The law isn't everything: The impact of legal and non-legal sanctions on motorists' drink driving behaviors

Freeman, James E.; Szogi, Elizabeth; Truelove, Verity; Vingilis, Evelyn

doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2016.10.001

Cited by 35 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, certainty of apprehension was not a significant predictor of following a vehicle too closely, which is a consistent finding in other road rule violations such as phone use while driving, speeding, and drink driving (Freeman et al, 2016; Kaviani et al, 2020; Truelove et al, 2019). For example, if a driver believes there is a low chance of being caught for following a vehicle too closely, then the punishment associated with the offence may not act as a deterrent for the driver.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…These results are consistent with previous research, finding younger drivers (Horswill et al, 2020; Kaiser et al, 2016; Liew et al, 2017; Monteiro et al, 2015; Rashid, 2016) and male drivers (Liew et al, 2017; Rashid, 2016) engage in unsafe following distances more frequently than older drivers and female drivers, respectively. Admission of following a vehicle too closely in the current study (98%) was significantly higher than admissions of other illegal behaviors such as drink driving (25%; Freeman et al, 2016) and phone use (58%; Truelove et al, 2019) in previous studies. This may be explained by the low perceptions of certainty of apprehension for the behavior.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

“…Finally, physical loss involves the fear of injuring yourself as a result of a crash caused by engaging in the offending behavior. Previous literature has found evidence to support Homel's contributions, which suggests that nonlegal sanctions are indeed also effective in preventing risky driving behavior for speeding, drink driving and phone use while driving (Allen et al, 2017; Freeman et al, 2016; Kaviani et al, 2020; Truelove et al, 2017). While research has yet to apply these variables to following a vehicle to closely, previous research by Michael et al (2000) indicated that a roadside sign (consisting of “Help prevent crashes please don’t tailgate”) significantly increased driving headways (i.e., following distances), providing preliminary support for the application of the nonlegal variables to prevent the behavior of following a vehicle too closely.…”

Section: Deterrence Theorymentioning

confidence: 94%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Examining the impact of both legal and nonlegal factors on following a vehicle too closely utilizing three deterrence-based theories

Ochenasek

Truelove

Stefanidis

et al. 2021

Journal of Criminology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following a vehicle too closely (otherwise known as tailgating) is a high-risk behavior and major contributor to motor-vehicle collisions and injuries. Both legal and nonlegal countermeasures are currently in place in an attempt to prevent this behavior, yet there has been limited research that has examined the effectiveness of both legal and nonlegal factors on engagement in the behavior. Therefore, this research utilized a combination of the three most salient deterrence-based theories used in road safety to understand the impact of both legal and nonlegal sanctions on following a vehicle too closely. A survey was completed by 887 Queensland drivers aged 17–84 years ( Mage = 49 years; 55% males). Variables from Classical Deterrence Theory, the reconceptualized deterrence theory and the extended deterrence-based model (that includes perceived internal loss, physical loss, and social sanctions), as well as measures of following a vehicle too closely were used. The majority of the sample (98%) reported following a vehicle too closely at some point, with the average frequency ranging from rarely to sometimes. Significant predictors of more frequent unsafe following distances included: being male, younger in age, and avoiding punishment for the behavior. Meanwhile, significant predictors of less frequent unsafe following distances included knowing others who have been punished for the behavior, as well as fearing the physical and internal losses resulting from unsafe following distances. Notably, the severity of the punishment was also a significant deterrent, while the perceived certainty of being apprehended for the offence was low and did not impact engagement in behavior. These results have a number of important implications on how to maximize both legal and nonlegal countermeasures to further prevent following a vehicle too closely.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

Section: Deterrence Theorymentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining the impact of both legal and nonlegal factors on following a vehicle too closely utilizing three deterrence-based theories

Ochenasek

Truelove

Stefanidis

et al. 2021

Journal of Criminology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Classical deterrence theory includes three elements: certainty, swiftness and severity (Freeman et al, 2016). Certainty refers to the perceptions that an individual will be caught if they commit the offence.…”

Section: Deterrence Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Young Drivers, Deterrence Theory, and Punishment Avoidance: A Qualitative Exploration

Bates

Anderson

2019

Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Punishment avoidance occurs when a person commits an offence but is not punished for it. The aim of this article was to explore how young drivers experience punishment avoidance. New drivers aged between 17 and 25 years participated in 11 focus groups held in both metropolitan and regional areas in two Australian states: Queensland and Victoria. Thematic analysis identified that young drivers experience punishment avoidance in one of three ways. First, they can attempt to actively avoid punishment by engaging in deliberate actions to circumvent policing activities. Secondly, they can experience either direct or vicarious punishment avoidance of police enforcement. An example of this would be ‘talking their way out of a ticket’ after they had been caught by a police officer. Finally, their parents may help them avoid punishment by, for instance, paying the traffic fine on their child’s behalf. This article increases our understanding of how punishment avoidance occurs in practice.

show abstract

“…It has been used to explain enforcement processes and interventions for a range of road safety issues including drink driving (e.g. Freeman et al, 2016;Baum, 1999;Berger et al, 1990;Piquero and Paternoster, 1998), drug driving (e.g. Watling et al, 2010) and speeding (e.g.…”

Section: Young Driver Enforcement Within Graduated Driver Licensing Systems: a Scoping Review Introduction And Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Young driver enforcement within graduated driver licensing systems: a scoping review

Bates

Rodwell

Matthews

2019

Crime Prev Community Saf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young drivers have the highest crash rates when compared with other groups of drivers. One countermeasure that has successfully reduced these crash rates is graduated driver licensing. However, young drivers' compliance with graduated driver licensing requirements decreases as they gain driving experience. This paper systematically reviews the literature in order to identify how enforcement practices can be used to influence the compliance of young drivers within graduated driver licensing systems. The review identified 21 relevant studies with all bar one of these being conducted in the United States or Australia.Additionally, young drivers and parents perceive that police enforcement of young drivers within graduated driver licensing systems is inconsistent. As young drivers are more concerned about their parents finding out that they broke the road rules, there appears to be scope for greater parental involvement in this area. The use of P plates or decals for drivers on an intermediate licence may also help to facilitate police enforcement.

show abstract

The law isn't everything: The impact of legal and non-legal sanctions on motorists' drink driving behaviors

Abstract: A range of non-legal deterrent factors have the potential to reduce the prevalence of drink driving although further research is required to determine how much exposure is required to produce a strong effect.

Cited by 35 publications

References 42 publications

Examining the impact of both legal and nonlegal factors on following a vehicle too closely utilizing three deterrence-based theories

Examining the impact of both legal and nonlegal factors on following a vehicle too closely utilizing three deterrence-based theories

Young Drivers, Deterrence Theory, and Punishment Avoidance: A Qualitative Exploration

Young driver enforcement within graduated driver licensing systems: a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About