Road trauma is recognized as a major public health problem worldwide (particularly for younger drivers), and risky driving has been identified as an important contributor to road crashes. It is often assumed that similar factors influence all risky driving behaviours, although direct and systematic examination of the differences between risky driving behaviours in terms of precipitating factors is lacking. The present thesis sought to undertake a systematic investigation of relevant factors in the prediction of four key risky driving behaviours (speeding, drink-driving, driving while fatigued, and not wearing seat belts). Four versions of a Risky Driving Questionnaire were developed to assess beliefs, personality factors and behavioural intentions, in relation to each of the four behaviours. Four versions of the Implicit Association Test were developed to assess attitudes toward each of the four behaviours, without reliance on self-report (in terms of the relative strength of pairs of associations). Data were collected from a student sample (N=215: Study 1), as well as urban (N=587) and rural (N=422) general population samples (Study 2), and regression models were examined for each of the four behaviours, with interaction terms to assess moderations involving perceived risk. Mediations involving gender were also assessed. Results indicate that different risky driving behaviours are predicted by different factors. For example, in the urban sample, speeding was predicted by driver anger and illusory invulnerability, drink driving was predicted by peer influence, driving while fatigued was predicted by the perceived benefits of not driving while fatigued, and not wearing seat belts was predicted by the (sensation seeking x illusory invulnerability) interaction. Results also suggest that different predictors of risky driving behaviours are relevant for different driver populations. For example, speeding was predicted by authority rebellion in the urban sample, and by sensation seeking in the rural sample. Observed moderations of perceived risk suggest that relationships between perceived risk and risky driving may differ for males versus females, and for low versus high sensation seekers. Findings suggest that future road safety interventions should be based on research of the determinants of individual risky driving behaviours, and in specific driver populations.

Road trauma is recognized as a major public health problem worldwide (particularly for younger drivers), and risky driving has been identified as an important contributor to road crashes. It is often assumed that similar factors influence all risky driving behaviours, although direct and systematic examination of the differences between risky driving behaviours in terms of precipitating factors is lacking. The present thesis sought to undertake a systematic investigation of relevant factors in the prediction of four key risky driving behaviours (speeding, drink-driving, driving while fatigued, and not wearing seat belts). Four versions of a Risky Driving Questionnaire were developed to assess beliefs, personality factors and behavioural intentions, in relation to each of the four behaviours. Four versions of the Implicit Association Test were developed to assess attitudes toward each of the four behaviours, without reliance on self-report (in terms of the relative strength of pairs of associations). Data were collected from a student sample (N=215: Study 1), as well as urban (N=587) and rural (N=422) general population samples (Study 2), and regression models were examined for each of the four behaviours, with interaction terms to assess moderations involving perceived risk. Mediations involving gender were also assessed. Results indicate that different risky driving behaviours are predicted by different factors. For example, in the urban sample, speeding was predicted by driver anger and illusory invulnerability, drink driving was predicted by peer influence, driving while fatigued was predicted by the perceived benefits of not driving while fatigued, and not wearing seat belts was predicted by the (sensation seeking x illusory invulnerability) interaction. Results also suggest that different predictors of risky driving behaviours are relevant for different driver populations. For example, speeding was predicted by authority rebellion in the urban sample, and by sensation seeking in the rural sample. Observed moderations of perceived risk suggest that relationships between perceived risk and risky driving may differ for males versus females, and for low versus high sensation seekers. Findings suggest that future road safety interventions should be based on research of the determinants of individual risky driving behaviours, and in specific driver populations.

Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of teenage deaths in the United States, highlighting the need for ways to reduce teenage driver crash rates. Adolescents (n = 176, M age = 16.4 years, 53% female) and their parents (n = 204, 71% mothers) self-reported on parenting style, driving restrictions, and risky driving. Results showed that more parental restrictions were associated with less adolescent risky driving. Three-way interactions were found such that more restrictions were associated with less concurrent risky driving in boys only under conditions of high parental warmth, structure, or autonomy support. Parenting style generally did not moderate the association for girls, although more restrictions were associated with less risky driving one year later for girls only in the context of low autonomy support. Findings are discussed in terms of how parenting may differentially affect risky driving as a form of risk-taking versus risky driving stemming from inexperience.

Unintentional injuries are the leading cause of death and disability for youth under 20, and motor vehicle collisions are the leading cause of death in youth aged 15-19 (World Health Organization, 2010). Research has consistently shown that driver education programs do not result in safer youth driving. Indeed, the biggest predictor of collisions involving youth is parental history of collisions. This dissertation comprised two studies – one to develop a measure of risky driving and one that examined the influence of parents on youth risky driving. Participants (N = 432) for both studies were undergraduate students aged 17 to 22 who had obtained their G2 driver’s licence in the past year. In Study 1, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the new Youth Domains of Risky Driving Scale revealed a four-factor solution consisting of aggressive, substance use, distracted, and moving violation subscales. In Study 2, this new measure was used to evaluate relations between parental modeling of risky driving behaviours, parental teaching about safe driving behaviours, and youth risky driving. Results revealed that parental modeling was generally more predictive of youth risk than parental teaching, for all four subtypes of driving behaviours examined. Youth whose parents modeled risky driving behaviour were more likely be willing to drive in a risky manner, to expect that they would do so in the future, and to report a history of risky driving in the past. Findings from this study highlight the role parents play in the development of youth risky driving. Implications for future interventions targeting parent driving behaviour in the early months of youth licensure are discussed. / Canadian Institutes of Health Research

The present study aimed the adaptation of the Driving Log, a questionnaire that assesses aggressive and risky driving behaviors in a day by day basis, with 395 Spanish participants. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the questionnaire fitted properly in two correlated factors, labeled as Risky Driving and Aggressive Driving. Subsequent analyses showed that the number of drives is significantly associated to Risky Driving, while the number of occasions in which anger is experimented correlated with Risky Driving as well as Aggressive Driving. Other findings suggest that men behave in a more risky and aggressive mannerthan women. Young people follow this same tendency in comparison to their elders. / El presente estudio tuvo como objetivo la adaptación del Driving Log, un cuestionario que valora los comportamientos agresivos y arriesgados al volante, en una muestra española de 395 personas. El análisis factorial confirmatorio mostró que el cuestionario ajustaba satisfactoriamente en dos factores, etiquetados como Conducción Arriesgada y Conducción Agresiva. Los análisis posteriores mostraron que el número de trayectos realizados se asoció significativamente a la Conducción Arriesgada, mientras que el número de veces en que se experimentó ira lo hizo tanto con la Conducción Arriesgada como con la Conducción Agresiva. Igualmente, se vio que los hombres se comportaban de forma más arriesgada y agresiva que las mujeres, y que los jóvenes lo hacían en mayor grado que los mayores.

Worldwide, young drivers are involved in more road traffic collisions than any other age group (Taubman & Katz, 2012). Comprehensive driver training and various forms of pre- and- post-test road safety interventions (RSIs) are in place, but young drivers continue to be involved in more at-fault, fatal collisions than older, newly qualified drivers (e.g. Emmerson, 2008; Braitman et al, 2008; Clarke et al, 2010). The evidence base to date is mixed regarding why young drivers are at a heightened risk of collision and so this thesis aims to provide further understanding about the factors underpinning young drivers’ engagement in risky driving. An evaluation of a young driver RSI, found that young males were less likely than young females to report safer attitudes and intentions after attending the RSI. We considered that this may be due to young males’ behaviour being motivated by a desire to seek rewards (e.g. the thrill of risky driving) rather than a fear of punishment which forms the basis of traditional RSIs. Two subsequent studies were conducted to ascertain whether a heightened sensitivity to reward might underpin the risk-taking behaviour of those most at risk. We found that young males and females scoring high on reward sensitivity reported engaging in more road traffic violations and displayed slower reaction times on a driving game; suggesting that young people may have a heightened sensitivity to reward, in general, and concurrently tend to accept a higher degree of risk than other drivers. We also found that reward sensitive young drivers rated road safety messages framed in terms of financial gains as most effective, suggesting that financial incentives may be a potential route to engage young drivers in the future. The findings from another study provided insight into the precise mechanisms at play in the relationship between young drivers and their peer passengers, and the evaluation of the pilot peer-to-peer RSI showed how it might be possible to improve young drivers’ intentions to drive safely by modifying the norm that risky driving is an appropriate way to attain social prestige within a peer group. The thesis offers a significant contribution to the literature by establishing empirically the effect of reward sensitivity on young drivers’ engagement in risky driving and suggesting multiple ways to better improve young drivers’ safety in the future.

This study sought to investigate the relationship between cell phone conversation type and dangerous driving behaviors. It was hypothesized that more emotional phone conversations engaged in while driving would produce greater frequencies of dangerous driving behaviors in a simulated environment than more mundane conversation or no phone conversation at all. Participants were semi-randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) no call, (2) mundane call, and, (3) emotional call. While driving in a simulated environment, participants in the experimental groups received a phone call from a research confederate who either engaged them in innocuous conversation (mundane call) or arguing the opposite position of a deeply held belief of the participant (emotional call). Participants in the no call and mundane call groups differed significantly only on percent time spent speeding and center line crossings, though the mundane call group consistently engaged in more of all dangerous driving behaviors than did the no call participants. Participants in the emotional call group engaged in significantly more dangerous driving behaviors than participants in both the no call and mundane call groups, with the exception of traffic light infractions, where there were no significant group differences. Though there is need for replication, the authors concluded that whereas talking on a cell phone while driving is risky to begin with, having emotionally intense conversations is considerably more dangerous.

The Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI) was created to measure drivers' self-reported propensity to drive dangerously (Dula & Ballard, in press). In the early stages of development, the DDDI and each of its subscales (Dangerous Driving Total, Aggressive Driving, Negative Emotional Driving, and Risky Driving) were found to have strong internal reliability (alphas from .83 to .92), and there was evidence of construct validity. In Study One, the alpha coefficient of .91 for the DDDI Total scale indicated excellent internal reliability for the measure and good internal reliability was demonstrated for its subscales with coefficient alphas equal to .81 for the DDDI Risky Driving subscale, .79 for the DDDI Negative Emotional subscale, and the DDDI Aggressive Driving subscale. Additionally, convergent and divergent validity was shown for the DDDI, but evidence was weaker for the validity of the separate subscales. Factor analysis demonstrated that the DDDI seemed to measure a unitary construct. In Study Two, coefficients of stability were generated from a four-week test-retest procedure, which were .76 for the DDDI Risky Driving subscale, .68 for the DDDI Negative Emotional subscale, .55 for the DDDI Aggressive Driving subscale, and .73 for the DDDI Total. In Study Three, the percentage of variance accounted for in criterion variables by different models ranged from 13.6% to 47.7%, where the DDDI Negative Emotional and DDDI Total scales frequently accounted for large portions of variance. In Study Four, the percent of variance accounted for in criterion variables by different models ranged from 22.0% to 65.6%, where some of the DDDI scales were regularly found to account for significant variance. Thus, it was concluded that the DDDI is a measure with high levels of internal reliability and reasonable stability across time, and that face, construct, and predictive validity was demonstrated. However, the evidence in support of the present division of subscales was weak, though present. Therefore, should further data fail to produce more substantial evidence for the validity of the DDDI subscales, a singular dangerous driving measure would be warranted, and the number of items should be shortened as guided by results from factorial analysis. / Ph. D.

Emergency medical services personnel work in a fast-paced, stressful environment requiring rapid, efficient response to critical situations, creating unique safety considerations within the workforce. With an occupational fatality rate notably higher than average, most of which are attributed to vehicular crashes, compounded by risks faced on rural roadways, rural EMS personnel face unique driving challenges that may be exacerbated by the very traits, self-efficacy and risk propensity, that may have initially drawn them to the profession. The purpose of this study was to identify the extent to which rural EMS personnel engage in off-duty, risky driving behaviors and to examine the relationship between these behaviors and their levels of risk propensity as well as their self-efficacy relative to driving. A cross-sectional, quantitative study was conducted to explore the relationship between the variables. A 63-item survey was completed by 227 rural EMS personnel. The statistical model resulting from this study identifies risky-driving self-efficacy and risk propensity as significant predictors of engaging in risky driving behaviors, with self-efficacy emerging as the strongest predictor. The predictive model fit well within the Social Cognitive Theory construct of triadic reciprocity, providing a platform from which to develop mitigating strategies to foster systemic as well as behavioral changes, while tailoring interventions to highly self-efficacious, risk-taking individuals who gravitate toward risky professions, including rural EMS personnel.

No description available.