Exploring perceived legitimacy of traffic law enforcement

The purpose of traffic law enforcement is to encourage compliant driver behaviour. That is, the threat of an undesirable sanction encourages drivers to comply with traffic laws. However, not all traffic law violations are considered equal. For example, while drink driving is generally seen as socially unacceptable, behaviours such as speeding are arguably less so, and speed enforcement is often portrayed in the popular media as a means of “revenue raising”. The perceived legitimacy of traffic law enforcement has received limited research attention to date. Perceived legitimacy of traffic law enforcement may influence (or be influenced by) attitudes toward illegal driving behaviours, and both of these factors are likely to influence on-road driving behaviour. This study aimed to explore attitudes toward a number of illegal driving behaviours and traffic law enforcement approaches that typically target these behaviours using self-reported data from a large sample of drivers. The results of this research can be used to inform further research in this area, as well as the content of public education and advertising campaigns designed to influence attitudes toward illegal driving behaviours and perceived legitimacy of traffic law enforcement.

Self-reported likelihood of speeding : the effects of attitudes, personality, and perceived legitimacy of enforcement

The positive relationship between speed and crash risk and severity is robust and well-established. While excessive speeding is typically regarded by the public as a common contributing factor in road crashes, speeding remains a common traffic infringement and an arguably socially acceptable behaviour, particularly at low levels over the speed limit. This suggests that other factors potentially contribute to this disparity between crash perceptions and actual behaviours. Previous work has described associations between perceptions of the legitimacy of speed enforcement, attitudes, and how they relate to the likelihood of speeding. This study sought to more closely examine the nature of the relationships between these variables. In total, 293 Queensland drivers participated in a study that examined how demographics, personality variables, attitudes, and perceptions of the legitimacy of enforcement contributed to drivers’ self-reported likelihood of speeding. Results suggested that positive attitudes towards speeding had the greatest impact on likelihood of speeding behaviours. Being younger and higher levels of the personality trait of extraversion were also associated with greater levels of self-reported likelihood of speeding. Attitudes were found to mediate the relationship between perceived legitimacy of speed enforcement and self-reported likelihood of speeding. A subgroup analysis of participants with positive and negative attitudes towards speeding revealed that a differential set of variables were predictive of self-reported likelihood of speeding for the two subgroups. This highlights the potential importance of attitudes in understanding the influence of perceptions of legitimacy of speed enforcement on speeding behaviour, and the need for targeted rather than a ‘one size fits all’ approach to changing attitudes and ultimately behaviour. The findings of the current study help to further understand why some drivers continue to speed.

Sleepy driving and drink driving: attitudes, behaviours, and perceived legitimacy of enforcement of younger and older drivers

Sleepy driving and drink driving are two risky driving behaviours that substantially contribute to road crashes. Several studies demonstrate equivalent levels of impairment from both sleepy and drink driving. Yet, drivers perceive sleepy and drink driving distinctly different, with younger and older drivers engaging in these two risky driving behaviours at different rates. The current study sought to examine the sleepy and drink driving behaviours and perceptions in a sample of 114 younger (17-29 years) and 177 older (30+ years) drivers. Compared to older drivers, younger drivers reported more positive attitudes toward sleepy and drink driving behaviours, as well as more negative views regarding perceived legitimacy of sleepy driving enforcement. Younger drivers were also more likely to report performing sleepy driving behaviours than older drivers. Younger drivers reported greater likelihood to drive while sleepy, lower perceptions of legitimacy for sleepy driving, and more positive attitudes towards sleepy driving when compared to drink driving and the same pattern was found for older drivers as well. Subsequently, the self-reported likelihood of driving while sleepy was greater than drink driving in both age groups. Overall, the results suggest that sleepy driving is not viewed as equally dangerous as drink driving with younger drivers’ perceptions being more lenient than older drivers’ perceptions. It is likely that change is needed regarding the perceptions of dangerousness of sleepy driving with a particular focus on younger drivers seemingly needed.

Standardization and omics science : technical and social dimensions are inseparable and demand symmetrical study

Standardization is critical to scientists and regulators to ensure the quality and interoperability of research processes, as well as the safety and efficacy of the attendant research products. This is perhaps most evident in the case of “omics science,” which is enabled by a host of diverse high-throughput technologies such as genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics. But standards are of interest to (and shaped by) others far beyond the immediate realm of individual scientists, laboratories, scientific consortia, or governments that develop, apply, and regulate them. Indeed, scientific standards have consequences for the social, ethical, and legal environment in which innovative technologies are regulated, and thereby command the attention of policy makers and citizens. This article argues that standardization of omics science is both technical and social. A critical synthesis of the social science literature indicates that: (1) standardization requires a degree of flexibility to be practical at the level of scientific practice in disparate sites; (2) the manner in which standards are created, and by whom, will impact their perceived legitimacy and therefore their potential to be used; and (3) the process of standardization itself is important to establishing the legitimacy of an area of scientific research.

The relationship between drivers’ perceptions toward police speed enforcement and self-reported speeding behaviour

Exceeding the speed limit and driving too fast for the conditions are regularly cited as significant contributing factors in traffic crashes, particularly fatal and serious injury crashes. Despite an extensive body of research highlighting the relationship between increased vehicle speeds and crash risk and severity, speeding remains a pervasive behaviour on Australian roads. The development of effective countermeasures designed to reduce the prevalence of speeding behaviour requires that this behaviour is well understood. The primary aim of this program of research was to develop a better understanding of the influence of drivers’ perceptions and attitudes toward police speed enforcement on speeding behaviour. Study 1 employed focus group discussions with 39 licensed drivers to explore the influence of perceptions relating to specific characteristics of speed enforcement policies and practices on drivers’ attitudes towards speed enforcement. Three primary factors were identified as being most influential: site selection; visibility; and automaticity (i.e., whether the enforcement approach is automated/camera-based or manually operated). Perceptions regarding these enforcement characteristics were found to influence attitudes regarding the perceived legitimacy and transparency of speed enforcement. Moreover, misperceptions regarding speed enforcement policies and practices appeared to also have a substantial impact on attitudes toward speed enforcement, typically in a negative direction. These findings have important implications for road safety given that prior research has suggested that the effectiveness of speed enforcement approaches may be reduced if efforts are perceived by drivers as being illegitimate, such that they do little to encourage voluntary compliance. Study 1 also examined the impact of speed enforcement approaches varying in the degree of visibility and automaticity on self-reported willingness to comply with speed limits. These discussions suggested that all of the examined speed enforcement approaches (see Section 1.5 for more details) generally showed potential to reduce vehicle speeds and encourage compliance with posted speed limits. Nonetheless, participant responses suggested a greater willingness to comply with approaches operated in a highly visible manner, irrespective of the corresponding level of automaticity of the approach. While less visible approaches were typically associated with poorer rates of driver acceptance (e.g., perceived as “sneaky” and “unfair”), participants reported that such approaches would likely encourage long-term and network-wide impacts on their own speeding behaviour, as a function of the increased unpredictability of operations and increased direct (specific deterrence) and vicarious (general deterrence) experiences with punishment. Participants in Study 1 suggested that automated approaches, particularly when operated in a highly visible manner, do little to encourage compliance with speed limits except in the immediate vicinity of the enforcement location. While speed cameras have been criticised on such grounds in the past, such approaches can still have substantial road safety benefits if implemented in high-risk settings. Moreover, site-learning effects associated with automated approaches can also be argued to be a beneficial by-product of enforcement, such that behavioural modifications are achieved even in the absence of actual enforcement. Conversely, manually operated approaches were reported to be associated with more network-wide impacts on behaviour. In addition, the reported acceptance of such methods was high, due to the increased swiftness of punishment, ability for additional illegal driving behaviours to be policed and the salutary influence associated with increased face-to-face contact with authority. Study 2 involved a quantitative survey conducted with 718 licensed Queensland drivers from metropolitan and regional areas. The survey sought to further examine the influence of the visibility and automaticity of operations on self-reported likelihood and duration of compliance. Overall, the results from Study 2 corroborated those of Study 1. All examined approaches were again found to encourage compliance with speed limits, such that all approaches could be considered to be “effective”. Nonetheless, significantly greater self-reported likelihood and duration of compliance was associated with visibly operated approaches, irrespective of the corresponding automaticity of the approach. In addition, the impact of automaticity was influenced by visibility; such that significantly greater self-reported likelihood of compliance was associated with manually operated approaches, but only when they are operated in a less visible fashion. Conversely, manually operated approaches were associated with significantly greater durations of self-reported compliance, but only when they are operated in a highly visible manner. Taken together, the findings from Studies 1 and 2 suggest that enforcement efforts, irrespective of their visibility or automaticity, generally encourage compliance with speed limits. However, the duration of these effects on behaviour upon removal of the enforcement efforts remains questionable and represents an area where current speed enforcement practices could possibly be improved. Overall, it appears that identifying the optimal mix of enforcement operations, implementing them at a sufficient intensity and increasing the unpredictability of enforcement efforts (e.g., greater use of less visible approaches, random scheduling) are critical elements of success. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were also performed in Study 2 to investigate the punishment-related and attitudinal constructs that influence self-reported frequency of speeding behaviour. The research was based on the theoretical framework of expanded deterrence theory, augmented with three particular attitudinal constructs. Specifically, previous research examining the influence of attitudes on speeding behaviour has typically focussed on attitudes toward speeding behaviour in general only. This research sought to more comprehensively explore the influence of attitudes by also individually measuring and analysing attitudes toward speed enforcement and attitudes toward the appropriateness of speed limits on speeding behaviour. Consistent with previous research, a number of classical and expanded deterrence theory variables were found to significantly predict self-reported frequency of speeding behaviour. Significantly greater speeding behaviour was typically reported by those participants who perceived punishment associated with speeding to be less certain, who reported more frequent use of punishment avoidance strategies and who reported greater direct experiences with punishment. A number of interesting differences in the significant predictors among males and females, as well as younger and older drivers, were reported. Specifically, classical deterrence theory variables appeared most influential on the speeding behaviour of males and younger drivers, while expanded deterrence theory constructs appeared more influential for females. These findings have important implications for the development and implementation of speeding countermeasures. Of the attitudinal factors, significantly greater self-reported frequency of speeding behaviour was reported among participants who held more favourable attitudes toward speeding and who perceived speed limits to be set inappropriately low. Disappointingly, attitudes toward speed enforcement were found to have little influence on reported speeding behaviour, over and above the other deterrence theory and attitudinal constructs. Indeed, the relationship between attitudes toward speed enforcement and self-reported speeding behaviour was completely accounted for by attitudes toward speeding. Nonetheless, the complexity of attitudes toward speed enforcement are not yet fully understood and future research should more comprehensively explore the measurement of this construct. Finally, given the wealth of evidence (both in general and emerging from this program of research) highlighting the association between punishment avoidance and speeding behaviour, Study 2 also sought to investigate the factors that influence the self-reported propensity to use punishment avoidance strategies. A standard multiple regression analysis was conducted for exploratory purposes only. The results revealed that punishment-related and attitudinal factors significantly predicted approximately one fifth of the variance in the dependent variable. The perceived ability to avoid punishment, vicarious punishment experience, vicarious punishment avoidance and attitudes toward speeding were all significant predictors. Future research should examine these relationships more thoroughly and identify additional influential factors. In summary, the current program of research has a number of implications for road safety and speed enforcement policy and practice decision-making. The research highlights a number of potential avenues for the improvement of public education regarding enforcement efforts and provides a number of insights into punishment avoidance behaviours. In addition, the research adds strength to the argument that enforcement approaches should not only demonstrate effectiveness in achieving key road safety objectives, such as reduced vehicle speeds and associated crashes, but also strive to be transparent and legitimate, such that voluntary compliance is encouraged. A number of potential strategies are discussed (e.g., point-to-point speed cameras, intelligent speed adaptation. The correct mix and intensity of enforcement approaches appears critical for achieving optimum effectiveness from enforcement efforts, as well as enhancements in the unpredictability of operations and swiftness of punishment. Achievement of these goals should increase both the general and specific deterrent effects associated with enforcement through an increased perceived risk of detection and a more balanced exposure to punishment and punishment avoidance experiences.

Sleepy driving and pulling over for a rest : investigating individual factors that contribute to these driving behaviours

Driver sleepiness is a substantial crash risk factor and as such, is a major contributor to crash statistics. A number of individual factors (i.e., psychological factors) have been suggested to influence driving while sleepy. However, few studies have examined the influence of these individual factors for sleepy driving in combination. The current study sought to examine how various demographic factors, attitudes, perceived legitimacy, personality constructs, and risk taking variables were associated with self-reported likelihood of driving sleepy and pulling over and resting when sleepy. The results show that being a younger driver, having positive attitudes towards driving sleepy, and high levels of emotional stability were related to self-reported likelihood of driving sleepy. Whereas, being an older driver and having negative attitudes towards driving sleepy were associated with self-reported likelihood of pulling over and resting when sleepy. Overall, the obtained results suggest that the age and attitudes of the driver have greater influence than personality traits or risk taking factors. Campaigns focused on changing attitudes to reflect the dangerousness of sleepy driving could be important for road safety outcomes.

What aspects of demographic, personality, attitudes, and perceptions of law enforcement influence self-reported likelihood of drink driving?

The aim of the current study was to examine the associations between a number of individual factors (demographic factors (age and gender), personality factors, risk-taking propensity, attitudes towards drink driving, and perceived legitimacy of drink driving enforcement) and how they influence the self-reported likelihood of drink driving. The second aim of this study was to examine the potential of attitudes mediating the relationship between risk-taking and self-reported likelihood of drink driving. In total, 293 Queensland drivers volunteered to participate in an online survey that assessed their self-reported likelihood to drink drive in the next month, demographics, traffic-related demographics, personality factors, risk-taking propensity, attitudes towards drink driving, and perceived legitimacy of drink driving enforcement. An ordered logistic regression analysis was utilised to evaluate the first aim of the study; at the first step the demographic variables were entered; at step two the personality and risk-taking were entered; at the third step, the attitudes and perceptions of legitimacy variables were entered. Being a younger driver and having a high risk-taking propensity were related to self-reported likelihood of drink driving. However, when the attitudes variable was entered, these individual factors were no longer significant; with attitudes being the most important predictor of self-reported drink driving likelihood. A significant mediation model was found with the second aim of the study, such that attitudes mediated the relationship between risk-taking and self-reported likelihood of drink driving. Considerable effort and resources are utilised by traffic authorities to reducing drink driving on the Australian road network. Notwithstanding these efforts, some participants still had some positive attitudes towards drink driving and reported that they were likely to drink drive in the future. These findings suggest that more work is needed to address attitudes regarding the dangerousness of drink driving.

The politics of open-access publishing : M/C Journal, Public Intellectualism, and Academic Discourses of Legitimacy

This article investigates the discourses of academic legitimacy that surround the production, consumption, and accreditation of online scholarship. Using the web-based media and cultural studies journal (http://journal.media-culture.org.au) as a case study, it examines how online scholarly journals often position themselves as occupying a space between the academic and the popular and as having a functional advantage over print-based media in promoting a spirit of public intellectualism. The current research agenda of both government and academe prioritises academic research that is efficient, self-promoting, and relevant to the public. Yet, although the cost-effectiveness and public-intellectual focus of online scholarship speak to these research priorities, online journals such as M/C Journal have occupied, and continue to occupy, an unstable position in relation to the perceived academic legitimacy of their content. Although some online scholarly journals have achieved a limited form of recognition within a system of accreditation that still privileges print-based scholarship, I argue that this, nevertheless, points to the fact that traditional textual notions of legitimate academic work continue to pervade the research agenda of an academe that increasingly promotes flexible delivery of teaching and online research initiatives.