Nerida L. Leal

Screening for Drugs in Oral Fluid: Illicit Drug Use and Drug Driving in a Sample of Queensland Motorists

Police Services in a number of Australian states have indicated random roadside drug testing will be implemented to target drug driving. This paper outlines research conducted to provide an estimate of the prevalence of drug driving in a sample of Queensland drivers. Oral fluid samples were collected from 781 drivers who volunteered to participate at Random Breath Testing (RBT) sites in a large Queensland regional area. Illicit substances tested for included cannabis (delta 9 tetrahydrocannibinol [THC]), amphetamine type substances, heroin and cocaine. Drivers also completed a self-report questionnaire regarding their drug-related driving behaviour. Samples that were drug-positive at initial screening were sent to a government laboratory for confirmation. Oral fluid samples from 27 participants (3.5%) were confirmed positive for at least one illicit substance. The most common drugs detected in oral fluid were cannabis (delta 9 THC) (n = 13) followed by amphetamine type substances (n = 11). A key finding was that cannabis was also confirmed as the most common self-reported drug combined with driving and that individuals who tested positive to any drug through oral fluid analysis were also more likely to report the highest frequency of drug driving. Furthermore, a comparison between drug vs drink driving detection rates for the study period revealed a higher detection rate for drug driving (3.5%) vs drink driving (0.8%). This research provides evidence that drug driving is relatively prevalent on Queensland Roads. The paper will further outline the study findings and present possible directions for future drug driving research.

The road safety implications of illegal street racing and associated risky driving behaviours: An analysis of offences and offenders

The purpose of this study was to explore the road safety implications of illegal street racing and associated risky driving behaviours. This issue was considered in two ways: Phase 1 examined the descriptions of 848 illegal street racing and associated risky driving offences that occurred in Queensland, Australia, in order to estimate the risk associated with these behaviours; and Phase 2 examined the traffic and crash histories of the 802 male offenders involved in these offences, and compared them to those of an age-matched comparison group, in order to examine the risk associated with the driver. It was found in Phase 1 that only 3.7% of these offences resulted in a crash (none of which were fatal), and that these crashes tended to be single-vehicle crashes where the driver lost control of the vehicle and collided with a fixed object. Phase 2 found that the offender sample had significantly more traffic infringements, licence sanctions and crashes in the previous three years than the comparison group. It was concluded that while only a small proportion of racing and associated offences result in a crash, these offenders appear to be generally risky drivers that warrant special attention.

Adapting the Propensity for Angry Driving Scale for use in Australian research.

Road rage is a topic that receives consistent attention in both the road safety literature and media. Before Australian research can address the underlying factors associated with road rage, there is a need for a valid instrument appropriate for use in this context. The present program of research consisted of two studies. Study 1 used a university sample to adjust the scoring technique and response options of a 19-item American measure of the propensity for angry driving with acceptable reliability and validity. In Study 2, Factor Analysis confirmed a one-factor solution and resulted in a 15-item scale, the Australian Propensity for Angry Driving Scale (Aus-PADS), with a coefficient alpha of .82 (N=433). The Aus-PADS may be used in future research to broaden the Australian road rage literature and to improve our understanding of the underlying processes associated with road rage in order to prevent the problem. Future research should also confirm the factor structure and generate normative data with a more representative sample.

What aspects of demographic, personality, attitudes and perceptions of law enforcement influence self-reported likelihood of drink driving?

The aim of the current study was to examine the associations between a number of individual factors (demographic factors (age and gender), personality factors, risk-taking propensity, attitudes toward drink driving, and perceived legitimacy of drink driving enforcement) and how they influence the self-reported likelihood of drink driving. The second aim of this study was to examine the potential of attitudes mediating the relationship between risk-taking and self-reported likelihood of drink driving. In total, 293 Queensland drivers volunteered to participate in an online survey that assessed their self-reported likelihood to drink drive in the next month, demographics, traffic-related demographics, personality factors, risk-taking propensity, attitudes toward drink driving and perceived legitimacy of drink driving enforcement. An ordered logistic regression analysis was utilised to evaluate the first aim of the study; at the first step the demographic variables were entered; at step two the personality and risk-taking were entered; at the third step, the attitudes and perceptions of legitimacy variables were entered. Being a younger driver and having a high risk-taking propensity were related to self-reported likelihood of drink driving. However, when the attitudes variable was entered, these individual factors were no longer significant; with attitudes being the most important predictor of self-reported drink driving likelihood. A significant mediation model was found with the second aim of the study, such that attitudes mediated the relationship between risk-taking and self-reported likelihood of drink driving. Considerable effort and resources are utilised by traffic authorities to reducing drink driving on the Australian road network. Notwithstanding these efforts, some participants still had some positive attitudes toward drink driving and reported that they were likely to drink drive in the future. These findings suggest that more work is needed to address attitudes regarding the dangerousness of drink driving.