Graduated driver licensing (GDL) is designed to reduce young driver injuries and fatalities on the road. While GDL systems impose additional restrictions on new drivers to reduce this crash risk, compliance with these restrictions and other licensing requirements can be low for young drivers. This research examines the influence of informal and formal deterrence measures on the compliance of provisionally licensed drivers, and the role that shame plays in mediating these relationships. The key independent variables measured were informal deterrence imparted by parents, formal deterrence imparted by police, and shame-related emotion, while compliance with road laws was the dependent variable. Using survey data from 151 young provisionally licensed drivers from Australia, the results indicate that informal deterrence, but not formal deterrence, is related to young drivers' compliance with road rules. Further, the effect of informal deterrence on compliance behaviour was mediated by young drivers' feelings of shame over wrongdoing. These findings suggest that internal psychological mechanisms need to be examined in addition to deterrence processes to understand young drivers' compliance behaviour. Importantly, this study has key policy implications including the utilisation of third-party policing practices such as the inclusion of parents in monitoring young drivers' behaviour on the road.
The enhancements to the GDL program in Queensland appear to have achieved many of their intended results. The current-GDL Learners participating in the study reported obtaining a significantly greater amount of supervised driving experience compared to former-GDL Learners. Encouragingly, the current-GDL Learners did not report any greater difficulty in obtaining supervised driving practice, and there was a decline in the proportion of current-GDL Learners engaging in unsupervised driving. In addition, the majority of Learners do not appear to be attempting to subvert logbook recording requirements, as evidenced by high rates of self-reported logbook accuracy. The results have implications for the development and the evaluation of GDL programs in Australia and around the world.
In this paper we explore the relationship between monthly random breath testing (RBT) rates (per 1000 licensed drivers) and alcohol-related traffic crash (ARTC) rates over time, across two Australian states: Queensland and Western Australia. We analyse the RBT, ARTC and licensed driver rates across 12 years; however, due to administrative restrictions, we model ARTC rates against RBT rates for the period July 2004 to June 2009. The Queensland data reveals that the monthly ARTC rate is almost flat over the five year period. Based on the results of the analysis, an average of 5.5 ARTCs per 100,000 licensed drivers are observed across the study period. For the same period, the monthly rate of RBTs per 1000 licensed drivers is observed to be decreasing across the study with the results of the analysis revealing no significant variations in the data. The comparison between Western Australia and Queensland shows that Queensland's ARTC monthly percent change (MPC) is 0.014 compared to the MPC of 0.47 for Western Australia. While Queensland maintains a relatively flat ARTC rate, the ARTC rate in Western Australia is increasing. Our analysis reveals an inverse relationship between ARTC RBT rates, that for every 10% increase in the percentage of RBTs to licensed driver there is a 0.15 decrease in the rate of ARTCs per 100,000 licenced drivers. Moreover, in Western Australia, if the 2011 ratio of 1:2 (RBTs to annual number of licensed drivers) were to double to a ratio of 1:1, we estimate the number of monthly ARTCs would reduce by approximately 15. Based on these findings we believe that as the number of RBTs conducted increases the number of drivers willing to risk being detected for drinking driving decreases, because the perceived risk of being detected is considered greater. This is turn results in the number of ARTCs diminishing. The results of this study provide an important evidence base for policy decisions for RBT operations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.