Applying Stafford and Warr’s Reconceptualization of Deterrence Theory to drug driving : can it predict those likely to offend?

In December 2007, random roadside drug testing commenced in Queensland, Australia. Subsequently, the aim of this study was to explore the preliminary impact of Queensland’s drug driving legislation and enforcement techniques by applying Stafford and Warr’s [Stafford, M. C., & Warr, M. (1993). A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 123-135] reconceptualization of deterrence theory. Completing a comprehensive drug driving questionnaire were 899 members of the public, university students, and individuals referred to a drug diversion program. Of note was that approximately a fifth of participants reported drug driving in the past six months. Additionally, the analysis indicated that punishment avoidance and vicarious punishment avoidance were predictors of the propensity to drug drive in the future. In contrast, there were indications that knowing of others apprehended for drug driving was not a sufficient deterrent. Sustained testing and publicity of the legislation and countermeasure appears needed to increase the deterrent impact for drug driving.

Improving road safety through deterrence-based initiatives : a review of research

The efficacy of road safety countermeasures to deter motorists from engaging in illegal behaviours is extremely important when considering the personal and economic impact of road accidents on the community. Within many countries, deterrence theory has remained a cornerstone to criminology and criminal justice policy, particularly within the field of road safety, as policy makers and enforcement agencies attempt to increase perceptions regarding the certainty, severity and swiftness of sanctions for those who engage in illegal motoring behaviours. Using the Australian experience (particularly the tremendous amount of research into drink driving), the current paper reviews the principles underpinning deterrence theory, the utilisation of the approach within some contemporary road safety initiatives (e.g., Random Breath Testing) as well as highlights some methods to enhance a deterrent effect. The paper also provides direction for future deterrence-based research, in particular, considering the powerful impact of non-legal sanctions, punishment avoidance as well as creating culturally embedded behavioural change.

Perceptual deterrence versus current behaviours : a study into factors influencing drug driving in Queensland

A range of interventions are being implemented in Australia to apprehend and deter drug driving behaviour, in particular the recent implementation of random roadside drug testing procedures in Queensland. Given this countermeasure has a strong deterrence foundation, it is of interest to determine whether deterrence-based perceptual factors are influencing this offending behaviour or whether self-reported drug driving is heavily dependent upon illicit substance consumption levels and past offending behaviour. This study involves a sample of Queensland motorists (N = 898) who completed a self-report questionnaire that collected a range of information, including drug driving and drug consumption practices, conviction history, and perceptual deterrence factors. The aim was to examine what factors influence current drug driving behaviours. Analysis of the collected data revealed that approximately 20% of participants reported drug driving at least once in the last six months. Overall, there was considerable variability in the respondents' perceptions regarding the certainty, severity and swiftness of legal sanctions, although the largest proportion of the sample did not consider such sanctions to be certain, severe or swift. In regard to predicting those who intended to drug drive again in the future, a combination of perceptual and behavioural-based factors were associated with such intentions. However, a closer examination revealed that behaviours, rather than perceptions, proved to have a greater level of influence on the current sample's future intentions to offend. This paper further outlines the major findings of the study and highlights that multi-modal interventions are most likely required to reduce the prevalence of drug driving on public roads.

Sex, drugs, and deterrence : applying Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of deterrence theory to drug driving across the genders

A consistent finding in the literature is that males report greater usage of drugs and subsequently greater amounts of drug driving. Research also suggests that vicarious influences may be more pertinent to males than to females. Utilising Stafford and Warr’s (1993) reconceptualization of deterrence theory, this study sought to determine if the relative deterrent impact of zero-tolerance drug driving laws is disparate between genders. A sample of motorists’ (N = 899) completed a self-report questionnaire assessing participants frequency of drug driving and personal and vicarious experiences with punishment and punishment avoidance. Results show that males were significantly more likely to report future intentions of drug driving. Additionally, vicarious experiences of punishment avoidance was a more influential predictor of future drug driving instances for males with personal experiences of punishment avoidance a more influential predictor for females. These findings can inform gender sensitive media campaigns and interventions for convicted drug drivers.

I know, but I don’t care : how awareness of Queensland’s drug driving testing methods impact upon perceptions of deterrence and offending behaviours

An increasing body of research is highlighting the involvement of illicit drugs in many road fatalities. Deterrence theory has been a core conceptual framework underpinning traffic enforcement as well as interventions designed to reduce road fatalities. Essentially the effectiveness of deterrence-based approaches is predicated on perceptions of certainty, severity, and swiftness of apprehension. However, much less is known about how the awareness of legal sanctions can impact upon the effectiveness of deterrence mechanisms and whether promoting such detection methods can increase the deterrent effect. Nevertheless, the implicit assumption is that individuals aware of the legal sanctions will be more deterred. This study seeks to explore how awareness of the testing method impacts upon the effectiveness of deterrence-based interventions and intentions to drug drive again in the future. In total, 161 participants who reported drug driving in the previous six months took part in the current study. The results show that awareness of testing had a small effect upon increasing perceptions of the certainty of apprehension and severity of punishment. However, awareness was not a significant predictor of intentions to drug drive again in the future. Importantly, higher levels of drug use were a significant predictor of intentions to drug drive in the future. Whilst awareness does have a small effect on deterrence variables, the influence of levels of drug use seems to reduce any deterrent effect.

A large scale quantitative study of pedestrian railway level crossing behaviour : deliberate violations, errors and deterrence

Every year a number of pedestrians are struck by trains resulting in death and serious injury. While much research has been conducted on train-vehicle collisions, very little is currently known about the aetiology of train-pedestrian collisions. To date, scant research has been undertaken to investigate the demographics of rule breakers, the frequency of deliberate violation versus error making and the influence of the classic deterrence approach on subsequent behaviours. Aim This study aimed to to identify pedestrians’ self-reported reasons for engaging in violations at crossing, the frequency and nature of rule breaking and whether the threat of sanctions influence such events. Method A questionnaire was administered to 511 participants of all ages. Results Analysis revealed that pedestrians (particularly younger groups) were more likely to commit deliberate violations rather than make crossing errors e.g., mistakes. The most frequent reasons given for deliberate violations were participants were running late and did not want to miss their train or participants believed that the gate was taking too long to open so may be malfunctioning. In regards to classical deterrence, an examination of the perceived threat of being apprehended and fined for a crossing violation revealed participants reported the highest mean scores for swiftness of punishment, which suggests they were generally aware that they would receive an “on the spot” fine. However, the overall mean scores for certainty and severity of sanctions (for violating the rules) indicate that the participants did not perceive the certainty and severity of sanctions as very high. This paper will further discuss the research findings in regards to the development of interventions designed to improve pedestrian crossing safety.

Strategic entry deterrence : does it constitute a misuse of market power?

A challenge for regulators and the courts has been establishing the boundary between behaviour is exclusionary and should be condemned under s 46 of the then Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TPA), now s 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA), and behaviour that is not exclusionary and might even be pro-competitive. This boundary can be especially difficult to draw in the case of entry deterring strategies. Section 46(1) prohibits corporations with a substantial degree of market power from taking advantage of that market power for one of the statutorily proscribed purposes which include preventing the entry of a person into that or any other market. Section 45(2) separately prohibits corporations from making and giving effect to contracts arrangements and understandings that have the purpose, effect or likely effect of substantially lessening competition in a market. The latest case in which the ACCC has failed to satisfy the s 46 criteria is the decision of Greenwood J in ACCC v Cement Australia Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 909 (Cement Australia case). Final orders were published in a separate judgment, in ACCC v Cement Australia Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 148 (28 February 2014). The case concerned an entry deterring strategy, namely the pre-emptive buying of input factors in an upstream market to protect an incumbent with substantial market power in a downstream market and to prevent new entry in the downstream market. Greenwood J found that while Cement Australia Pty Ltd, formerly known as Queensland Cement Ltd (QCL), had substantial market power, its conduct in entering into the pre-emptive contracts was not a contravention of s 46, because Cement Australia had not “taken advantage” of its market power. However, since Cement Australia’s purpose in entering into the pre-emptive contracts was anti-competitive, they were held to contravene s 45(2) of the TPA. The purpose of this Note is to consider only the reasons for judgment in the Cement Australia case in relation to the “taking advantage” element. The judgment was handed down on 10 September 2013. The final hearing date was 15 July 2011, so it was long-awaited. At 714 pages, it is carefully drafted.

Deterrence of drug driving : the impact of the ACT drug driving legislation and detection techniques

Overarching Research Questions Are ACT motorists aware of roadside saliva based drug testing operations? What is the perceived deterrent impact of the operations? What factors are predictive of future intentions to drug drive? What are the differences between key subgroups

Deterrence of drug driving: The impact of the ACT drug driving legislation and detection techniques

The study sought to explore the initial impact of the ACT's implementation of roadside oral fluid drug screening program. The results suggest that a number of individuals reported intentions to drug drive in the future. The classical deterrence theory variables of certainty of apprehension, severity and swiftness of sanctions were not predictive of intentions to drug drive in the future. In contrast, having avoided apprehension and having known of others that have avoided apprehension were predictive of intentions to drug drive in the future. Increasing perceptions of the certainty of apprehension, increased testing frequency, and increased awareness of the oral fluid drug screening program could potentially lead to reductions of drug driving and result in safer road environment for all ACT community members.

Young and unaffected by road policing strategies: Using deterrence theory to explain provisional drivers' (non)compliance

Newly licenced drivers are disproportionately represented in traffic injuries and crash statistics. Despite the implementation of countermeasures designed to improve safety, such as graduated driver licencing (GDL) schemes, many young drivers do not comply with road rules. This study used a reconceptualised deterrence theory framework to investigate young drivers’ perceptions of the enforcement of road rules in general and those more specifically related to GDL. A total of 236 drivers aged 17–24 completed a questionnaire assessing their perceptions of various deterrence mechanisms (personal and vicarious) and their compliance with both GDL-specific and general road rules. Hierarchical multiple regressions conducted to explore noncompliant behaviour revealed that, contrary to theoretical expectations, neither personal nor vicarious punishment experiences affected compliance in the expected direction. Instead, the most influential factors contributing to noncompliance were licence type (P2) and, counterintuitively, having previously been exposed to enforcement. Parental enforcement was also significant in the prediction of transient rule violations, but not fixed rule violations or overall noncompliance. Findings are discussed in light of several possibilities, including an increase in violations due to more time spent on the road, an ‘emboldening effect’ noted in prior studies and possible conceptual constraints regarding the deterrence variables examined in this study.

Left on the side of the road? A review of deterrence-based theoretical developments in road safety

Deterrence-based initiatives form a cornerstone of many road safety countermeasures. This approach is informed by Classical Deterrence Theory, which proposes that individuals will be deterred from committing offences if they fear the perceived consequences of the act, especially the perceived certainty, severity and swiftness of sanctions. While deterrence-based countermeasures have proven effective in reducing a range of illegal driving behaviours known to cause crashes such as speeding and drink driving, the exact level of exposure, and how the process works, remains unknown. As a result the current study involved a systematic review of the literature to identify theoretical advancements within deterrence theory that has informed evidence-based practice. Studies that reported on perceptual deterrence between 1950 and June 2015 were searched in electronic databases including PsychINFO and ScienceDirect, both within road safety and non-road safety fields. This review indicated that scientific efforts to understand deterrence processes for road safety were most intense during the 1970s and 1980s. This era produced competing theories that postulated both legal and non-legal factors can influence offending behaviours. Since this time, little theoretical progression has been made in the road safety arena, apart from Stafford and Warr's (1993) reconceptualisation of deterrence that illuminated the important issue of punishment avoidance. In contrast, the broader field of criminology has continued to advance theoretical knowledge by investigating a range of individual difference-based factors proposed to influence deterrent processes, including: moral inhibition, social bonding, self-control, tendencies to discount the future, etc. However, this scientific knowledge has not been directed towards identifying how to best utilise deterrence mechanisms to improve road safety. This paper will highlight the implications of this lack of progression and provide direction for future research.

Assessing specific deterrence effects of increased speeding penalties using four measures of recidivism

Traffic law enforcement sanctions can impact on road user behaviour through general and specific deterrence mechanisms. The manner in which specific deterrence can influence recidivist behaviour can be conceptualised in different ways. While any reduction in speeding will have road safety benefits, the ways in which a ‘reduction’ is determined deserves greater methodological attention and has implications for countermeasure evaluation more generally. The primary aim of this research was to assess the specific deterrent impact of penalty increases for speeding offences in Queensland, Australia, in 2003 on two cohorts of drivers detected for speeding prior to and after the penalty changes were investigated. Since the literature is relatively silent on how to assess recidivism in the speeding context, the secondary research aim was to contribute to the literature regarding ways to conceptualise and measure specific deterrence in the speeding context. We propose a novel way of operationalising four measures which reflect different ways in which a specific deterrence effect could be conceptualised: (1) the proportion of offenders who re-offended in the follow up period; (2) the overall frequency of re-offending in the follow up period; (3) the length of delay to re-offence among those who re-offended; and (4) the average number of re-offences during the follow up period among those who re-offended. Consistent with expectations, results suggested an absolute deterrent effect of penalty changes, as evidenced by significant reductions in the proportion of drivers who re-offended and the overall frequency of re-offending, although effect sizes were small. Contrary to expectations, however, there was no evidence of a marginal specific deterrent effect among those who re-offended, with a significant reduction in the length of time to re-offence and no significant change in the average number of offences committed. Additional exploratory analyses investigating potential influences of the severity of the index offence, offence history, and method of detection revealed mixed results. Access to additional data from various sources suggested that the main findings were not influenced by changes in speed enforcement activity, public awareness of penalty changes, or driving exposure during the study period. Study limitations and recommendations for future research are discussed with a view to promoting more extensive evaluations of penalty changes and better understanding of how such changes may impact on motorists’ perceptions of enforcement and sanctions, as well as on recidivist behaviour.