The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

EVALUATION OF THE DRUGS DRIVING TV ADVERT

CHAPTER TWO Views and experiences of drug driving

2.1 This chapter of the report attempts to contextualise the results of the evaluation by outlining key findings relating to respondents' views and experiences of drug-driving. It draws primarily on the qualitative interviews, and also summarises findings from the survey of drivers relating to drug taking and drug driving. Comparisons are also made between views and experiences of drink driving and drug-driving.

Prevalence of drug driving - quantitative results

2.2 In a prevalence survey of 17-39 year-old drivers carried out for the Scottish Executive by NFO System Three (Ingram et al, 2000) it was found that cannabis was by far the most common drug involved in self-reported incidents of drug driving. Of the 57 respondents who had drug-driven in the previous 12 months, 39 had driven under the influence of cannabis only. Cannabis is also the most widely used illegal drug, and most people who use other drugs will also use or have used cannabis. For the purposes of this current survey of drivers, it was therefore decided to employ cannabis use as a proxy for drug use, and driving within a few hours of using cannabis as a proxy for drug driving.

2.3 Overall, 15% of all respondents admitted having used cannabis at some point during their lives. This figure is just slightly lower than the 17.4% of respondents to the 2000 Scottish Crime Survey who admitted having ever used cannabis (Fraser, 2002). Experience of cannabis varied significantly by age - 45% of 17-24 year-olds interviewed admitted having used cannabis at some point during their lives, for example, compared with just 11% of 45-54 year-olds. Table 2.1 shows cannabis use by age.

Table 2.1 Best description of cannabis use by age of respondent (% respondents)

Base 726 ¹

2.4 Although 15% of respondents admitted having used cannabis at least once, only 4% reported being current users. The remaining 11% indicated that they had used cannabis in the past, but did not use it now. Again, 17-24 year-olds were significantly more likely to indicate that they currently used cannabis on either an occasional or a regular basis than respondents aged 35 or older. ²

2.5 The 132 respondents who reported having used cannabis were then asked whether they had ever driven a motor vehicle on a public road within a few hours of using cannabis. In total, 36 respondents admitted having driven after using cannabis. This figure represents 4% of all respondents in the driver survey, and 23% of those who admitted having used cannabis. It is worth noting that drug driving is clearly still a minority issue in comparison with drink driving. A total of 30% of respondents (n=216) to the driver survey admitted having driven when they thought they might be over the legal alcohol limit, in contrast to just 4% who had drug-driven.

2.6 The proportion of drivers in this current survey of drivers who admitted driving when they thought they might be over the alcohol limit was somewhat higher than in an earlier prevalence survey of drink driving (Anderson and Ingram, 2001). The 2001 survey found that 22% of respondents admitted ever driving when they suspected they might be over the limit, compared with 30% in this current survey. There is no obvious explanation for this difference, although the two surveys were carried out in different periods using different sampling methods and precise question wording, so some level of difference in results might be expected.

2.7 A slightly higher proportion of drivers interviewed for the drug-driving prevalence study in 2000 (Ingram et al) admitted having driven after using cannabis (7%). However, this difference is probably explained by the fact that the 2000 prevalence study only included 17-39 year-olds, thus excluding older age groups who are less likely to have drug-driven. In fact, when the results of the survey of drivers are confined to 17-39 year-olds, 9% admitted having driven within a few hours of taking cannabis.

2.8 As in the 2000 prevalence survey, age and sex were the characteristics most strongly associated with drug-driving, although the numbers involved are very small (just 36 respondents admitted having driven after using cannabis) so caution should be employed in interpreting results. A greater proportion of 17-24 year-olds said they had driven after using cannabis compared with those over 35, although differences between age groups were not statistically significant due to the small numbers involved. Men were, however, significantly more likely than women to have driven after using cannabis. Of those respondents who admitted using cannabis, 31% of men compared with 12% of women admitted having driven on a public road within a few hours of using cannabis.

2.9 Of those who had driven after using cannabis, over half (n=21) said they had only done this once or twice, although around a quarter said they had done it 10 or more times (n=9). The majority of these respondents felt they were 'not very likely' or 'not at all likely' to drive within a few hours of using cannabis within the next 12 months, although interestingly around 2 in 5 (n=17) said they had driven after using cannabis in the previous 12 months.

Circumstances in which drug driving occurs

2.10 The qualitative research explored the situations in which drug driving occurs. Several participants stated that when they were younger they had regularly driven to secluded locations specifically to take drugs (usually cannabis). In part, this had been because they were living with parents, and this behaviour was generally seen as something they had grown out of as they got older and moved into their own homes. Drug driving in these circumstances was also in part an indication of the importance of 'car culture' for particular groups of young people - especially in rural areas. For these young people, cars play a key role in their social lives, especially when they still live at home with their parents:

2.11 Other circumstances in which participants had drug driven included driving somewhere after taking drugs at a friend's house or party and driving home from clubs after taking drugs. One participant who admitted having a speed habit reported drug driving on a daily basis as a result of his habit.

2.12 It is not clear how serious a problem driving home from clubs under the influence of drugs is. This certainly appeared to be less common than driving home from a friend's house after taking drugs (a finding supported by the prevalence study carried out for the Scottish Executive). However, people returning from clubs are likely to be driving longer distances and taking different drugs than people who drive after using drugs at a friends house or party. Speed and Ecstasy were the drugs most commonly mentioned in the interviews by people who had drug driven after going to a club, while cannabis was most commonly mentioned by those who had driven after using drugs at a friend's house. Which of these kinds of drug driving is considered more serious may depend on which of these factors (prevalence, drug taken, distance driven) are considered most important in terms of accident causation.

Perceptions of the effects of drugs on driving

2.13 Participants in the focus groups and paired depth interviews were asked whether and how they thought drugs affected driving. In general, the impact of drugs on people's driving capacity was not seen as being great, particularly by comparison with the effects of alcohol (an issue discussed in more detail below). The following comments were typical of the attitudes to drug driving expressed in the qualitative interviews:

2.14 Participants who had been passengers in a car when the driver had taken drugs often identified the fact that they were also either on drugs or drunk at the time as a factor in lessening their concern. Convenience and necessity were also key factors in the decision to accept a lift from a drug driver - participants would not turn down a lift from someone who was on drugs if they needed to get somewhere (or get home from somewhere).

2.15 Although the majority of participants in the qualitative study did not see drug driving as something most young people would (or should) worry about, it was recognised that the effects of drugs on a person's driving would vary depending on the type of drug used, the individual concerned, and the amount of drugs taken. However, although the type of drug used was identified as a key issue in most interviews, there was no consensus about what type of drug would have the most detrimental effect on driving. Several participants who had driven after taking speed felt that it had no effect on their driving or actually improved it by 'sharpening' reactions, while other participants were much more wary of the effects of speed compared with cannabis, for instance. There was also a lack of consensus about the amounts of different types of drugs that would lead to significant impairment of driving ability, with several participants suggesting that it would depend on the tolerance level of the individual involved:

Comparisons between drug driving and drink driving

2.16 The majority of participants in the qualitative interviews thought that most drugs had much less of an impact than alcohol on driving ability. The following comments were typical of the distinction made between drink driving and drug driving:

2.17 In addition to viewing drink driving as more dangerous than drug driving, participants also suggested that driving whilst under the influence of alcohol was much more likely to lead to arrest and conviction than drug driving. In part, this was because people thought it was easier to conceal the fact that you were under the influence of drugs than to hide the fact that you had been drinking. Half of the qualitative interviews contained someone who had actually been stopped by the police in a drug driving situation (either as driver or passenger) and the driver had not been detected or charged with anything. There was also a perception that detecting and convicting people for drug driving was relatively rare in comparison with convictions for drink driving. Participants stressed that while they knew people who had been convicted for drink driving they had never heard of anyone being caught and convicted for drug driving.

2.18 Results from the survey of drivers reinforce the finding that drug driving is viewed as less of a problem than drink driving, both in terms of the effect of drugs on driving and in terms of possible adverse consequences. Respondents who had driven after using cannabis were asked what effect they felt cannabis had on their driving. Although the base size here is small and should be treated with caution, the results are striking. Half (n=21) said they thought it had no effect on their driving, while just over a third thought that it made it 'a little worse' or 'a lot worse'. This contrasts with findings for respondents who reported having driven while over the legal alcohol limit. Just 19% said they felt alcohol had no effect on their driving, while 62% said it had made it either 'a little worse' or 'a lot worse'. Figure 2.1 shows these differences in attitudes between drug drivers and drink drivers.

Figure 2.1: Perceptions of the effect of alcohol and drugs on driving ability (%)

Bases: Drug drivers (respondents who had driven on a public road within a few hours of using cannabis) = 37; drink drivers (respondents who had driven while over the legal alcohol limit) = 216.

2.19 The majority of respondents who had driven after using cannabis were not concerned about being stopped by the police or about having an accident at the time. Over half (n=23) said they were either 'not very worried/concerned' or 'not at all worried/concerned' about either of these possibilities when they last drove after using cannabis. Again, this contrasts with findings for drink drivers. Over half (57%) of those who admitted driving when they thought they were over the legal alcohol limit said they had been 'very' or 'fairly' worried or concerned about being stopped by the police at the time, while 47% had been 'very' or 'fairly' worried about being involved in an accident. Figure 2.2 illustrates the different levels of concern about being stopped by the police between drug drivers and drink drivers, while figure 2.3 shows the varying levels of concern about being involved in an accident.

Figure 2.2: Level of concern about being stopped by the police while driving under the influence(%)

Bases: Drug drivers (respondents who had driven on a public road within a few hours of using cannabis) = 37; drink drivers (respondents who had driven while over the legal alcohol limit) = 216.

Figure 2.3: Level of concern about being involved in an accident while driving under the influence(%)

Bases: Drug drivers (respondents who had driven on a public road within a few hours of using cannabis) = 37; drink drivers (respondents who had driven while over the legal alcohol limit) = 216.

Key points

• 15% of respondents to the survey of drivers had used cannabis at some point during their lives. This figure rose to 45% among 17-24 year-olds.

• 4% of respondents to the survey of drivers had ever driven within a few hours of using cannabis. Men were more likely to admit to drug driving than women.

• Drug driving occurs in a variety of circumstances. While older teenagers may take drugs in cars as part of their social life outside the home, drug driving among young people in their 20s is more likely to follow drug taking at a friends house or party or at a club.

• The impact of drugs on driving was not seen as great by most participants in the qualitative interviews, particularly in comparison with the effects of drink driving. However, it was recognised that the impact of drugs on driving would vary depending on the type of drug, the amount taken and the individual concerned.

• Drink driving was viewed much more negatively than drug driving, both in terms of the likelihood of it leading to an accident and the probability of being caught and convicted.

« Previous | Contents | Next »