An exploratory study of parent acceptance of sanctions for driving offenses committed by their children

OBJECTIVE

Graduated driver licensing (GDL) systems are effective at reducing young driver crashes but rely on active parental involvement. However, some parents may accept sanctions (e.g., demerit points, monetary fines) for traffic offenses committed by their children, leading to experiences of punishment avoidance by young drivers. This aim of this exploratory study was to investigate several demographic and psychosocial influences that could possibly be associated with parent acceptance of sanctions.

METHOD

An online survey was completed by parents of young drivers (N = 149, M = 48.88 years, SD = 4.76 years; female = 86%) from 3 Australian states. The survey included measures of sociodemographic characteristics and driving history (e.g., crash involvement), socioeconomic status, parenting style, knowledge of their child's driving behavior, perceptions of their ability to manage their child's driving, attitudes toward GDL, and previous or potential acceptance of demerit points or payment of fines for road offenses committed by their child.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine percent of parents had accepted or would accept a sanction on behalf of their child. Number of children overall, number of children licensed, and household income were associated with parent acceptance of a sanction. Parenting style, attitude toward GDL restrictions, parent confidence in their knowledge of GDL restrictions and ability to manage their child's driving, and belief that their child would follow rules were not associated with (non)acceptance of a sanction.

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory findings suggest that family size and income may be important influences on parent acceptance of sanctions on behalf of their offending children. The findings related to the psychosocial variables are discussed considering other research and the limitations of the study.

Road rule enforcement and where to find it: An investigation of applications used to avoid detection when violating traffic rules

INTRODUCTION

One of the primary countermeasures in place to prevent road rule violations is legal enforcement, yet there are numerous applications that can undermine such efforts by notifying drivers of enforcement locations. However, the capabilities of these applications and how they can impact offending behavior is currently unknown.

METHOD

Two studies were conducted to understand which of these applications are being used by drivers and how these applications are impacting road rule violations. Study 1 consisted of a content analysis that involved searching the Google Play Store and Apple iTunes Store for applications that could be used to avoid road rule violations using pre-determined keywords. Meanwhile, Study 2 consisted of 468 licensed Australian drivers (54.5% males) over the age of 17 years (Mage = 35 years) who completed a survey.

RESULTS

A total of 73 applications were identified for Study 1, with most of the applications displaying speed camera locations. It was found that applications that notify drivers of traffic enforcement locations are widely prevalent, can be used on a variety of interfaces and include numerous additional features. Study 2 found that those who use the applications were more willing to speed than those who do not use the applications, while there was no difference in phone use while driving between those who do and do not use the applications.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

The findings have important implications for stakeholders, policy, and future research. For example, it is suggested that specific functions of these applications need to be regulated to reduce road rule violations and crash risk. Meanwhile, enforcement initiatives need to evolve at a faster rate to keep up to date with the changing technology that can undermine them.

Improving the safety effect of speed camera programs through innovations: Evidence from the French experience

PROBLEM

This study investigates the effect of the French Automated Speed Enforcement Program (ASEP) on casualties involving different types of road users.

METHOD

Interrupted time-series analyses were conducted to estimate the effect of the ASEP.

RESULTS

Overall, the ASEP was associated with a decrease of 19.7% in traffic fatalities and crashes with injuries. Significant diminutions were observed for passenger vehicles/light SUVs (−25.4%), motorcyclists (−39.0%), and trucks (−15.7%). Adding red light cameras and devices taking pictures of both ends of the vehicle produced, in some cases, additional gains among specific categories of road users.

CONCLUSION

Traffic fatalities, crashes with injuries and the severity of crashes significantly declined following the introduction of the ASEP in November 2003. Practical applications: ASEPs are an effective strategy to prevent traffic casualties. Innovations such as red light cameras and devices taking pictures of both ends of the vehicle can improve an ASEP.

"I drove after drinking alcohol" and other risky driving behaviours reported by young novice drivers

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=1076; 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.