Highlights We compared two methods of determining crash responsibility among NJ drivers. 50% of drivers had a crash-contributing driver action; 18% were issued a violation. Only 32% of drivers with a driver action were cited for a moving violation. The likelihood of being cited given a driver action varied among driver subgroups. Use of moving violations to determine responsibility may lead to biased estimates.

    Abstract Traditional methods for determining crash responsibility – most commonly moving violation citations – may not accurately characterize at-fault status among crash-involved drivers given that: (1) issuance may vary by factors that are independent of fault (e.g., driver age, gender), and (2) these methods do not capture driver behaviors that are not illegal but still indicative of fault. We examined the statistical implications of using moving violations to determine crash responsibility in young driver crashes by comparing it with a method based on crash-contributing driver actions. We selected all drivers in police-reported passenger-vehicle crashes (2010–2011) that involved a New Jersey driver <21 years old (79,485 drivers<age 21, 61,355 drivers≥age 21). For each driver, crash responsibility was determined from the crash report using two alternative methods: (1) issuance of a moving violation citation; and (2) presence of a driver action (e.g., failure to yield, inattention). Overall, 18% of crash-involved drivers were issued a moving violation while 50% had a driver action. Only 32.2% of drivers with a driver action were cited for a moving violation. Further, the likelihood of being cited given the presence of a driver action was higher among certain driver subgroups—younger drivers, male drivers, and drivers in single-vehicle and more severe crashes. Specifically among young drivers, those driving at night, carrying peer passengers, and having a suspended or no license were more often cited. Conversely, fatally-injured drivers were almost never cited. We also demonstrated that using citation data may lead to statistical bias in the characterization of at-fault drivers and of quasi-induced exposure measures. Studies seeking to accurately determine crash responsibility should thoughtfully consider the potential sources of bias that may result from using legal culpability methods. For many studies, determining driver responsibility via the identification of driver actions may yield more accurate characterizations of at-fault drivers.


    Zugriff

    Zugriff prüfen

    Verfügbarkeit in meiner Bibliothek prüfen

    Bestellung bei Subito €


    Exportieren, teilen und zitieren



    Titel :

    Statistical implications of using moving violations to determine crash responsibility in young driver crashes


    Beteiligte:

    Erschienen in:

    Erscheinungsdatum :

    2013-12-11


    Format / Umfang :

    8 pages




    Medientyp :

    Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)


    Format :

    Elektronische Ressource


    Sprache :

    Englisch





    Driver licensing, motor-vehicle crashes, and moving violations among older adults

    Palumbo, Aimee J. / Pfeiffer, Melissa R. / Metzger, Kristina B. et al. | Elsevier | 2019


    Preventing young driver crashes

    Hall, J. / International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety | British Library Conference Proceedings | 1997


    A statistical approach to estimating driver responsibility in two-car crashes

    Wasielewski, Paul / Evans, Leonard | Elsevier | 1985


    Comparative effects of driver improvement programs on crashes and violations

    Struckman-Johnson, David L. / Lund, Adrian K. / Williams, Allan F. et al. | Elsevier | 1988