distress Scale, an abridged Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire, and risky driving behaviour was measured by the Behaviour of Young Novice Drivers Scale. Structural equation modelling revealed anxiety, reward sensitivity and sensation seeking propensity predicted risky driving. Gender was a moderator, with only reward sensitivity predicting risky driving for males. Future interventions which consider the role of rewards, sensation seeking, and mental health may contribute to improved road safety for younger and older road users alike.

Coping with aggressive driving : driver accounts of how they manage themselves and others to reduce conflict on the road

Dealing with the aggression of other drivers on the road is an important skill given that driving is a common activity for adults in highly motorised countries. Even though incidents of extreme aggression on the road (such as assault) are reportedly rare, milder forms, some of them dangerous (such as tailgating or deliberately following too closely) are apparently common, and may be increasing. At the very least, this is likely to render the driving environment more stressful, and at worst elevates the risk of crashing by increasing both the level of risky driving behaviours and the likelihood of responses that escalate the situation. Thus the need for drivers to manage incidents of conflict is likely to become increasingly important. However, little research examines how drivers manage their own or others’ aggressive driving behaviour. Recently greater attention has been paid to driver cognitions, especially the attributions that drivers make about other drivers, that then might influence their own driving responses, particularly aggressive or risky ones. The study reported below was the first in a larger exploration of aggressive driving that focussed on driver cognitions, emotions and underlying motivations for aggressive behaviours on the road. Qualitative, in-depth interviews of drivers (n = 30, aged 18-49 years) were subjected to thematic analysis to investigate driver experiences with aggressive driving. Two main themes were identified from these accounts: driver management of self; and driver attempts to influence or manage other drivers. This paper describes the subthemes falling under the management of self main theme. These subthemes were labelled ‘being magnanimous’, ‘chilling out’, ‘slowing down’, and ‘apology/acknowledgment’. ‘Being magnanimous’ referred to situations where the respondent perceived him/herself to be a recipient of another’s aggressive driving and made a deliberate choice not to respond. However, a characteristic of this sub-theme was that this choice was underpinned by the adoption of morally superior stance, or sense of magnanimity. ‘Chilling out’ was a more general response to both the milder aggressive behaviours of other drivers and the general frustrations of driving. ‘Slowing down’ referred to reducing one’s speed in response to the perceived aggressive driving, often tailgating, of another. This subtheme appeared to consist of two separate underlying motivations. One of these was a genuine concern for one’s own safety while the other was more aimed at “getting back” at the other driver. ‘Apology’ referred to how drivers modified their more negative reactions and responses when another driver made gestures that acknowledged their having made a mistake, indicated an apology, or acknowledged the recipient driver. These sub-themes are discussed in relation to their implications for understanding aggressive driving and intervening to reduce it.

"My mother would freak out" : understanding the influence of parents on the risky behaviour of their young novice drivers

Purpose Parents can influence the driving behaviour of their young novice drivers in a variety of ways. Research was undertaken to explore and identify the nature and mechanisms of parental influence upon novice drivers (16-25 years) to inform the design of more effective young driver countermeasures. Methods The mechanisms and nature of parental influence on young novice drivers were explored in small group interviews (n = 21) and three surveys (n1 = 761, n2 = 1170, n3 = 390) in a larger Queensland-wide study. Surveys two and three were part of a six-month longitudinal study. Results Parental influence appeared to occur across the pre-Licence, Learner, and Provisional (intermediate) periods. The most risky novice drivers (in terms of pre-Licence driving, unsupervised driving while a Learner, and risky driving behaviours such as speeding) reported that their parents were less likely to punish risky driving, and that their parents – who they were more likely to imitate – were also risky drivers (indicated by crashes and offences). Conclusions Parents appear influential in the risky behaviour of young novice drivers. Interventions enhancing their positive influence may improve road safety outcomes not only for young novice drivers, but for all persons who share the road with them. Among the interventions warranting further development and evaluation are programs to encourage the modelling of safe driving behaviour by parents; continued parental monitoring of driving during the pre-Licence, Learner and Provisional periods (e.g., Checkpoints program); and sharing the family vehicle during the first six months of independent licensure.

Sleepiness : how a biological drive can influence other risky road user behaviours

The Safe System approach to road safety utilises a holistic view of the interactions among vehicles, roads and road users. Yet, the contribution of each of these factors to crashes is vastly different. The role of road users is widely acknowledged as an overwhelming contributor to road crashes. Substantial gains have been made with improvements to vehicle and roads over a number of years. However, improvements of the road user’s behaviour has been (in some cases) less substantial. A road user behaviour that is relatively unregulated is driver sleepiness, which is part of the ‘fatal five’ of risky road user behaviours. The effect of sleepiness is ubiquitous – sleepiness is a state that most, if not all drivers on our roads has experienced, and is habitually exposed to. The quality and quantity of daily sleep is integral to our level of neurobehavioural performance during wakefulness and as such can have a compounding effect on a number of other risky driving behaviours. This paper will discuss the potential influence of sleepiness as an interceding factor for a number of risky driving behaviours. Little effort has been given to increasing awareness of the deleterious and wide ranging effects that sleepiness has on road safety. Given the wide ranging influence of sleepiness, improvements of ‘sleep health’ as a protective factor at the community or individual level could lead to significant reductions in road trauma and increases of general well being. A discussion of potential actions to reduce sleepiness is required if reductions of road trauma are to continue.