Attitudes of young people toward driving after smoking cannabis or after drinking alcohol

Abstract

Acknowledgement: Stefanie Schmeer for her valuable advice. 1 ObjectiveCurrently there is a public welfare debate about the acute effects of cannabis and risk of motor vehicle accidents . This study sought to disclose young people's attitudes, values, and willingness to drive after smoking cannabis, and their awareness of the potential risks. DesignFocus group interviews which contrasted attitudes and beliefs about drinking and driving with those about smoking cannabis and driving. SettingAt the college or workplace where young people were either studying or working. MethodFive focus groups comprising peers from the same work/study environment, each addressing the same set of key issues. ResultsYoung people appear to be knowledgeable about risks of drinking and driving, and hold a culture wide value that such behaviour is antisocial. This is in stark contrast to their willingness to smoke cannabis and drive coupled with poorly developed values and knowledge about risks involved. ConclusionYoung people appear to be risk averse when it comes to drink-driving, but willing to take risk with smoking cannabis and driving. The difference probably arises from the well developed public heath campaigns and 2 education aimed to discourage drink-driving . It is therefore reasonable to be optimistic that health education could change attitudes and willingness to drive after smoking cannabis. Word Counts Abstract : 205Main Body of Text : 3307 ( excluding abstract and bibliography)

Exploring perceptions among people who drive after cannabis use: Collision risk, comparative optimism and normative influence

“…There were indications that fellow users’ opinions were seen as more credible than those who did not use or had not used cannabis. These findings support existing knowledge that peer influence can be an important protective factor (peer disapproval) or risk factor (peer acceptance) for drug use and drink‐ and drug‐driving . Some participants linked perceived acceptance of cannabis use and DUIC among peers to increasing normalisation of both behaviours and cited (at the time, impending) cannabis legalisation in Canada as evidence of this increasing social acceptance.…”

“…Earlier research identified among the broader population a lack of recognition of DUIA as a high‐risk behaviour; personal judgements of responsibility and appropriate sanctions for DUIA, for example, were highly sensitive to situational context and minimal in the absence of adverse consequences such as serious injury or property damage . Later evidence supports the notion that knowledge and beliefs regarding DUIA have changed over time such that the behaviour is now widely regarded as a major risk factor for collision and met with strong social disapproval . Decades of legislative reform, education and enforcement campaigns have contributed to significantly reduced DUIA prevalence, perhaps by reshaping, among other possible mechanisms, relevant risk perceptions and social acceptability .…”

“…Further, little published research has utilised qualitative methods to understand DUIC. Three focus group studies have reported that young people (between the ages of 16 and 25 years) generally perceive DUIC to be common and acceptable among their peers, and not as risky as DUIA or other drug‐driving . As improved understanding of collision risk associated with DUIC, and factors that affect that risk, requires the perspectives of those who engage in DUIC , we undertook a qualitative study involving individuals officially processed for impaired driving.…”

The prevalence of cannabis-involved driving in California

“…Several studies show that cannabis users do not perceive cannabis use as being associated with increased driving risk, even among those who believe that alcohol elevates crash risk (e.g., Danton et al, 2003; McCarthy et al, 2007; Terry and Wright, 2004). Lacking public perception that cannabis increases risk of crash, increases in cannabis use by the public should correspond with increases in cannabis use while driving.…”

A Meta-Analytic Comparison of the Effects of Text Messaging to Substance-Induced Impairment on Driving Performance

“…The persuasiveness of campaigns against texting while driving could be greatly enhanced if it would be demonstrated that the magnitude of the effects of texting rivals the effects of other forms of driving impairment that are already understood and accepted by the public as dangerous activities when combined with driving (Danton, Misselke, Bacon, & Done, 2003;Kelly, Drake, & Ross, 2004;Robbins, 2009). In the driving safety literature, such a comparison is known as benchmarking (Young, Regan, & Lee, 2009).…”