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 1

2. 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

3. Overview of Research Project 1 Comparing 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 4

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 5

6. GDL FeatureQueensland Pre-July 2007 Queensland Post-July 2007 Victoria Learner Practice 100 logbook hours 10 hours at night 1/3 Instructor credit 120 logbook hours 10 hours at night No 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 6

7. MethodPre-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)

8. Results: Sociodemographics 8 Characteristic Original-GDL (n = 149) Enhanced- GDL (n = 183) p Age when P1-licensed (M, SD)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 Characteristic Original-GDL (n = 149) Hours (M, SD) Enhanced- GDL (n = 183) Hours (M, SD) p Reported logbook hours–108.8 (12.7)– Reported driving practice63.3 (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 9

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 attempt61.5%68.2%=.21 Number of attempts to pass practical test (M, SD) 1.5 (0.7)1.3 (0.7)=.09 10

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? 11

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? 12

13. 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?

14. 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?

15. 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) 16

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? 17

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? 18

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 19

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? 20

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 21

22. 22 Questions? Contact Details: Bridie Scott-Parker PhD Candidate-under-examination Email: b.scott-parker@qut.edu.aub.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