Transcript Graduated driver licensing: Recent research undertaken at the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q) Prof Barry Watson, Mrs Bridie Scott-Parker.

Graduated driver licensing:
Recent research undertaken at the
Centre for Accident Research and Road
Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q)
Prof Barry Watson, Mrs Bridie Scott-Parker
1
Acknowledgements
• Research Team
– Dr Lyndel Bates (former-PhD Candidate)
– Bridie Scott-Parker (PhD Candidate-underexamination)
– Prof Barry Watson (Principal Supervisor)
– Dr Mark King (Associate Supervisor)
– Dr Melissa Hyde (Associate Supervisor)
2
Overview of Research
• Project 1
Comparing the experience of Learners in
Queensland and New South Wales pre-July 2007
Dr Lyndel Bates
• Project 2
Comparing Queensland pre- and post-July 2007
PhD candidate-under-examination Mrs Bridie
Scott-Parker
3
The impact of an enhanced
graduated driver licensing
program in Queensland
Mrs Bridie Scott-Parker
4
Overview
• The Queensland graduated driver licensing
(GDL) context
– Post-July 2007 compared with pre-July 2007, Victoria
• The experiences of young Learner drivers
– Comparison of pre- and post-July 2007 experiences
– Post-July 2007 experiences
• GDL-related issues
• Other factors in young novice driver safety
– Person-related factors
– Social factors
• Questions
5
GDL Feature
Queensland
Pre-July 2007
Learner
Practice
Age: Learner
16.5 years (6 months)
Provisional (1) 17 years (3 years)
Provisional (2)
Learner
Restrictions
Queensland
Post-July 2007
Victoria
100 logbook hours
10 hours at night
1/3 Instructor credit
120 logbook hours
10 hours at night
No Instructor credit
16 years (1 year)
17 years (1 year)
18 years (2 years)
16 years (1 year)
18 years (1 year)
19 years (3 years)
• Drivers: No handsfree/ loudspeaker/
blue-tooth mobile
• Passengers: No
hands-free/ bluetooth/ loudspeaker
mobile
• Drivers: No handsfree/ loudspeaker/ bluetooth mobile
• No towing
Provisional 1
Restrictions
• Same mobile for
driver, passengers
• ≤ 1 peer passenger
11pm – 5 am
Hazard Perception Test
Provisional 1 to
Provisional 2
• Same mobile for
driver
• All day ≤ 1 peer
passenger
Learner to
Provisional 16
Methodologies: Pre- and PostMethod
Pre-July 2007 (‘Original’)
GDL Program
Post-July 2007 (‘Enhanced’)
GDL Program *
• 2006, early 2007
Recruitment • Recruited in-person from
North Brisbane/ Townsville
• April, May, June 2010
• Recruited Queenslandwide with Flyer when passed
practical test
• 219 Novices (53% female)
Participants • 17-19 years subsample
149 Novices (50% female)
• 1032 Novices (59% female)
• 17-19 years subsample
183 Learners (60% female)
Design and
Procedure
• 35-minute telephone
interview
• One 30-minute telephone
interview after 18 months
• 30-minute online/ paper
survey
• Two 20-minute surveys
after 6 and 12 months
* Small group interviews (n =21)
7
Results: Sociodemographics
Characteristic
Age when P1-licensed (M, SD)
Original-GDL
Enhanced(n = 149)
GDL (n = 183)
p
17.5 (0.7)
17.5 (0.7)
= .88
Gender (Female)
51.7%
60.7%
= .10
Marital Status (Single)
91.3%
98.9%
< .01
Education (Year 12)
97.3%
90.1%
< .05
Study Status (Studying)
69.2%
82.0%
< .01
Employment Status (Working)
89.2%
74.3%
< .01
8
Driving Practice
Original-GDL
(n = 149)
Hours (M, SD)
EnhancedGDL (n = 183)
Hours (M, SD)
p
–
108.8 (12.7)
–
Reported driving practice
63.3 (48.0)
92.4 (24.8)
< .001
Driving practice with parents/
friends
52.8 (45.8)
83.3 (25.6)
< .001
Driving practice with
professional instructor
11.5 (15.8)
9.8 (8.7)
= .24
Characteristic
Reported logbook hours
9
Duration, Difficulty and Tests
Original-GDL
(n = 149)
Enhanced-GDL
(n = 183)
p
12.4 (6.8)
16.5 (5.8)
< .001
35.3%
23.2%
= .14
“Difficult” to practice
Females
Males
50.0%
19.8%
28.0%
14.7%
< .05
= .82
Gained P1 licence on 1 attempt
61.5%
68.2%
= .21
1.5 (0.7)
1.3 (0.7)
= .09
Characteristic
Duration of the Learner
period (Months) (M, SD)
Difficulty obtaining supervised
practice (“Difficult”)
Number of attempts to pass
practical test (M, SD)
10
GDL-Related Issues [1]
• When did Learners have most driving practice?
– One third “from the beginning” BUT
– 50% of males & 60% of females “mainly at end”
• Implications: Persistent practice effects vs ‘cramming’?
• Continued practising after submitting logbook and
waiting for practical driving assessment?
– 95% yes
• Implications: Delayed testing, ‘accruing hours’ focus?
11
GDL-Related Issues [2]
• Logbook accuracy
– 83% logbook accurate
– 13% some rounding up
– 4% included extra hours
• Risks associated with logbook inaccuracy? General riskiness?
• ‘Problem young driver’
– 13% of novices at highest risk (self-reported driving
behaviours, personal characteristics including attitudes)
• Can GDL address this group? Other interventions?
12
GDL-Related Issues [3]
• Compliance with GDL and general road rules
– Pre-Licence driving: Reported by 12% of Learners
– Unsupervised driving: Reported by 11% of Learners
• Can GDL address these risky behaviours?
• Role of parents? Inadequate supervision?
• Difficulties detecting unlicensed driving/ plate compliance
– Speeding: 70% of Learners reported speeding by <10
km/hr, 32% by 10-20 km/hr, 13% by more than 20 km/hr
• Learners continue speeding at greater amounts and
more frequently as Provisional 1 drivers
• Can GDL address speeding?
GDL-Related Issues [4]
• Punishment avoidance
– Some Learners (and P1) drivers reported their
parents took the demerit points on their behalf
– Some Learners successfully talked themselves out of
a ticket for the same offence on multiple occasions
– Some Learners reported multiple simultaneous
offences were missed by Police
– One quarter of males actively avoided Police
presence
• Perceived as rewarding by the young novice driver, so how
do we address this?
14
GDL-Related Issues [5]
• Car ownership in Provisional 1 (P1) phase
– 78% of P1 drivers have own car within six months
– Owners report more crashes, offences, driving
exposure, and risky driving
• Can GDL ameliorate this risk?
• Safer cars?
15
GDL-Related Issues [6]
• Younger (16-17 year old Learners) vs Older (18-19
year old Learners)
–
–
–
–
Pre-Licence driving: 12% of younger and older novices
Unsupervised driving: 10% of younger, 20% of older novices
Learner duration: younger = 15 months; older = 25 months
Practice characteristics
•
•
•
•
‘Difficult’ to obtain practice: 20% of younger; 38% of older novices
Parents/friends supervisors: younger = 90 hours; older = 84 hours
Professional instructor: younger = 10 hours; older = 14 hours
Logbook accurate: 84% of younger; 79% of older
– Punishment avoidance
• Avoid Police: 18% of younger; 28% of older (40% of older males)
16
Personal Factors [1]
• Sociodemographic characteristics
– Gender: Males consistently more risky (e.g., speeding,
unsupervised driving, actively avoiding Police)
– Age: Younger young novice drivers reported more
speeding, Older reported more difficulty practising,
longer Learner period and more logbook inaccuracy
– Attitudes: More risky attitudes, more risky driving;
develop before licensed
– Willingness: Novices don’t intend to be risky, but are
more willing to be risky
• How can GDL address these?
17
Personal Factors [2]
• Psychological state
– Psychological distress (anxiety, depression)
• Depression, anxiety predictors of risky driving
• Depression predictor of speeding
• Suggests a need for countermeasures to complement GDL
• Emotional driving
– Sensation seeking (personality trait)
– Upset so ‘get in car and drive’
– Become upset whilst driving
• More risky driving behaviour
• Can GDL address this?
18
Social Factors [1]
• Parents and Peers
– Social environment exposes adolescent to attitudes
and behaviours regarding road use
– Dynamics of adolescence
– Influence adolescents’ attitudes and behaviours
•
•
•
•
Observe their attitudes and behaviours
See the consequences for these (punishments/ rewards)
Imitate their driving behaviour
Receive punishments and rewards for their own driving and
this has considerable implications for risky driving
• ‘Cool’ status in social group, teased for not showing off
• Confiscate mobile phone for risky driving
19
Social Factors [2]
• Interviews and surveys: Parents and peers
– Models to imitate or ignore; sources of punishments and
rewards (dependent upon outcome of behaviour: ‘bad’ vs ‘not bad’)
– Parents
•
•
•
•
Unlikely to impose additional punishments
Some facilitated punishment avoidance
Some low-quality supervision of Learner driving (eg, speeding)
How can GDL address parent influence?
– Peers
• Likely to encourage and to reward risky behaviour
• Can effectively punish/ discourage risky behaviour but unlikely to
do so (age of friends appeared important)
• Apart from passenger limits, can GDL address peer influences?
20
Strengths and Limitations
• Self-report data (surveys, interviews)
– Difficult to investigate any other way
• Low response in online surveys
• High attrition for longitudinal research
– Despite incentives
– Flooding during longitudinal second-wave
• Greater participation of females
– Moderation analyses
• Generalisability of findings
– Small, matched sample for GDL-comparison, results need
to be confirmed by larger-scale evaluations
– Longitudinal research participants’ reflected Queensland ‘s
ARIA profile
21
Questions?
Contact Details:
Bridie Scott-Parker
PhD Candidate-under-examination
Email: [email protected]
Acknowledgements:
Supervisory team (Prof Barry Watson,
Dr Mark King, Dr Melissa Hyde)
Pre-July 2007 GDL data (Dr Lyndel Bates)
Mark your Diaries!
International Council on Alcohol, Drugs
and Traffic Safety Conference (T2013)
25-28 August 2013, Brisbane
22