The influence of personality traits in predicting information processing and message persuasiveness

Gray‘s (2000) revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (r-RST) was used to investigate personality effects on information processing biases to gain-framed and loss-framed anti-speeding messages and the persuasiveness of these messages. The r-RST postulates that behaviour is regulated by two major motivational systems: reward system or punishment system. It was hypothesised that both message processing and persuasiveness would be dependent upon an individual‘s sensitivity to reward or punishment. Student drivers (N = 133) were randomly assigned to view one of four anti-speeding messages or no message (control group). Individual processing differences were then measured using a lexical decision task, prior to participants completing a personality and persuasion questionnaire. Results indicated that participants who were more sensitive to reward showed a marginally significant (p = .050) tendency to report higher intentions to comply with the social gain-framed message and demonstrate a cognitive processing bias towards this message, than those with lower reward sensitivity.

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.

Young, inexperienced and on the road : do novice drivers comply with road rules?

The graduated driver licensing (GDL) program in Queensland, Australia, was considerably enhanced in July 2007. This paper explores the compliance of young Learner and Provisional (intermediate) drivers with current GDL requirements and general road rules. Unsupervised driving, Learner logbook accuracy, and experiences of punishment avoidance were explored, along with speeding as a Provisional driver. Participants (609 females; M = 17.43 years) self-reported sociodemographic characteristics, driving behaviours and licensing experiences as Learners. A subset of participants (238 females, 105 males) completed another survey six months later exploring their Provisional behaviours and experiences. While the majority of the participants reported compliance with both the GDL requirements and general road rules such as stopping at red lights on their Learner licence; a considerable proportion reported speeding. Furthermore, they reported becoming less compliant during the Provisional phase, particularly with speed limits. Self-reported speeding was predicted by younger age at licensure, being in a relationship, driving unsupervised, submitting inaccurate Learner logbooks, and speeding as a Learner. Enforcement and education countermeasures should focus upon curtailing noncompliance, targeting speeding in particular. Novice drivers should be encouraged to comply with all road rules, including speed limits, and safe driving behaviours should be developed and reinforced during the Learner and early Provisional periods. Novice drivers have been found to model their parents’ driving, and parents are pivotal in regulating novice driving. It is vital young novice drivers and parents alike are encouraged to comply with all road rules, including GDL requirements.

Justice, globalisation and human rights

Criminal Justice: Local and Global covers the way the 'local' can be widened out to look at international, transnational and supranational aspects of justice. This means that issues such as corporate crime and human rights can be discussed in a comparative and critical way, examining the possibility, for example of an International Criminal Court, cross-national jurisdictions of regulation and control (such as Interpol) and so on. Each chapter covers a different area of regulation, punishment and process.

Individual differences in drivers’ cognitive processing of road safety messages

Using Gray and McNaughton’s (2000) revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (r-RST), we examined the influence of personality on processing of words presented in gain-framed and loss-framed anti-speeding messages and how the processing biases associated with personality influenced message acceptance. The r-RST predicts that the nervous system regulates personality and that behaviour is dependent upon the activation of the Behavioural Activation System (BAS), activated by reward cues and the Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS), activated by punishment cues. According to r-RST, individuals differ in the sensitivities of their BAS and FFFS (i.e., weak to strong), which in turn leads to stable patterns of behaviour in the presence of rewards and punishments, respectively. It was hypothesised that individual differences in personality (i.e., strength of the BAS and the FFFS) would influence the degree of both message processing (as measured by reaction time to previously viewed message words) and message acceptance (measured three ways by perceived message effectiveness, behavioural intentions, and attitudes). Specifically, it was anticipated that, individuals with a stronger BAS would process the words presented in the gain-frame messages faster than those with a weaker BAS and individuals with a stronger FFFS would process the words presented in the loss-frame messages faster than those with a weaker FFFS. Further, it was expected that greater processing (faster reaction times) would be associated with greater acceptance for that message. Driver licence holding students (N = 108) were recruited to view one of four anti-speeding messages (i.e., social gain-frame, social loss-frame, physical gain-frame, and physical loss-frame). A computerised lexical decision task assessed participants’ subsequent reaction times to message words, as an indicator of the extent of processing of the previously viewed message. Self-report measures assessed personality and the three message acceptance measures. As predicted, the degree of initial processing of the content of the social gain-framed message mediated the relationship between the reward sensitive trait and message effectiveness. Initial processing of the physical loss-framed message partially mediated the relationship between the punishment sensitive trait and both message effectiveness and behavioural intention ratings. These results show that reward sensitivity and punishment sensitivity traits influence cognitive processing of gain-framed and loss-framed message content, respectively, and subsequently, message effectiveness and behavioural intention ratings. Specifically, a range of road safety messages (i.e., gain-frame and loss-frame messages) could be designed which align with the processing biases associated with personality and which would target those individuals who are sensitive to rewards and those who are sensitive to punishments.

Successes and challenges in managing illegal road user behaviours

- The role of illegal behaviours in road crashes - Three case studies in managing illegal road user behaviour: an Australian perspective - Current and emerging challenges, including the need to: -reduce punishment avoidance -identify and manage recidivist offenders -address community attitudes and perceptions - Countermeasure implications

Crime in Rural Australia

Contemporary rural crime is more varied and sophisticated than it once was. The new forms range from agricultural crimes, such as the theft of water designated for agricultural production, to environmental crimes such as the illegal dumping of waste. They take place side by side with “traditional” rural crimes such as cattle duffing while “urban” crimes such as drug and alcohol abuse and violent assaults are also prevalent, and on the rise. Crime in Rural Australia covers them all. It brings together leading academics who examine the major dimensions of crime and justice in rural and regional Australia including: •the extent of rural crime •farm crime •violence •juvenile crime •policing •Indigenous crime and justice •crime prevention •drugs •fear of crime, and •sentencing and punishment. It includes vignettes on rural policing and the stock squad from the perspectives of the NSW police. An ideal text for rural crime and criminology courses, Crime in Rural Australia will also be of interest to criminal justice practitioners, policy-makers, and criminology scholars. Three of the editors, Dr Elaine Barclay, Dr John Scott and Associate Professor Russell Hogg, are associated with the Centre for Rural Crime at the University of New England. Professor Joseph F. Donnermeyer is the International Research Co-ordinator for the Rural Crime Centre and is a leading US scholar on rural crime at Ohio State University.

Explaining Gendered Sentencing Patterns for Men and Women in the Late Victorian Period

Contemporary studies of disparities in the sentencing of male and female offenders claim that the differences found are caused by gender-related contextual factors, but not by a gender bias. In contrast, historical studies have suggested that women were disadvantaged by appearing to offend both against the law and the conventions of femininity. This article analyses minor assaults prosecuted in ten English magistrates’ courts between 1880 and 1920. It is based on a data-set that combines court cases and newspaper reports, and allows for the control of gender differences in sentencing outcomes through four contextual factors: severity of the assault, bonds between victim and assailant, culpability, and evidence. The findings reveal a differentiated pattern of sentences that questions the assumption that ‘doubly deviant’ women were more often convicted, and received higher penalties, throughout the Victorian period. The results show that the contextual factors of the offence affected judicial decision-making to the extent that they virtually account for gender differences in conviction rates, but do not, on their own, account for the different penalties handed out to men and women. Women who committed similar assaults to men were likely to receive a lighter punishment. Magistrates clearly targeted ‘male’ contexts of violence, and handed down more convictions and harsher penalties to men involved in these, in contrast to women involved in 'female' contexts. The findings of a strong gender bias in sentencing that disadvantaged lowerclass men indicate that local magistrates directed their efforts of 'civilizing' lower-class communities at 'dangerous masculinities', and deemed assaults committed by women as less important in this task.

Responsibilisation and Rights: Explorations in Comparative Youth Criminology

Studies of international youth justice, punishment and control are in their infancy but the issues of globalisation, transnationalisation, policy transfer and localisation are gradually being addressed. There also appears a growing demand in policy and pressure group circles in the UK to learn more about other jurisdictions in order to emulate ‘best practice’ and avoid the worst excesses of punitive populism. However, existing comparative work in this area rarely ventures much beyond country specific descriptions of historical development, powers and procedures. Statistical comparisons – predominantly of custody rates – are becoming more sophisticated but remain beset with problems of partial and inaccurate data collection. The extent to which different countries do things differently, and how and why such difference is maintained, remains a relatively unexcavated territory. This article suggests a conceptually comparative framework in which degrees of international, national and local convergence and divergence can begin to be revealed and assessed.

Rethinking Youth Prostitution: National Provision at the Margins of Child Protection and Youth Justice

In March 2000, the Department of Health and the Home Office issued guidance fundamentally altering policy and practice with regard to young people in prostitution. 1 Instead of being arrested and punished for prostitution-related offences, those under 18 years old were to be thought of as children ‘in need’ and offered welfare-based interventions. The practice that has developed in the last three years has offered interventions that are located within both child protection and youth justice work. This article examines these changes in order to generate insights about the changing nature of youth justice. In particular, it is argued that the drive to manage the risks posed by young people in prostitution to specific organisations, takes precedence over either the desire to care for, or the demand to punish them. Through an analysis of how practitioners and policy makers responsible for implementing this new approach to youth prostitution talk about ‘risk’ and ‘responsibility’, ‘liability’, ‘protection’ and ‘punishment’, the article argues that the contradiction between care and control has been re-interpreted, such that there is noticeable blurring of the boundaries between welfare and punishment at the margins of youth justice work.

Regulating Prostitution: Controlling Women's Lives'

The chapter argues that the women who compose the majority of street prostitutes in Great Britain are currently subject to an interlocking system of regulation that variously defines them as criminal offenders, threats to public health, victims of child abuse, and vulnerable women who must be compelled under the threat of punishment to seek welfare help. Each label or approach to the street prostitute involves a set of interventions aimed at changing or working with different aspects of the women's lives. This produces an interlocking system of regulation, because the interventions are not mutually exclusive. A street prostitute can be defined as both a victim and an offender and as both a patient in need of medical help and a threat to public health. This comprehensive system of regulation means that a street prostitute faces not only a wide range of criminal justice dispositions, but also mandatory participation in programs in which her relationships and the choices she makes in her life outside of prostitution are subject to scrutiny and intervention. Given that street prostitutes are mostly poor women seeking economic survival in a profession that makes them vulnerable to victimization, the current regulatory system is an attempt to control a small group of poor women regarding their choices and relationships as they struggle to survive poverty. Whereas in the 1980s in Great Britain, a woman involved in street prostitution may have faced only a fine, now she is subject to a more extensive range of criminal justice actions accompanied by various government interventions designed to remake her life.

Pre-sentence Report, Magisterial Discourse and Agency in Youth Courts in England

This article draws on interviews with Youth Court magistrates to examine if and how discourses, strategies and technologies of risk governance have affected Youth Court magistrates in England and Wales. The aim of the article is to detail the complex relationship between magisterial agency in decision making and youth justice policies which focus on risk control and management. The article demonstrates that, contrary to what might be assumed from the youth and risk governance theoretical literature, Youth Offending Team risk assessments form only one part of the information used by magistrates to explain young people’s presence in courts. This article concludes that magisterial decision making is framed not by formal, expert assessments of risk, but by magistrates’ claims that they are ‘knowing outsiders’, who through judicious use of information presented to them and their own life experiences are able to make objective judgements about both the risk assessments authored by Youth Offending Teams and the young lawbreakers before them.