The procedural justice approach to policing may be an effective method of reducing young driver noncompliance with traffic laws. We undertook a qualitative study in two Australian states (Queensland and Victoria) to explore how procedural justice operates when police interact with young drivers. Metropolitan and regional focus groups were conducted (n = 31, 45% male, 17–25 years), and transcripts coded against the four procedural justice elements: (a) neutrality, (b) respect, (c) voice, and (d) trust. Young drivers did not perceive neutral treatment; they felt targeted due to their provisional licence plate, their gender (male), and vehicle type. Despite this, young drivers reported their interactions with police to be respectful, they were allowed to present their point of view (voice), and that police officers and agencies could be trusted. This has implications for how the procedural justice framework is conceptualized and operationalized, for it to be an effective tool for policing young drivers.

Deterrence theory is the framework traditionally used to underpin road policing practices. However, there have been several developments in deterrence theory. This study uses an integrated approach and tests four hypotheses derived from classical deterrence theory, Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization and informal sanctioning. Regression analysis of self-reported data from a sample ( N = 623) of Queensland’s drivers provided evidence that punishment avoidance, both direct and vicarious, significantly predicted offending driving behaviors. Moreover, while offending driving behaviors appeared unrelated to formal sanctioning, including certainty, severity, and celerity, they were inversely associated with informal sanctions involving shame, guilt, and concern over losing the respect of friends. This indicates that policing agencies may be able to reduce road offending by implementing interventions targeted at the informal sanctions associated with these behaviors.

No abstract

No abstract

The study examines changes over time in crash risk differences between young Australian drivers born in Asia and those born in Australia.Data from the 2003 baseline survey of the DRIVE cohort of 20 806 young drivers aged 17–24 years were linked to police, hospital and death data up until 2016. The association between country of birth and crash was investigated using flexible parametric survival models adjusted for confounders.Six months after baseline, the crash risk in Asian-born drivers was less than half that of their Australian-born counterparts (mean HR, MHR 0.41; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.57), only to increase steadily over time to resemble that of Australian-born drivers 13 years later (MHR 0.94; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.36).This is likely to be associated with acculturation and the adoption by young Asian-born Australian drivers of driving behaviour patterns akin to those born locally. This needs to be considered in future road safety campaigns.