The contribution of risky behaviour to the increased crash and fatality rates of young novicedrivers is recognised in the road safety literature around the world. Exploring such riskydriver behaviour has led to the development of tools like the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire(DBQ) to examine driving violations, errors, and lapses [1]. Whilst the DBQ has been utilisedin young novice driver research, some items within this tool seem specifically designed forthe older, more experienced driver, whilst others appear to asses both behaviour and relatedmotives. The current study was prompted by the need for a risky behaviour measurementtool that can be utilised with young drivers with a provisional driving licence. Sixty-threeitems exploring young driver risky behaviour developed from the road safety literature wereincorporated into an online survey. These items assessed driver, passenger, journey, carand crash-related issues. A sample of 476 drivers aged 17-25 years (M = 19, SD = 1.59years) with a provisional driving licence and matched for age, gender, and education weredrawn from a state-wide sample of 761 young drivers who completed the survey. Factoranalysis based upon a principal components extraction of factors was followed by an obliquerotation to investigate the underlying dimensions to young novice driver risky behaviour. Afive factor solution comprising 44 items was identified, accounting for 55% of the variance inyoung driver risky behaviour. Factor 1 accounted for 32.5% of the variance and appeared tomeasure driving violations that were transient in nature - risky behaviours that followed riskydecisions that occurred during the journey (e.g., speeding). Factor 2 accounted for 10.0% ofvariance and appeared to measure driving violations that were fixed in nature; the riskydecisions being undertaken before the journey (e.g., drink driving). Factor 3 accounted for5.4% of variance and appeared to measure misjudgement (e.g., misjudged speed ofoncoming vehicle). Factor 4 accounted for 4.3% of variance and appeared to measure riskydriving exposure (e.g., driving at night with friends as passengers). Factor 5 accounted for2.8% of variance and appeared to measure driver emotions or mood (e.g., anger). Giventhat the aim of the study was to create a research tool, the factors informed the developmentof five subscales and one composite scale. The composite scale had a very high internalconsistency measure (Cronbach?s alpha) of .947. Self-reported data relating to policedetecteddriving offences, their crash involvement, and their intentions to break road ruleswithin the next year were also collected. While the composite scale was only weaklycorrelated with self-reported crashes (r = .16, p < .001), it was moderately correlated withoffences (r = .26, p < .001), and highly correlated with their intentions to break the road rules(r = .57, p < .001). Further application of the developed scale is needed to confirm the factorstructure within other samples of young drivers both in Australia and in other countries. Inaddition, future research could explore the applicability of the scale for investigating thebehaviour of other types of drivers.
展开▼
