The growth in the gig economy and a preference for home delivery of meals due to COVID-19 have led to huge growth in the food delivery business internationally and consequent road safety concerns. There is increasing evidence that delivery riding is an occupation with significant road safety risks because work pressures encourage risky behaviours. However, there is little or no research that directly compares delivery and private riders. Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the impact of riding for work by comparing the observable riding behaviours of food delivery and private bicycle riders. Specifically, this investigation used decision trees to analyse the prevalence and patterns of risky riding behaviours of 2274 bicycle food delivery riders (BFDRs) and 1127 private bicycle riders observed in the inner suburbs of Brisbane, Australia. The results showed that helmet use was higher for BFDRs than private riders (99.8% versus 93.4%) but varied by company and for some companies, female BFDRs had lower wearing rates. Male BFDRs on electric bikes were more likely to wear helmets than those on standard bikes (99.7% versus 94.9%). Using a handheld mobile phone or having a mobile phone in a cradle was less common for one company (0.6%) than for the others (3.0%) or among private riders (1.8%). Among riders from the Other Companies, using a handheld mobile phone was more common on standard bikes and differed by time of day. Female BFDRs were more likely to be observed using handheld mobile phones. Overall, 24.0% of riders facing a red traffic or pedestrian signal (“red light”) did not stop. This was more common among riders who rode on the footpath (Australian term for sidewalk), and particularly those who moved between the footpath and the road on electric bikes (49.5%) and among those who rode in the wrong direction in the traffic lane (55.0%). Whether the rider was a BFDR or private rider had little influence on red light running. The results suggest that BFDRs are not more likely to perform the risky behaviours examined, but that other factors such as bicycle type, gender, time of day and infrastructure appear to be more important determinants. However, the differences among companies suggest that organisational factors deserve further investigation.@en

Despite a strong reliance on enforcement approaches to prevent drug driving in Australia, this behaviour is still prevalent. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of problematic drug use (i.e., showing indications of addiction), exposure to roadside drug testing, the use of detection avoidance strategies, and perceptions relating to alternative transport options on drug driving among illicit drug users. A total of 1,541 licensed drivers from the states of Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria completed an online survey. The survey collected demographic and problematic substance use information, as well as items assessing drug driving behaviour. Cannabis was reported to be the most commonly used drug (36.0%); the most common drug of problematic use (27.9%), and the drug most often taken prior to driving (43.5%). Observing police operating Roadside Drug Tests (RDT) was more common among the participants than being tested by RDT (35.7% vs 23%). The results indicated a significant association between being a drug driver and observing or being tested by RDT. The drug drivers were significantly more likely to report using a range of strategies to avoid police detection than the non-drug drivers. Similarly, the drug drivers reported that it was more difficult for them to use various alternative transport options than the non-drug drivers. Decision tree analyses found that significant predictors of self-reported drug driving were problematic drug use, holding a provisional or probationary licence, earning a low- or middle-income, and using detection avoidance strategies like remaining watchful for police vehicles and taking back streets. The findings of this study suggest that ongoing improvements to drug driving enforcement will need to be complemented by health-based approaches designed to reduce drug abuse and dependence, and improvements to public transport, in order to achieve a sustainable reduction in drug driving.@en

Fully automated vehicles (FAVs) have the potential to improve road safety and reduce traffic congestion and emissions. Most studies of acceptance of FAVs have focused on motor vehicle users, largely ignoring other road users, such as cyclists. This study investigates the factors that influence cyclists’ receptivity towards sharing roads with FAVs and their behavioural intentions in interactions with FAVs. The online survey collected information on participant demographics (e.g. age, gender, crash experience), self-reported on-road cycling behaviours (e.g. violations, errors, positive behaviours) and their receptivity towards sharing roads with FAVs (e.g. attitude, social norms, trust). Three typical cyclist-vehicle interaction scenarios were presented to test the cyclists’ intention to engage in self-protective behaviours (e.g. giving a hand signal, giving way or moving over) during the interaction with a FAV. Three hundred and fourteen Australian adults (106 females vs 208 males) who had ridden a bicycle at least once in the past year completed the survey. The results show that older cyclists and male cyclists had a lower receptivity towards sharing roads with FAVs than younger cyclists and female cyclists, respectively. Cyclists who reported being involved in a bicycle crash in the last two years and those who reported committing more errors on roads were more willing to share roads with FAVs. Cyclists who had a higher propensity to risky behaviours and positive behaviours were less likely to take intended self-protective behaviours during interaction with FAVs. Findings of the study provide some insights from the cyclist's perspective to facilitate the development and implementation of automated vehicles.@en

The study applied the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to explore motorcycle riders’ underlying behavioural, normative, and control beliefs towards Advanced Rider Assistance Systems (ARAS). Each belief was explored in terms of three categories of technologies, (i) advanced technologies that help riders manage riding according to situations and conditions, (ii) advanced technologies that help riders to stop, and (iii) advanced technologies that help riders to corner. Eight focus groups were conducted with 39 motorcycle riders (Mage = 44.54 years, 27 males) who resided in Australia. First, participants completed a short online questionnaire which asked demographic information (e.g., age, gender, riding experience), before taking part in a 50-minute semi-structured online focus group. Participants’ knowledge of ARAS differed depending on the type of technology, with most participants reporting good to excellent knowledge of cruise control and standard anti-lock braking system (ABS) and a poor to fair understanding of selectable riding modes and cornering ABS. For behavioural beliefs, two common advantages reported for all three categories of technologies were safety and that the technologies would benefit new riders or riders with less experience. The three common disadvantages included concerns over riders’ reliance on the technologies, cost, and loss of skill or false sense of security. For normative beliefs, participants reported that their loved ones (i.e., partner, family, and friends) would approve of them using these technologies, with participants perceiving that ‘purists’ (i.e., riders who prefer to ride traditional motorcycles) would disapprove. For control beliefs, cost, lack of information on the safety of advanced technologies, and not being able to switch off systems were reported as barriers to use. Lowering insurance premiums, education/test rides, technologies as selectable options, and availability, were all identified as factors that would encourage use of ARAS. By providing information about ARAS, riders will become more informed about ARAS, which may enhance trust and user acceptance. Additionally, ongoing research and development are essential to ensure the evaluation and improvement of ARAS and mitigate any unintended consequences.@en

Drug driving is recognised as a major road safety problem in many countries. In Australia, the primary response to this problem involved the adoption of roadside drug testing (RDT), which was modelled on the policies and practices used to conduct random breath testing (RBT) for alcohol. However, there remain important differences in the way that RDT and RBT are conducted, which might produce differential effects on drug and drink driving behaviour. In addition, various psychosocial factors are known to influence the two behaviours. Thus, there is a need to investigate the relative influence of legal and psychosocial factors on drug driving and explore how they may be similar or different to drink driving. Accordingly, this study utilised Deterrence Theory and Akers' Social Learning Theory, augmented by measures of dependence and a range of psychosocial factors, to examine the factors associated with self-reported drink and drug driving. An online survey was completed by 1394 licensed drivers from the three most populous states in Australia: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. Self-reported drink and drug driving became more likely as level of dependence increased. In relation to legal factors, direct experience of avoiding detection was the strongest predictor of self-reported drink and drug driving. Among the psychosocial factors, a significant positive relationship was found between holding favourable attitudes toward both drink driving and drug driving and self-reported behaviours. The findings suggest that applying legal sanctions in isolation without addressing the psychosocial rewards and punishments for the behaviours is not sufficient to reduce drug or drink driving. Future research should identify countermeasures that integrate deterrence and psychosocial principles in order to reduce these risky driving behaviours.@en

Cyclists are vulnerable road users and face disproportionately high rates of road trauma, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Behaviour of road users is a system outcome, and thus studying cyclist behaviours can identify problems in the whole road transport system and assist in generating long-lasting, cost-effective solutions to promote cyclist safety. This study aims to investigate the similarities and disparities of cycling behaviour among countries with different income levels and cycling prevalence, and the relationships among cyclist demographic characteristics, behaviours and crash involvement. It applies the Cycling Behaviour Questionnaire (CBQ) to measure the behaviour of cyclists in three countries: Australia (high-income, emerging cycling country), China (mid-income, traditional cycling country) and Colombia (low-income, emerging cycling country). A total of 1094 cyclists (Australia 347, China 368, and Colombia 379) with a mean age of 31.8 years completed the online questionnaire. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to examine the factorial structure of the CBQ. The results showed that the three-factor CBQ (i.e., Traffic Violations, Errors and Positive Behaviours) had a stable and uniform factorial structure across all three countries. Cyclists reported more frequent positive behaviours than risky behaviours across all three countries. The Australian cyclists reported more positive behaviours and fewer violations than cyclists from the other countries, which is likely to reflect the road environment, policy and enforcement differences. Male cyclists tended to engage in more risky riding than females and reported more crash involvement. Older cyclists reported less risky riding and less involvement in crashes than younger cyclists. Cyclists who rode more often reported more frequent risky riding. The study helps understand the prevalence of risky/positive cyclist behaviours among countries and provides insights for developing systematic countermeasures to improve cycling environment and cyclist safety.@en

Drug driving is a serious problem worldwide that can increase the risk of road crashes. This systematic review seeks to identify factors associated with drug driving (i.e., driving after consuming drugs other than alcohol) to highlight gaps in existing knowledge and inform the design of more effective countermeasures. A search of the literature was conducted for the period January 1, 2005 to July 31, 2021 using six different databases. The search protocol followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (#CRD42021234616). Studies that met inclusion criteria compared drug drivers with either non-drug drivers, alcohol-only drivers or drug drivers from an earlier time period, to identify factors specifically associated with drug driving, rather than common to all drivers. Two hundred and nineteen publications met the inclusion criteria and were included within the review. Based on the findings, a logic model was developed that presents the factors associated with drug driving. Various sociodemographic, psychosocial and legal factors emerged as the main factors associated with illegal drug driving. At the sociodemographic and psychological levels, drug drivers were more likely to be single, young males who often drive after using cannabis and who score high on sensation-seeking and impulsivity scales. The key social factor found to be associated with drug driving was peer acceptance/disapproval of the behaviour. At the legal level, the review suggested that the effectiveness of current enforcement approaches to drug driving vary among jurisdictions around the world due to differences in the level of perceived certainty of apprehension and the chances of punishment avoidance. Future research into the anticipated and actual rewards for drug driving is needed to inform the development of more effective countermeasures.@en

In-vehicle information systems (IVIS) have increased in popularity and availability in the past five years and are expected to transform the way individuals drive. Therefore, it is important to investigate the potential risks associated with IVIS use, particularly with regards to distracted driving. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate drivers’ engagement with IVIS and related risky driving behaviours. Specifically, the current study explored drivers’ current knowledge and use of IVIS and perceptions of risk, and used the Theory of Planned Behaviour to investigate the psychological factors that influence drivers’ decision-making in relation to its use. A semi-structured interview was conducted with 32 Australian drivers aged 19–70 years who drove vehicles with an IVIS. The results showed that drivers mainly used their IVIS for entertainment (i.e., music) and navigation purposes (i.e. GPS), and lacked comprehensive knowledge of other capabilities. Additionally, drivers do not believe an IVIS is an essential system, and further stated that it would be risky if drivers relied on the IVIS for engagement in driving tasks (e.g., navigation) or non-driving tasks (e.g., mobile phone). Some of the factors that influenced drivers’ decisions to use IVIS were the safety, entertainment, and convenience it offered and the influence of family and friends. Finally, there is evidence that mobile phones are often preferred over IVIS while driving, based on perceptions that IVIS have lower ease of use and usability.@en