Driving under the influence of cannabis: Links with dangerous driving, psychological predictors, and accident involvement
Department of Psychology, Université de Montréal, C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville, Montréal, QC, Canada H3C 3J7.Accident; analysis and prevention (Impact Factor: 1.65). 04/2009; 41(2):299-307. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2008.12.004
Driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) has become a growing concern. Studies investigating the impact of DUIC on traffic safety have shown evidence that, during the acute period of cannabis intoxication, cannabis diminishes driving faculties and is associated with an elevated risk of collision. However, DUIC drivers seem to exhibit a general reckless driving style that may contribute to an over-estimation of DUIC-related collisions among this group. In this study, we investigated DUIC drivers with respect to self-reported dangerous driving habits (e.g., risky driving, aggressive driving and negative emotional driving), behaviours observed in a driving simulator, psychological predictors and crash involvement. Results suggest that DUIC is associated with self-reported and observed risky driving and negative emotional driving. We also found that sensation seeking and impulsivity are independent psychological predictors of DUIC. Finally, a trend suggests that self-reported DUIC is associated with an increased risk of being involved in a car accident, after controlling for dangerous driving and demographic variables. Implications for interventions are discussed.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Various concepts in the driving style research literature refer to such behavior. The MDSI (Taubman-Ben-Ari et al., 2004) contains a factor named " risky driving style, " and the same term is also used by Richer and Bergeron (2009) and by Dula and Ballard (2003). Other related terms found in the research literature include " reckless and careless " driving style (Ishibashi et al., 2007) and " dangerous " driving (Knipling et al., 2004). "
ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to outline a conceptual framework for understanding driving style and, on this basis, review the state-of-the-art research on driving styles in relation to road safety. Previous research has indicated a relationship between the driving styles adopted by drivers and their crash involvement. However, a comprehensive literature review of driving style research is lacking. A systematic literature search was conducted, including empirical, theoretical, and methodological research, on driving styles related to road safety. A conceptual framework was proposed whereby driving styles are viewed in terms of driving habits established as a result of individual dispositions as well as social norms and cultural values. Moreover, a general scheme for categorizing and operationalizing driving styles was suggested. On this basis, existing literature on driving styles and indicators was reviewed. Links between driving styles and road safety were identified and individual and sociocultural factors influencing driving style were reviewed. Existing studies have addressed a wide variety of driving styles, and there is an acute need for a unifying conceptual framework in order to synthesize these results and make useful generalizations. There is a considerable potential for increasing road safety by means of behavior modification. Naturalistic driving observations represent particularly promising approaches to future research on driving styles. Knowledge about driving styles can be applied in programs for modifying driver behavior and in the context of usage-based insurance. It may also be used as a means for driver identification and for the development of driver assistance systems. © 2015, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 06/2015; 57(7). DOI:10.1177/0018720815591313 · 1.69 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Driving whilst using a cell phone, including dialing (Klauer et al., 2006) and texting (Owens et al., 2011), driving whilst using MP3 players and other electronic devices (Chisholm et al., 2008), driving whilst under the influence of alcohol and other psychoactive substances, including cannabis (Calafat et al., 2009; Richer & Bergeron, 2009), and driving whilst tired or fatigued (Smart et al., 2005; Smith et al., 2005), are additional examples of driving behaviour that fall under the banner of reckless. These behaviours have been found to compromise both driving performance and driving safety (Anderson & Baumberg, 2006; Berghaus et al., 1995; Charlton, 2009; Deery & Lowe, 1996; Kircher et al., 2004; Lenne et al., 2000; Owens et al., 2011; Potter, 2000; Raemakers et al., 2004; Sexton et al., 2000; Smith et al., 2005; Strayer & Johnson, 2001). "
ABSTRACT: Reckless driving is a major contributing factor to road morbidity and mortality. While further research into the nature and impact of reckless driving, particularly among young people, is urgently needed, the measurement of reckless driving behaviour also requires increased attention. Three major shortcomings apparent in established measures of driver behaviour are that they do not target the full range of reckless driving behaviours, they measure characteristics other than driving behaviours, and/or they fail to categorise and label reckless driver behaviour based on characteristics of the behaviours themselves. To combat these shortcomings, this paper reports the development and preliminary validation of a new measure of reckless driving behaviour for young drivers. Exploratory factor analysis of self-reported driving data revealed four, conceptually distinct categories of reckless driving behaviour: those that increase crash-risk due to (a) distractions or deficits in perception, attention or reaction time (labelled "distracted"), (b) driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol (labelled "substance-use"), (c) placing the vehicle in an unsafe environment beyond its design expectations (labelled "extreme"), and (d) speed and positioning of the vehicle relative to other vehicles and objects (labelled "positioning"). Confirmatory factor analysis of data collected from a separate, community sample confirmed this four-factor structure. Multiple regression analyses found differences in the demographic and psychological variables related to these four factors, suggesting that interventions in one reckless driving domain may not be helpful in others.Accident; analysis and prevention 05/2014; 70C:245-257. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2014.04.014 · 1.65 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "It is important to note that this subscale had the weakest loading on the overall Negative Urgency factor identified by Whiteside and Lynam (2001). In a sample of Canadian men, Richer and Bergeron (2009) found that " impulsivity " was significantly positively correlated with driving under the influence of cannabis, driving under the influence of alcohol, risky driving (e.g., " I will weave in and out of slower traffic , " " I will drive if I am only mildly intoxicated or buzzed " ; Dula and Ballard, 2003), but was non-significantly positively correlated with aggressive driving (r = .13; e.g., " I would tailgate a driver who annoys me " ) and negative emotional driving (r = .19; "
ABSTRACT: The present study examined the predictive effects of five impulsivity-like traits (Premeditation, Perseverance, Sensation Seeking, Negative Urgency, and Positive Urgency) on driving outcomes (driving errors, driving lapses, driving violations, cell phone driving, traffic citations, and traffic collisions). With a convenience sample of 266 college student drivers, we found that each of the impulsivity-like traits was related to multiple risky driving outcomes. Positive Urgency (tendency to act impulsively when experiencing negative affect) was the most robust predictor of risky driving outcomes. Positive Urgency is a relatively newly conceptualized impulsivity-like trait that was not examined in the driving literature previously, suggesting a strong need to further examine its role as a personality trait related to risky driving. These findings generally support the multidimensional assessment of impulsivity-like traits, and they specifically support the addition of Positive Urgency to a list of risk factors for risky driving behaviors.Accident; analysis and prevention 04/2013; 53:142-8. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2013.01.009 · 1.65 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.