Motivational factors underlying the intention to drink and drive in young male drivers

Problem: Anyone drinking and driving has a high risk of being involved in an accident. Young male drivers, however, run the highest risk at the same levels of blood alcohol as other candidates, as they have more accidents than any other group. A better understanding of their motivations toward drinking and driving is needed to help create effective prevention. Method: In the present study, 115 male drivers aged 18–24 completed a questionnaire—based on Ajzen's theory of planned behavior—designed to study the motivational factors leading to drinking and driving. Results: Young males' intention to drink and drive is predicted by their attitudes, their perceived behavioral control (PBC), and, to a lesser degree, subjective norms. Impact on Industry: The results showing slightly positive PBC over driving after drinking suggest that work aimed at reducing this perception to a more realistic level is a potential prevention avenue.     

Driving exposure by driver age in Michigan

Background

This study compared driving exposure between two high-crash-risk groups (16–17 and 18-24-year-olds), with a low-crash-risk group (35-64-year-olds). In addition, patterns of association between driving exposure measures and demographic and driving behavior variables were examined.

Methods

Respondent's total miles, minutes, and trips driven were calculated within a 48-hour period, using state-wide survey data collected in 2004 and 2005.

Results

The youngest drivers drove fewer miles and minutes, but a comparable number of trips as the two older groups. Employment and high vehicle access were associated with greater driving exposure for 16-17-year-olds and 18-24-year-olds. Employment, high household income, large household size, and low vehicle access were associated with greater driving exposure for 35-64-year-olds. More driving was done alone than with passengers present and during the day than at night across all ages. There was a positive association between two driving exposure measures (miles and minutes driven) and demographic and driving behavior variables, which did not extend to trips driven.

Discussion

Driving exposure is directly related to stage of life. The entire sample of 16-17-year-old respondents were in high school, which directly influenced their driving times, destinations, and purpose. Those aged 18–24 years displayed driving behavior patterns that were closer to the older drivers, while retaining some differences. The oldest drivers were likely to be shouldering the greatest household responsibilities, and their greater driving exposure may reflect this reality.

Impact on industry

These findings provide new information about driving exposure for two high-risk and one low-risk group of drivers. They also raise concern over potential workplace safety issues related to teens’ higher driving exposure, and concomitant crash risk, related to being employed. Future research should examine this issue more carefully so that evidence based recommendations can be made to enhance the safety of teens who are employed, especially those who are employed as drivers.     

Responsibility of drivers, by age and gender, for motor-vehicle crash deaths

Problem: Motor-vehicle crash rate comparisons by age and gender usually are based on the extent to which drivers in a particular age/gender category are themselves injured or involved in crashes (e.g., the number of 20-year-old females in crashes). Basing comparisons instead on the extent to which drivers in various age/gender groups are responsible for deaths (including themselves) in their crashes is more revealing of their overall contribution to the problem. Methods: Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS, 1996–2000) were used in the analysis, which was based on crashes that involved one or two vehicles only. Drivers in fatal single-vehicle crashes were assumed to have responsibility for the crash. In fatal two-vehicle crashes, driver operator errors reported by police were used to assign crash responsibility. Results: When all crashes were considered, both the youngest and oldest drivers were most likely to be responsible for deaths in their crashes. In two-vehicle crashes, the oldest drivers were more likely than young drivers to be responsible. Young males were more likely than young females to be responsible for crash deaths, whereas females in their 50s and older were more likely than same-age males to be responsible. In terms of responsibility for deaths per licensed driver, young drivers, especially males, had the highest rates because of their high involvement rates and high responsibility rates. The majority of deaths for which young drivers were responsible occurred to people other than themselves, especially passengers in their vehicles, whereas the bulk of the deaths for which older drivers were responsible were their own. Discussion: The results highlight the contribution of young drivers to the motor-vehicle crash problem, the need for measures such as passenger restrictions in graduated licensing systems, and the need for vehicle modifications to better protect older occupants.     

Hazard and Risk Perception among Young Novice Drivers

Young novice drivers are overrepresented in road accidents. Although they quickly acquire the skills needed to control a motor vehicle, it takes much longer for novice drivers to develop the higher-order perceptual and cognitive skills necessary to safely interact with the driving environment. The aim of this paper is to propose a model of the processes mediating behavior around traffic hazards and to critically review the literature on novice drivers within the framework provided by the model. Compared to experienced drivers, novice drivers detect hazards less quickly and efficiently and perceived them less holistically. The detection of hazards is proposed to provide the requisite information for risk perception, the process which includes assessing both the level of risk posed by a hazard and one's ability to deal with the hazard effectively. Research indicates that young drivers underestimate the risk of an accident in a variety of hazardous situations. At the same time, they overestimate their own driving skill. Young drivers are also more willing to accept risk while driving than experienced drivers. These factors are likely to contribute to young novice drivers overrepresentation in accidents. Opportunities for further research are discussed.     

Characteristics of crashes and injuries among 14 and 15 year old drivers,by rurality

Purpose: Motor-vehicle crashes continue to be the leading cause of death for teenagers in the United States. The United States has some of the youngest legal driving ages worldwide. The objective of this study was to determine rates and factors associated with injury crashes among 14- and 15-year-old drivers and how these varied by rurality. Methods: Data for this cross-sectional study of 14- and 15-year-old drivers were obtained from the Iowa Department of Transportation from 2001 to 2013. Crash and injury crash rates were calculated by rurality. The relationship between crash and driver factors and injury was assessed using logistic regression. Findings: Teen drivers, aged 14 and 15 years, had a statewide crash rate of 8 per 1,000 drivers from 2001 to 2013. The majority of crashes occurred in urban areas (51%), followed by in town (29%), remote rural areas (13%), and suburban areas (7%). Crash and injury crash rates increased as level of rurality increased. The odds of an injury crash increased more than 10-fold with the presence of multiple other teens as passengers, compared to no passengers (OR = 10.7, 95% CI: 7.1–16.2). Conclusions: Although 14- and 15-year-old drivers in Iowa have either limited unsupervised (school permits) or supervised only driving restrictions, they are overrepresented in terms of crashes and injury crashes. Rural roads and multiple teen passengers are particularly problematic in terms of injury outcomes. Practical applications: Results from this study support passenger restrictions and teen driving interventions designed with a rural focus.     

A Conflict-Resolution Model for the Conjunctive Use of Surface and Groundwater Resources that Considers Water-Quality Issues: A Case Study

The conjunctive use of surface and groundwater resources is one alternative for optimal use of available water resources in arid and semiarid regions. The optimization models proposed for conjunctive water allocation are often complicated, nonlinear, and computationally intensive, especially when different stakeholders are involved that have conflicting interests. In this article, a new conflict-resolution methodology developed for the conjunctive use of surface and groundwater resources using Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) and Young Conflict-Resolution Theory (YCRT) is presented. The proposed model is applied to the Tehran aquifer in the Tehran metropolitan area of Iran. Stakeholders in the study area have conflicting interests related to water supply with acceptable quality, pumping costs, groundwater quality, and groundwater table fluctuations. In the proposed methodology, MODFLOW and MT3D groundwater quantity and quality simulation models are linked with the NSGA-II optimization model to develop Pareto fronts among the objectives. The best solutions on the Pareto fronts are then selected using YCRT. The results of the proposed model show the significance of applying an integrated conflict-resolution approach to conjunctive use of surface and groundwater resources in the study area.     

Young drivers' determinants of driving under the influence of cannabis: Findings from the Youth Cannabis and Driving Survey (YouCanDS)

Introduction: Driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) is proven to increase the risk of collisions and is most common among young drivers (ages 16 to 24). However, little is known about the specific determinants of DUIC behavior among youth, which limits the capacity to develop evidence-based prevention and intervention efforts. This study developed and evaluated a youth DUIC questionnaire, which was used to establish the DUIC determinants of young drivers. Method: The questionnaire was based on the theoretical framework of general deterrence and general prevention. Data obtained included: demographics, past cannabis use and DUIC experiences, DUIC intention, experiences riding as a passenger with someone DUIC, knowledge and credibility of the law, attitudes towards DUIC, and social controls. The resulting questionnaire was validated for a sample of 426 young drivers in the province of Ontario, Canada. An ordinal regression was conducted to examine the relationships between questionnaire items and DUIC intention. Results: The questionnaire displayed good construct validity and internal consistency across four out of five domains (KMO and Cronbach α values ≥ 0.70). Of the 426 respondents (52.6% female), 356 (83.6%) reported previous cannabis use, with 296 (69.5%) doing so in the past year, and 142 (33.3%) reporting DUIC. Furthermore, 179 (42%) study participants indicated at least a slight chance of DUIC in the next year. The regression analysis identified six variables predictive of DUIC intention: past DUIC incidence, perceived percent of those convicted that receive the penalty, moral awareness, perceived dangerousness, minor accident risk, and vicarious punishment avoidance. Conclusions: Preventive efforts should emphasize these determinants when designing targeted strategies and interventions. Practical Applications: These efforts should focus on educating the dangers and risk of a vehicle collision, that law enforcement has the capacity to apprehend and appropriately punish individuals DUIC, and that DUIC is wrong and socially unacceptable.     

Adolescent, and their parents, attitudes towards graduated driver licensing and subsequent risky driving and crashes in young adulthood

Problem

Although Graduated Driver Licensing Systems (GDLS) have helped reduce young driver crash rates, they remain significantly over-represented in crash statistics. To be effective GDLS rely heavily on support for the legislation by those directly involved; parents to enforce the restrictions and adolescents to comply. There is some evidence that practices regarding GDLS restrictions influence adolescent driving outcomes in the early stage of licensure. However there has been no examination undertaken on the influence of parent and adolescent attitudes toward GDLS on adolescents’ driving behavior and crash experiences as they move into their young adult years. The aim of this research was to examine these relationships.

Method

This investigation was based on a longitudinal study of a birth cohort, and uses data collected when the cohort members were aged 15, 18, and 21 years. At age 15 both adolescent and their parent attitudes toward GDLS were measured. At age 18 adolescent GDLS attitudes were measured again. The association between these measures and self-reported risky driving behavior and crash involvement at age 21 were examined.

Results

Negative attitudes toward the learner supervisor restriction for males, and negative attitudes toward a GDLS for females were strongly associated with risky driving and crash involvement as young adults.

Impact on industry

Targeting interventions to improve adolescents and parents understanding of the reasons for graduated licensing and the specific restrictions may improve attitudes and views and thereby contribute to a reduction in risky driving behaviors and crash risk among young adults.     

Seat-Belt Use and Related Behaviors Among Young Adults

Seat-belt use among young adults was examined to identify factors associated with nonuse. This research was part of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study, which is a study of the health, development, and behavior of a birth cohort of young New Zealanders (n = 1037). At age 21 years, 948 (93%) members of this cohort were administered a face-to-face interview where they were asked about seat-belt use (self and friends), reasons for nonuse, and also their involvement in risky driving practices, motor-vehicle traffic crashes, and some thrill-seeking activities. Results showed relatively high front seat-belt use (85–96%) but low rear use (29–47%). Some differences in use were a function of gender and seating location. Generally, users had higher academic qualifications and lower risky driving behavior (males only), but did not differ significantly as far as crash experiences and thrill-seeking activity was concerned. The main reasons for not using a seat belt were forgetfulness/laziness, a perceived low risk of injury, and discomfort. This study provided information about the background and behavior of young adults who do not use seat belts, which could be helpful when designing strategies to promote seat-belt use in this age group.