Incompatibility of standards used in: qualifying drivers, building highways, designing vehicles - a report to the Secretary of Transportation by the National Highway Safety Advisory Committee.

Mode of access: Internet.

Investigation of motor vehicle/bicycle collision parameters, volume I. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Investigation of motor vehicle/bicycle collision parameters, volume II, appendices. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

An examination of sudden acceleration. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Road tests of alertness variables. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

‘You’re a bad driver but I just made a mistake’ : attribution differences between the ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’ of scenario-based aggressive driving incidents

Driver aggression is an increasing concern for motorists, with some research suggesting that drivers who behave aggressively perceive their actions as justified by the poor driving of others. Thus attributions may play an important role in understanding driver aggression. A convenience sample of 193 drivers (aged 17-36) randomly assigned to two separate roles (‘perpetrators’ and ‘victims’) responded to eight scenarios of driver aggression. Drivers also completed the Aggression Questionnaire and Driving Anger Scale. Consistent with the actor-observer bias, ‘victims’ (or recipients) in this study were significantly more likely than ‘perpetrators’ (or instigators) to endorse inadequacies in the instigator’s driving skills as the cause of driver aggression. Instigators were significantly more likely attribute the depicted behaviours to external but temporary causes (lapses in judgement or errors) rather than stable causes. This suggests that instigators recognised drivers as responsible for driving aggressively but downplayed this somewhat in comparison to ‘victims’/recipients. Recipients and instigators agreed that the behaviours were examples of aggressive driving but instigators appeared to focus on the degree of intentionality of the driver in making their assessments while recipients appeared to focus on the safety implications. Contrary to expectations, instigators gave mean ratings of the emotional impact of driving aggression on recipients that were higher in all cases than the mean ratings given by the recipients. Drivers appear to perceive aggressive behaviours as modifiable, with the implication that interventions could appeal to drivers’ sense of self-efficacy to suggest strategies for overcoming plausible and modifiable attributions (e.g. lapses in judgement; errors) underpinning behaviours perceived as aggressive.

Chronological age and age-related cognitive deficits are associated with an increase in multiple types of driving errors in late life

Objective: Older driver research has mostly focused on identifying that small proportion of older drivers who are unsafe. Little is known about how normal cognitive changes in aging affect driving in the wider population of adults who drive regularly. We evaluated the association of cognitive function and age, with driving errors. Method: A sample of 266 drivers aged 70 to 88 years were assessed on abilities that decline in normal aging (visual attention, processing speed, inhibition, reaction time, task switching) and the UFOV® which is a validated screening instrument for older drivers. Participants completed an on-road driving test. Generalized linear models were used to estimate the associations of cognitive factor with specific driving errors and number of errors in self-directed and instructor navigated conditions. Results: All errors types increased with chronological age. Reaction time was not associated with driving errors in multivariate analyses. A cognitive factor measuring Speeded Selective Attention and Switching was uniquely associated with the most errors types. The UFOV predicted blindspot errors and errors on dual carriageways. After adjusting for age, education and gender the cognitive factors explained 7% of variance in the total number of errors in the instructor navigated condition and 4% of variance in the self-navigated condition. Conclusion: We conclude that among older drivers errors increase with age and are associated with speeded selective attention particularly when that requires attending to the stimuli in the periphery of the visual field, task switching, errors inhibiting responses and visual discrimination. These abilities should be the target of cognitive training.

Is it time to revisit the problem young driver?

For decades there have been two young driver concepts: the „young driver problem‟ where the driver cohort represents a key problem for road safety; and the „problem young driver‟ where a sub-sample of drivers represents the greatest road safety problem. Given difficulties associated with identifying and then modifying the behaviour of the latter group, broad countermeasures such as graduated driver licensing (GDL) have generally been relied upon to address the young driver problem. GDL evaluations reveal general road safety benefits for young drivers, yet they continue to be overrepresented in fatality and injury statistics. Therefore it is timely for researchers revisit the problem young driver concept to assess its potential countermeasure implications. Personal characteristics, behaviours and attitudes of 378 Queensland novice drivers aged 17-25 years were explored during their pre-, Learner and Provisional 1 (intermediate) licence as part of a larger longitudinal research project. Self-reported risky driving was measured by the Behaviour of Young Novice Drivers Scale (BYNDS), and five subscale scores were used to cluster the drivers into three groups (high risk n = 49, medium risk n = 163, low risk n = 166). High risk „problem young‟ drivers were characterised by self-reported pre-Licence driving, unsupervised Learner driving, and speeding, driving errors, risky driving exposure, crash involvement, and offence detection during the Provisional period. Medium risk drivers were also characterised by more risky road use behaviours than the low risk group. Interestingly problem young drivers appear to have some insight into their high-risk driving, and they report significantly greater intentions to bend road rules in future driving. The results suggest that in addition to broad countermeasures such as GDL which target the young driver problem, tailored intervention efforts may need to target problem young drivers. Driving behaviours and crash-involvement could be used to identify these drivers as pre-intervention screening measures.

Revisiting the concept of the ‘problem young driver’ within the context of the ‘young driver problem’ : Who are they?

For decades there have been two young driver concepts: the ‘young driver problem’ where the driver cohort represents a key problem for road safety; and the ‘problem young driver’ where a sub-sample of drivers represents the greatest road safety problem. Given difficulties associated with identifying and then modifying the behaviour of the latter group, broad countermeasures such as graduated driver licensing (GDL) have generally been relied upon to address the young driver problem. GDL evaluations reveal general road safety benefits for young drivers, yet they continue to be overrepresented in fatality and injury statistics. Therefore it is timely for researchers to revisit the ‘problem young driver’ concept to assess its potential countermeasure implications. This is particularly relevant within the context of broader countermeasures that have been designed to address the ‘young driver problem’. Personal characteristics, behaviours and attitudes of 378 Queensland novice drivers aged 17-25 years were explored during their pre-, Learner and Provisional 1 (intermediate) licence as part of a larger longitudinal project. Self-reported risky driving was measured by the Behaviour of Young Novice Drivers Scale (BYNDS), and five subscale scores were used to cluster the drivers into three groups (high risk n=49, medium risk n=163, low risk n=166). High risk ‘problem young drivers’ were characterised by greater self-reported pre-Licence driving, unsupervised Learner driving, and speeding, driving errors, risky driving exposure, crash involvement, and offence detection during the Provisional period. Medium risk drivers were also characterised by more risky road use than the low risk group. Interestingly problem young drivers appear to have some insight into their high-risk driving, since they report significantly greater intentions to bend road rules in future driving. The results suggest that tailored intervention efforts may need to target problem young drivers within the context of broad countermeasures such as GDL which address the young driver problem in general. Experiences such as crash-involvement could be used to identify these drivers as a pre-intervention screening measure.

Safety at railway level crossings : driver acceptance of potential ITS interventions

There is a continuing need to improve safety at Railway Level Crossings (RLX) particularly those that do not have gates and lights regulating traffic flow. A number of Intelligent Transport System (ITS) interventions have been proposed to improve drivers’ awareness and reduce errors in detecting and responding appropriately at level crossings. However, as with other technologies, successful implementation and ultimately effectiveness rests with the acceptance of the technology by the end user. In the current research, four focus groups were held (n=38) with drivers in metropolitan and regional locations in Queensland to examine their perceptions of potential in-vehicle and road-based ITS interventions to improve safety at RLX. The findings imply that further development of the ITS interventions, in particular the design and related promotion of the final product, must consider ease of use, usefulness and relative cost.

An application of the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire in a large Australian organisational fleeting setting : can it predict crashes and demerit point loss?

This study reports on the utilisation of the Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) to examine the self-reported driving behaviours of a large sample of Australian fleet drivers (N = 3414). Surveys were completed by employees before they commenced a one day safety workshop intervention. Factor analysis techniques identified a three factor solution similar to previous research, which was comprised of: (a) errors, (b) highway-code violations and (c) aggressive driving violations. Two items traditionally related with highway-code violations were found to be associated with aggressive driving behaviours among the current sample. Multivariate analyses revealed that exposure to the road, errors and self-reported offences predicted crashes at work in the last 12 months, while gender, highway violations and crashes predicted offences incurred while at work. Importantly, those who received more fines at work were at an increased risk of crashing the work vehicle. However, overall, the DBQ demonstrated limited efficacy at predicting these two outcomes. This paper outlines the major findings of the study in regards to identifying and predicting aberrant driving behaviours and also highlights implications regarding the future utilisation of the DBQ within fleet settings.

Using the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire to predict crashes and demerit point loss : does it get better with larger sample sizes?

The Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) continues to be the most widely utilised self-report scale globally to assess crash risk and aberrant driving behaviours among motorists. However, the scale also attracts criticism regarding its perceived limited ability to accurately identify those most at risk of crash involvement. This study reports on the utilisation of the DBQ to examine the self-reported driving behaviours (and crash outcomes) of drivers in three separate Australian fleet samples (N = 443, N = 3414, & N = 4792), and whether combining the samples increases the tool’s predictive ability. Either on-line or paper versions of the questionnaire were completed by fleet employees in three organisations. Factor analytic techniques identified either three or four factor solutions (in each of the separate studies) and the combined sample produced expected factors of: (a) errors, (b) highway-code violations and (c) aggressive driving violations. Highway code violations (and mean scores) were comparable across the studies. However, across the three samples, multivariate analyses revealed that exposure to the road was the best predictor of crash involvement at work, rather than DBQ constructs. Furthermore, combining the scores to produce a sample of 8649 drivers did not improve the predictive ability of the tool for identifying crashes (e.g., 0.4% correctly identified) or for demerit point loss (0.3%). The paper outlines the major findings of this comparative sample study in regards to utilising self-report measurement tools to identify “at risk” drivers as well as the application of such data to future research endeavours.

The nature of errors made by drivers [Austroads Publication no: AP-R378-11]

It is important that we understand the factors and conditions that shape driver behaviour – those conditions within the road transport system that contribute to driver error and the situations where driver non-compliance to road regulations is likely. This report presents the findings derived from a program of research investigating the nature of errors made by drivers, involving a literature review and an on-road study. The review indicates that, despite significant investigation, the role of different error types in road traffic crashes remains unclear, as does the role of the wider road transport system failures in driver error causation.

Assessing driver acceptance of intelligent transport systems in the context of railway level crossings

Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) have the potential to substantially reduce the number of crashes caused by human errors at railway levels crossings. Such systems, however, will only exert an influence on driving behaviour if they are accepted by the driver. This study aimed at assessing driver acceptance of different ITS interventions designed to enhance driver behaviour at railway crossings. Fifty eight participants, divided into three groups, took part in a driving simulator study in which three ITS devices were tested: an in-vehicle visual ITS, an in-vehicle audio ITS, and an on-road valet system. Driver acceptance of each ITS intervention was assessed in a questionnaire guided by the Technology Acceptance Model and the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Overall, results indicated that the strongest intentions to use the ITS devices belonged to participants exposed to the road-based valet system at passive crossings. The utility of both models in explaining drivers’ intention to use the systems is discussed, with results showing greater support for the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Directions for future studies, along with strategies that target attitudes and subjective norms to increase drivers’ behavioural intentions, are also discussed.

Developing guidelines for syringe driver management

The aim of this project was to develop clinical practice guidelines for the use and administration of pharmacological agents for symptom control via syringe drivers within Australia. By developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the use of this common device, this project aimed to improve patient outcomes, reduce practice variation, minimize errors and encourage more efficient use of resources. A literature review identified current literature regarding syringe driver management and an expert panel was assembled to assist in the development of the guidelines. The development of these practice guidelines provides an example of how palliative care practitioners can use a framework of contemporary evidence to enhance clinical practice.