Transcript DFT: Drug Driving Evaluating the effectiveness of the campaign at V2006 Prepared for Department for Transport October 2006 2CV Research 34 Rose Street Covent Garden London WC2E.

DFT: Drug Driving
Evaluating the effectiveness of the campaign at V2006
Prepared for Department for Transport
October 2006
2CV Research
34 Rose Street
Covent Garden
London WC2E 9BS
T +44 (0)20 7655 9900
F +44 (0)20 7655 9901
[email protected]
www.2cv.co.uk
2
Presentation Flow
1. Background and Objectives
2. Personal drug driving experience (as driver or passenger)
3. Attitudes towards drug driving
4. How successful has the anti-drug driving campaign been?
5. Awareness of drug driving laws
6. Conclusions & implications for the THINK! drug driving campaign
3
Defining the research objectives
•
DfT’s drug driving campaign is targeted at drivers and passengers aged 17-35 and aims to
communicate the dangers of drug driving.
•
The field marketing activity included sponsorship of the V2006 music festival – a targeted
campaign that seeks to bring about behaviour change
•
2CV’s quantitative research set out to determine the effectiveness of the drug driving festival
activity in the context of the broader drug driving and THINK! campaign:
• Awareness
• Message cut-through
• Impact on behaviour
•
Additionally, we sought to gain insight into drug driving and passenger behaviour
•
And ultimately to identify the implications for the overall campaign strategy moving forward
4
Overview of research programme
V2006 attendees
Stage 1: V2006 interviews
(19-20th August)
• 5 minute face to face interview
•awareness & message take-out
• recruitment for Stage 2:
collection of email address
(2 weeks later)
V2006 non-attendees
Stage 2: Recontact survey
Control sample survey
• 10 minute online survey
• campaign awareness
• message take-out
• investigation of drug taking and driving
attitudes and behaviour
• 10 minute online survey via online panel
• wider drug driving campaign awareness
• message take-out
• investigation of drug taking and driving
attitudes and behaviour
5
Sample definition and size
V2006 attendees
Stage 1: V2006 interviews
• All respondents aged 17-35
• 50% drug drivers and 50% passengers
• 50% male and 50% female
• 301 interviews (c.150 per site)
• Interviewing on Fri, Sat and Sunday
V2006 non-attendees
Stage 2: Recontact survey
Control sample survey
• Self-selecting sample from initial
recruitment stage
• Total 114 interviews completed (187
respondents dropped out)
• All respondents aged 17-35
• 50% drug drivers and 50% passengers
• 50% male and 50% female
• 271 interviews (spread throughout GB)
6
Presentation Flow
1. Background and Objectives
2. Personal drug driving experience (as driver or passenger)
3. Attitudes towards drug driving
4. How successful has the anti-drug driving campaign been?
5. Awareness of drug driving laws
6. Conclusions & implications for the THINK! drug driving campaign
7
The frequency of drug driving behaviour can range from often to
very rarely. The most frequent drug drivers have a distinct profile.
Drug drivers are more likely to
be male than female (c. 2/3 vs
1/3)
The most frequent drug
drivers (5-10 on the scale) are
72% male and 82% aged 2535 – older age group suggests
they ‘grow into’ their hardened
drug taking behaviour
Using the scale provided, how often do you drive a car after
having taken recreational drugs?
V2006 SAMPLE
Very rarely (1-3)
Rarely (4-6)
Always/nearly always (9-10)
58
25
9
8
CONTROL SAMPLE
Very rarely (1-3)
Rarely (4-6)
54
Source: SQ3/4 Base: All drivers sample
Occasionally/often (7-8)
Occasionally/often (7-8)
Always/nearly always (9-10)
24
16
5
8
Passengers are also an important group as the decision to drug
drive is often made in a social context. Our sample also covers a
range of frequent and infrequent drug-drive passengers
The V2006 sample tend to be
passengers more often,
showing that the activity was
well targeted
Over 9 in 10 of the drug
drivers sample had also
been a passenger in a car
driven by a drug driver –
indicative of social circles
where drug use and driving is
accepted behaviour
Source: SQ3/4 Base: All passengers sample (i.e. excluding drug drivers)
Using the scale provided, how often have you knowingly been a
passenger in a car driven by someone under the influence of drugs?
V2006 SAMPLE
Very rarely (1-3)
Rarely (4-6)
Occasionally/often (7-8)
58
Always/nearly always (9-10)
32
5
5
CONTROL SAMPLE
Very rarely (1-3)
Rarely (4-6)
68
Occasionally/often (7-8)
Always/nearly always (9-10)
24
5 2
9
Drug driving is most likely to occur for convenience reasons at the
end of a night out – for passengers it’s often easier to accept a lift
than rely on public transport
What are the most common reasons for you to drug drive / be a passenger in a car
driven by someone under the influence of illegal drugs?
41
Getting home from
clubs/raves/pubs
54
17
Going to get
supplies (drinks,
cigarettes etc.)
Going to get more
drugs
Source: Q17/Q18 (online stage)
Driver
Passenger
15
Plus for drivers:
Dropping friends home
For enjoyment/racing
21%
4%
For passengers:
Inadequate public transport
Don’t drive myself
24%
19%
10
8
Base: all driver sample (171) / all who have ever been a passenger (335)– online stage
10
While cannabis is the drug most likely to be taken before driving,
speed is used almost exclusively by frequent drug drivers –
suggesting speed users are a key group to target in communications
Thinking about the most recent occasion, which drugs were in your system while driving?
58
Cannabis /
marijuana
43
21
Cocaine
Amphetamines /
speed
14
20
3
Opiates
Source: Q19 (online stage)
Males are significantly more likely
than females to take cannabis,
cocaine and ecstasy before their
drug driving
7
7
Ecstasy
LSD
No significant difference in cannabis
usage by age group
1
2
Frequent drug driver
2
Infrequent drug driver
Base: all drug drivers – online stage (n=171)
Those aware of the drug driving
campaign less likely to take
cannabis, but more likely to take
cocaine than those unaware
11
Presentation Flow
1. Background and Objectives
2. Personal drug driving experience (as driver or passenger)
3. Attitudes towards drug driving
4. How successful has the anti-drug driving campaign been?
5. Awareness of drug driving laws
6. Conclusions & implications for the THINK! drug driving campaign
12
Overall, there’s a high level of awareness and concern about drug
driving although it’s seen as a lesser issue than drink-driving
4 Agree slightly
5 Agree strongly
I was aware of the issue before this survey
-4 -5
Drug driving is never acceptable
-2 -8
Some drugs are much more unsafe than others
-10
I am very concerned about drug driving
More likely to be drug drive passenger
Q13 (online stage)
-12
-21
-49
Base: all online stage respondents (n=381)
62
17
-6
57
28
41
32
-8
23
-9
-27
56
21
-3 -9
Drink driving is more unsafe than drug driving
1 Disagree strongly
26
-2-4
Drug driving is very dangerous
Don’t really care
2 Disagree slightly
22
32
52
27
12
Top 2 2005
box survey
82%
82%
83%
74%
82%
69%
59%
45%
44%
7%
43%
13
Drug drivers are much more likely to be oblivious to the dangers – or
at least more comfortable with the risks - than their passengers.
They tend to see drink driving as a more serious issue.

Drug drivers are more likely than passengers to feel that drug
driving is acceptable, that it is not particularly dangerous and
that they are not very concerned about the issue. These
feelings are accentuated among the most frequent drug drivers.

They tend to downplay the dangers of drug driving vs drink
driving with a third strongly agreeing that drink driving is more
dangerous.

They’re also much more likely to be passengers in cars driven
by other drug drivers than those under the influence of alcohol.

Some 42% of the most frequent drug drivers claim drug driving is
‘never acceptable’ – but they still do it. Can’t they help
themselves when they are under the influence?
14
Higher levels of concern in the recall sample suggest the V2006
campaign was effective. The younger age group also display a
greater level of concern about drug driving.

The ad aware/recall sample are significantly more likely than the control sample to agree
strongly that drug driving is never acceptable, very dangerous, and that they are very
concerned about the issue – suggesting the V2006 campaign was well-targeted and effective.

The younger age group (17-20) are significantly more in agreement with the statements that
drug driving is never acceptable and very dangerous than their older counterparts. Among the
older respondents (late 20s and early 30s) there’s more of an emphasis on the dangers of drink
driving

Females are more likely than males to care about the issue and to view drug driving as unsafe
and unacceptable. Males are more likely to agree that some drugs are more unsafe than
others, suggesting greater knowledge of their effects
Q13 (online stage)
Base: all online stage respondents (n=381)
15
Drug drivers’ concerns about drug driving are matched by feelings of
being relaxed and in control
How do you feel just before you are about to drug drive?
Worried about getting caught
32
In control
29
Worried about safety
23
Relaxed
22
Confident
Cannabis: more confident,
in control and relaxed, but
increases worries too
17
Don't even think about it / it's normal
8
Worried about parents finding out
Rebellious
(“Out of control” only 2%)
6
4
Cocaine: increases
confidence and control but
less relaxed and more
concerned about being
caught by police
Conflicting emotions can often go hand in hand - e.g. 3 in 10 of those who feel in control
are also worried about getting caught by the police
Source: Q20
Base: all drug drivers – online stage (n=171)
16
Less than half of drug drivers are ‘quite’ or ‘very’ worried about
getting caught with 6% of men not worried at all
• The most frequent drug
drivers are actually less worried
about being caught
(presumably they have got away
with it so far)
• Worry about getting caught
decreases with age (26% of 2535 year-olds not very/not at all
worried vs 14% of 17-24 yearolds)
When you drug drive, how worried are you about getting caught?
MEN
Not worried at all
6
19
Neither/not sure
Quite worried
34
Very worried
33
13
WOMEN
Not worried at all
20
Source: Q21 (online stage)
Not very worried
Base: all drug drivers (171) - online stage
Not very worried
32
Neither/not sure
Quite worried
24
Very worried
24
17
The relaxed attitude of frequent drug drivers extends to views of
their friends’ behaviour – 7 in 10 have friends who drug drive, but
the majority see no reason why they should stop
Do you have any friends who take drugs and drive, and if so, what do you think of this?
20
Don't have any friends who drug
drive
38
31
Have friend(s) who drug drive and
would like them to stop
Have friends who drug drive and
their behaviour doesn't bother me
Source: Q16 (online stage)
46
42
9
Base: all drug drivers – online stage (n=171)
No significant
difference in opinion
among those who
recall anti-drug driving
campaign vs those
who do not
Frequent drug driver
Infrequent drug driver
18
Overall, passengers are more likely than drug drivers to feel that
driving under the influence of each drug is unsafe – although both
consider LSD equally dangerous
Which of the following drugs do you consider to be the most unsafe in relation to driving?
78
78
LSD
49
Ecstasy
67
Speed
56
Passenger
37
Opiates
42
30
Cocaine
47
20
Cannabis
Other
Driver
31
37
4
5
Cannabis seen as the
safest illegal drug
Frequent drug drivers also
significantly less likely to
consider slower reaction
times, overconfidence and
poor coordination as risks
19
To summarise, we have seen that a ‘hard core’ of the most frequent
drug drivers show some key characteristics
… more likely to have taken
amphetamines / speed…
Most likely to fall into
the M 25-34 group…
… less concerned about
their friends’ drug driving
behaviour
… and drive under the influence of
drugs in non-emergency scenarios
– getting supplies, getting more
drugs or dropping friends home
THE FREQUENT
DRUG DRIVER
… less likely to believe that his /
her drug taking has had any effect
on reaction times and alertness…
… feel confident and in control
when driving under the influence
of drugs – don’t worry about
safety. In fact, around half feel
nothing but confidence…
20
Presentation Flow
1. Background and Objectives
2. Personal drug driving experience (as driver or passenger)
3. Attitudes towards drug driving
4. How successful has the anti-drug driving campaign been?
5. Awareness of drug driving laws
6. Conclusions & implications for the THINK! drug driving campaign
21
Over 9 in 10 are aware of the overall THINK! campaign. It is most
strongly associated with drink driving and speeding.
Have you seen this logo in any advertising in the last 12 months?
= 94% awareness
(96% recall vs 93% control)
If so, which road safety campaign messages can you remember seeing or hearing about?
Drink driving
Speeding
Driver
tiredness
83%
78%
38%
37%
31%
Control
17-24s
Control
Recall
17-24s
Recall
Males
17-24s
17-24s
Source: Q28/Q29 (online stage)
Motorcycling
Child road
safety
Seatbelts
Base: all online respondents (m=377) / all aware of the THINK! campaign (n=354)
28%
Teen
pedestrian
Mobile
phones
28%
26%
17-24s
Control
Males
22
The V2006 anti-drug driving campaign generated a high level of
awareness with 7 in 10 festival-goers noticing the activity
What messages are being communicated on posters and other forms of advertising around the car parks today?
Anti-drug driving
45
Anti-drink driving
Anti-speeding
22
18
Spontaneous
Source: Q1a/b
Base: all Chelmsford V2006 respondents (n=150)
69
• Frequent drug drivers
significantly more likely to
absorb the drug driving publicity
(78% total awareness)
• Similar recall for males and
females
31
19
Prompted
In 2005, 56% of
festival goers
recalled drug
driving advertising
23
There’s considerable residual recall (when prompted) of drug driving
communications from previous festivals that have been attended
% recalling drug
driving activity
At which of these festivals did you see or
hear any messages or advertising about
drug driving?
V2005
48
V2004
V2003
10%
5
30
2004
Source: Q11/Q12 (online stage)
2003
13%
13%
14
2005
Glastonbury
% attending
18
11
Base: all online stage respondents who attended each festival
5%
4%
5%
NB. Sample sizes
too low to look at
Global Gathering
24
The V Festival is seen as a very appropriate place for anti-drug
driving communications, especially by females
How appropriate do you think it is for anti-drug driving advertising to take place at V2006?
3
Very/quite inappropriate
Neither appropriate nor inappropriate (3)
Quite appropriate (4)
Very appropriate (5)
5
17
75
Overall, 92% feel the V2006 advertising is appropriate
Those who have seen the advertising are more likely to consider it ‘very
appropriate’ (79% vs 64% of those who have not seen the campaign


Females more likely to consider the activity ‘very appropriate’ (82%) vs males (68%)
• No females think the activity is inappropriate, compared to 6% of males
• Drivers and passengers see the advertising as similarly appropriate
Source: Q7 (V2006)
Base: All V2006 respondents (n=301) – weighted
In 2005, 87%
considered the
advertising very/
quite effective
25
The “Don’t do drugs and drive” message at V2006 cuts through,
although its impact begins to fade after the festival has finished
You mentioned you have seen publicity/advertising about drug driving at V2006. What were the actual messages
being communicated?
Don't do drugs and
drive
THINK!
Drug driving. Not a
safe trip.
74
9
9
84
19
But this still comfortably
outweighs total awareness in
control sample of 27%
16
drugdrive.com 1 3
Spontaneous
Prompted
Males (87%) more likely than
females (80%) to recall the
message
Message ‘sticks’ best in
minds of 17-20s – 68% recall
Where's your head
1 3
at?
Source: Q1c/d (V2006)
At recall stage, recall of
‘don’t do drugs and drive’
drops to 53% (spont) and
58% (prompted)
Base: all aware of drug driving advertising at V2006 (n=254)
26
Two-fifths of festival-goers noticed specific drug driving activity, with
the specs/car park cards most recalled
Before this interview, which of the following had you noticed at the festival this year?
Straight eye specs
28
Bent road signs
21
Staff clothing
Source: Q5 (V2006)
Base: all festival respondents (n=301) - weighted
Staffs = 34%
Staffs = 15%
9
1
25-30s = 38%
Staffs = 55%
Chelmsford = 19%
16
Tyre tread signs
Remote-controlled
traffic cone
Over-indexing
sub-groups
41% didn’t notice
any of the activity
27
The straight-eye specs are an effective vehicle for getting the “don’t
do drugs and drive” message across
Which of these were you given on your way to the festival or when you arrived at the festival today? And which
of these messages can you remember seeing on these cards?
MESSAGE RECALL
Don’t do drugs and drive
61%
(esp. 31-35s = 86%, Staffs 67%)
Stupid things you do on drugs 12%
THINK!
27%
were given straight
eye specs
25-30 year-olds
35%
Males
32%
Drivers
31%
Source: Q3/4 (V2006)
10%
(esp. males & Chelmsford)
Plus penalties, reduced safety,
illegality, FIT test mentions
1%
Base: All festival respondents (n=301) / All who were given straight eye specs/car park cards (n=94) - weighted
given
Carl
Cox CD
28
The advertising on the V2006 website is also playing a significant
role in communicating ‘don’t do drugs and drive’
In the run up to this year’s festival, did you visit the V2006 website?
IF YES: Do you remember seeing any anti-drug driving messages on the website?
• 31-35s are least likely to visit
website but most likely to recall
advertising if they have visited
(can we get more of them to
visit the website for V2007?)
44
NO /
DON’T
KNOW
• No significant differences
between Chelmsford and
Staffordshire festival-goers
Source: Q6 (V2006)
Base: All festival respondents (n=301) - weighted
21
YES – and
recall
advertising
YES – but
don’t recall
advertising
36
i.e. recalled by 37% of
visitors to the V2006
website
29
Festival-goers who noticed drug driving advertising were more
likely to claim they’d be more careful not to drug drive . . .
In which of these ways do you think you will change your behaviour after V2006?
I will be more careful not to be a
passenger in a car driven by a drug
driver
18
8
I will be more careful not to drink and
drive
I will be more careful not to take
drugs and drive
But majority said they
wouldn’t change their
behaviour at all
23
19
11
4
4
I will be more careful not to speed
Aware of drug driving
advertising
9
I won't change my behaviour in any
way / don't know
Source: Q8 (V2006)
68
55
Base: all ad aware V2006 respondents (n=254) vs non ad aware (n=47)
Unaware of drug driving
advertising
30
The campaign leads 8 in 10 drivers and 7 in 10 passengers to think about
the issue since being exposed to advertising
In which of the following ways have you thought about the messages communicated about drug driving?
39
When thinking about my experience at
V2006 (attendees only)
28
When considering getting into a car with a
drug driver
21
25
When driving
When considering driving when under the
influence of drugs
12
17
3
9
9
When taking drugs
In other situations
7
3
Have not thought about the issue
Base: all aware of drug driving advertising (n=189)
Driver sample
29
Generally - at no particular times
Source: Q7 (online stage)
• Younger people less
likely to think about the
issue (36% of 17-20s
haven’t thought about it)
21
32
Passenger sample
21
31
31
The advertising inspires conversations and debate, primarily
about the dangers/risks of drug driving

Overall, 55% of those aware of drug driving advertising have gone on to discuss the issue
(similar in both V2006 and Control samples and for drivers vs passengers)

Young men aged 17-20 are the least likely to discuss the issue (43%*), whereas women are
more likely to talk about it

Most only speak to 1-3 other people about drug driving with men tending to speak to only one
person and women more likely to speak with 2-3

The main aspects of the campaign that are discussed are the dangers and risks to self and
others (23%). Another spur to discuss the issue is particular incidents involving the individual
and/or their friends (mentioned by 8%)

Effects on perception and comparisons with drink driving are amongst the other topics discussed
Source: Q9/Q10 (online stage)
Base: all aware of drug driving advertising (n=189)
*Caution: low base
32
The campaign has had an undoubted positive impact in changing some
people’s behaviour but there’s a hardcore who continue their behaviour
Since seeing anti-drug driving advertising (at V2006) which of the following have you done?
18
Avoided drug driving where
previously would have done so
8
Avoided getting lift from drug driver
where previously would have done
so
24
27
Net 42%
positive
impact
24
Persuaded friend not to drug drive
26
Overall net 23%
positive impact
17
Have drug driven
Have been passenger in car with
drug driver
4
16
Net 19%
no positive
impact
12
Driver sample
36
None of these
Source: Q8 (online stage)
Base: all aware of drug driving advertising (n=189)
54
Passenger sample
33
Presentation Flow
1. Background and Objectives
2. Personal drug driving experience (as driver or passenger)
3. Attitudes towards drug driving
4. How successful has the anti-drug driving campaign been?
5. Awareness of drug driving laws
6. Conclusions & implications for the THINK! drug driving campaign
34
Awareness of drug driving laws is patchy, and is significantly
lower among the most frequent drug drivers
% aware
51
The same penalties as for drink driving
24
Up to 14 years in prison if you kill somebody
22
Minimum 1 year driving ban
21
A fine of up to £5000
17
Up to 6 months in prison
Didn't realise it was an offence
3
Other
3
Don't know
Source: Q22 (online stage)
Frequent drug drivers are
less aware of all these
penalties for drug driving
21
Base: all online stage respondents
Young men (17-24) are significantly
more likely to be aware of the driving
ban and £5000 fine than men aged
25+ and women
35
Although the recall cell are no more likely to be aware of the
penalties, they have learnt about the various tests used
% aware
40
Roadside saliva testing
35
36
Eye examination
27
36
Walk and turn test
27
28
One leg stand
24
26
FIT test
Others
Didn't realise there were tests
Don't know
Source: Q22 (online stage)
14
5
4
11
21
12
Recall
Control
21
Base: all online stage respondents
Again, there is a tendency for
younger men to have a higher
awareness of the tests used by
police to detect drug driving
36
Awareness of penalties does not seem to have the desired effect
on intentions to drug drive
In fact, those aware of at least one of the more serious penalties (1 year driving ban, £5k fine, 6 months – 14
years in prison) and those who are aware of the FIT test and saliva testing are no more worried about
getting caught than those who aren’t sure about penalties and tests used
What happens to attitudes after the drug driving law and the implications of getting caught
are explained?
Now you know the law, how worried do you feel and how will this affect your behaviour?
52
% of drug drivers
21
10
Very worrying - I
intend not to drug
drive in the future
17
Quite worrying but I The law doesn't worry Don't know / not sure
will probably still drug me and won't change
drive
my behaviour
48% might
still drug
drive
37
Persistent drug drivers (i.e. who may still drug drive) are not
demographically different
We know that just under half of drug drivers are still likely to drug drive after having the laws and
penalties explained to them. In order to understand how to get through to these hardened drug
drivers, we need to know a bit more about them.
There are no age or gender differences between those who plan to stop drug driving
and
those who plan to continue
(although women aged 17-24 are the ones who are the
most easily persuaded).
Further, persistent drug drivers are no more likely to live in suburban
or rural areas, where it is likely to be more difficult to find public transport.
So what is it that makes certain drug drivers so hard to reach?
38
Persistent drug drivers are less likely to perceive the drugs they
take before driving – notably speed and cocaine - as making them
unsafe on the roads
NB. Table indicates index for
each group against the total %
Drugs taken when driving
Drugs perceived to be the most
unsafe when driving
Symptoms associated with drug
driving
BASE
204
103
101
TOTAL %
INDEX
INDEX
Amphetamines / speed
11
82
127
Cocaine
20
85
120
Amphetamines / speed
33
121
79
Cocaine
32
125
75
Slower reaction times
50
122
74
Plan to stop drug driving
Plan to continue drug driving
39
Persistent drug drivers are more relaxed about driving under the
influence of drugs – a more commonplace occurrence
BASE
Frequency of drug driving
Feelings when drug driving
Level of worry about getting caught
(before hearing about the law)
204
103
101
TOTAL %
INDEX
INDEX
Frequent
44
64
141
Infrequent
56
129
68
Confidence
19
84
121
Worried about safety
23
135
65
Worried about getting caught
32
119
81
Very / quite worried
43
123
67
Going to get more drugs
10
40
160
Getting supplies
19
47
153
Reasons for drug driving
Plan to stop drug driving
Plan to continue drug driving
40
In summary, we see mixed awareness of the law and among
many, an unwillingness to change their usual behaviour
regardless of the potential penalties

We’ve seen that there is only patchy awareness of the
penalties / tests associated with drug driving

Awareness of the penalties only has a limited effect on
intentions to drug drive

Those who are likely to persist are more likely to take speed
and/or cocaine and perceive these drugs as safer than they
actually are

Those resistant to change feel confident when they’re drug
driving and regard it as a normal aspect of their lives
41
Presentation Flow
1. Background and Objectives
2. Personal drug driving experience (as driver or passenger)
3. Attitudes towards drug driving
4. How successful has the anti-drug driving campaign been?
5. Awareness of drug driving laws
6. Conclusions & implications for the THINK! drug driving campaign
42
Conclusions & implications (1)
•
The research indicates that drug driving remains a significant social problem. If not as drug
drivers, it appears common to be a passenger in a car driven by a drug driver
•
While drug driving is generally seen as a serious issue, many people – especially a ‘hard core’ of
frequent drug drivers – are not fully aware of just how dangerous it can be to drive whilst under
the influence of illegal substances
•
The V2006 campaign appears to be well targeted, achieving high levels of awareness and
message recall (even 2-3 weeks after the festival).
•
The activity also stimulates thoughts and conversations, but impact on behaviour is more
limited, especially among the ‘hard core’ of offenders
•
Feeling of invulnerability (‘it won’t happen to me’ mentality) is especially prevalent among 25-35
year-old males, the most frequent drug-driver group
43
Conclusions & implications (2)
•
There is a lack of awareness of the ways in which taking all illegal drugs can impair driving
performance  a need to communicate the effects on co-ordination, visual perception, etc.
•
Still a perception that alcohol is more dangerous, especially among the older drivers and those
who drug drive frequently
•
There’s also a widespread feeling that some drugs are safer than others when it comes to
driving, with cannabis the least likely to be regarded as dangerous – again especially among
frequent drug drivers and males
•
Although there is some fear of being caught, the feelings of relaxation and confidence that drug
drivers experience mean they’re often willing to take the risk again and again
•
The fact that hardened drug-drivers tend to be 25-35 suggests there’s a need to target those in
their teens/early 20s to stop them falling into this habit in the first place
44
Conclusions & implications (3)
•
The role of friendship groups cannot be underestimated – an important point of reference – if
friends drug drive tend to see it as more acceptable for yourself.
•
If hardcore drug drivers can’t be persuaded directly by advertising to change their behaviour, can
we instead leverage the power of passengers? i.e. make it seen as equally socially
unacceptable to drug drive as it is to drink drive
•
Lack of concern about being caught – even when they know the law. Need to make it much
clearer that it’s now much more likely that drug driving will be detected and prosecuted fully.
•
The association between the use of speed and frequent drug driving suggests speed users may
be ripe for targeting
•
A week-to-week campaign targeting older clubbers could be an effective strategy for eroding the
deep-seated attitudes of hardcore drug drivers
DFT: Drug Driving
Evaluating the effectiveness of the campaign at V2006
Prepared for Department for Transport
October 2006
2CV Research
34 Rose Street
Covent Garden
London WC2E 9BS
T +44 (0)20 7655 9900
F +44 (0)20 7655 9901
[email protected]
www.2cv.co.uk