1

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

Acknowledgements

• Research Team– Dr Lyndel Bates (former-PhD Candidate)– Bridie Scott-Parker (PhD Candidate-under-

examination)– Prof Barry Watson (Principal Supervisor)– Dr Mark King (Associate Supervisor)– Dr Melissa Hyde (Associate Supervisor)

2

Overview of Research

• Project 1Comparing 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

4

The impact of an enhanced graduated driver licensing program in Queensland

Mrs Bridie Scott-Parker

5

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

6

GDL Feature QueenslandPre-July 2007

Queensland Post-July 2007

Victoria

Learner Practice

100 logbook hours 10 hours at night1/3 Instructor credit

120 logbook hours 10 hours at nightNo Instructor credit

Age: Learner Provisional (1)Provisional (2)

16.5 years (6 months)17 years (3 years)

16 years (1 year) 17 years (1 year) 18 years (2 years)

16 years (1 year) 18 years (1 year) 19 years (3 years)

Learner Restrictions

• Drivers: No hands-free/ loudspeaker/ blue-tooth mobile • Passengers: No hands-free/ blue-tooth/ loudspeaker mobile

• Drivers: No hands-free/ loudspeaker/ blue-tooth mobile

• No towing

Provisional 1 Restrictions

• Same mobile for driver, passengers• ≤ 1 peer passenger 11pm – 5 am

• Same mobile for driver• All day ≤ 1 peer passenger

Hazard Per-ception Test

Provisional 1 to Provisional 2

Learner to Provisional 1

Method Pre-July 2007 (‘Original’)GDL Program

Post-July 2007 (‘Enhanced’) GDL Program *

Recruitment• 2006, early 2007• Recruited in-person from North Brisbane/ Townsville

• April, May, June 2010• Recruited Queensland- wide with Flyer when passed practical test

Participants • 219 Novices (53% female)• 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

7

Methodologies: Pre- and Post-

* Small group interviews (n =21)

Results: Sociodemographics

8

Characteristic Original-GDL(n = 149)

Enhanced-GDL (n = 183) p

Age when P1-licensed (M, SD) 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

9

Driving Practice

9

CharacteristicOriginal-GDL

(n = 149)Hours (M, SD)

Enhanced-GDL (n = 183) Hours (M, SD)

p

Reported logbook hours – 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

10

Duration, Difficulty and Tests

Characteristic Original-GDL(n = 149)

Enhanced-GDL (n = 183) p

Duration of the Learner period (Months) (M, SD)

12.4 (6.8) 16.5 (5.8) < .001

Difficulty obtaining supervised practice (“Difficult”)

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

Number of attempts to pass practical test (M, SD)

1.5 (0.7) 1.3 (0.7) = .09

11

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?

12

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?

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]

14

• 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?

GDL-Related Issues [5]

15

• 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?

16

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)

17

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?

18

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?

19

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

20

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?

21

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

22

Questions?

Contact Details: Bridie Scott-Parker PhD Candidate-under-examination

Email: b.scott-parker@qut.edu.au

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