« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 6: OTHER DRIVING VIOLATIONS AND SENSATION SEEKING
The key objectives of this chapter are to:
- identify the extent of other driving violations within the survey population ( i.e. 17-39 year old drivers)
- compare the prevalence of these among drivers and drug drivers
- look at sensation seeking scores for each of the driving violations and identify any patterns
Key Findings
Survey
The prevalence of other driving violations was measured among 17-39 year old drivers:
- 21% had driven when they were over the limit, 5% in the previous year
- 57% had been stopped by the police
- 33% had been stopped because they were driving too fast
- 24% had been flashed by a speed camera
- 25% had at least 3 points on their licence
- 27% had been involved in an accident in the last 5 years
A higher proportion of drug drivers reported each of these driving violations compared to other drivers.
Respondents who reported involvement in these driving behaviours had higher sensation seeking scores than other drivers, with drug drivers having the highest sensation seeking scores.
Prevalence of other driving violations
The first driving violation included in the survey was driving when they thought they were over the drink-drive limit. One in every five people (21%) reported that they had and 5% had done so in the last 12 months. The majority of recent drunk drivers (66%) said they had done this only once or twice a year but 15% said they had drunk-driven at least once a month.
The survey also asked if respondents had ever been stopped by the police while they were driving which applied to over half of the sample (57%). However, 58% of these said it was for some reason not connected with the way they were driving.
Of the other driving violations, a third (33%) had been stopped because they were driving too fast, a quarter (24%) reported being flashed by a speed camera, a quarter (25%) had at least three points on their licence and 27% said they had been involved in an accident in the previous five years.
Although the majority of drug drivers are not concerned about their driving while under the influence of drugs 14, a higher proportion of those who have driven while impaired by drugs reported each of these driving violations than those who have not driven while drug impaired. Figure 6.1 shows that, in general, people who have drug driven, either ever or in the previous 12 months, are more likely to have committed other types of driving violations than people who have not driven under the influence of drugs. This is particularly striking for recent drunk driving where 36% of those who have drug driven in the last twelve months have also driven under the influence of alcohol compared with 5% of those who have never drug driven.
Figure 6.1 Driving violations by drug driving
Base: Drug drivers ever, not in the last 12 months (30), Drug drivers in the last 12 months (36), All others (965)
The other noticeable feature of Figure 6.1 is that former drug drivers - those who had drug driven in the past but not in the previous 12 months - were as likely as recent drug drivers to have driven when they thought they were drunk (both ever and in the previous year), to have been flashed and to have points on their licence. They were also more likely to have been involved in a crash in the previous five years than recent drug drivers.
From this analysis it is clear that the different driving violations are related. One possibility is that there may be some sort of personality characteristic that underlies risky driving behaviour. As discussed in chapter 4, a higher propensity for sensation seeking may be a potential causal factor in risky driving. The rest of this chapter will discuss this possibility.
Sensation seeking scores
Sensation seeking scores for each of the driving violations are displayed in Figure 6.2. Drug drivers have the highest sensation seeking scores followed by those who have driven while drunk. The mean scores for the 'less serious' offences are lower. For each driving behaviour, the mean score of those who have committed the violation is significantly higher than those who have not. These results clearly show that high sensation seekers engage in more risky driving than low sensation seekers.
Figure 6.2 Mean sensation seeking scores for each driving violation
Since drug driving is related to a wide range of other driving violations, it suggests that drug testing of drunk drivers, at the scene of accidents and when drivers are stopped for speeding, might be a useful strategy. It may identify more drug drivers than would otherwise be caught if the police were only basing their drug testing on significantly substandard driving. It may simply demonstrate that the police are now routinely checking for drug impairment, with a broader deterrent effect. The principal difficulty with increasing impairment testing is the form of testing used. Our own respondents were dismissive of the field impairment testing and, if their experience is borne out and impaired drivers regularly "pass", increased testing will be counter-productive as it will reduce the credibility of the test. On the other hand, testing of blood and saliva is both time-consuming and expensive and, while it might confirm that drugs have been used, it does not confirm impairment. 15
« Previous | Contents | Next »