Vigilant care aims at reducing adolescent risk behaviors while matching parental involvement to the level of alarm signs. This study examined the effect of parent training in vigilant care and technological feedback on driving risk of novice male drivers. A sample of 217 Israeli families was divided into four conditions: a) no-feedback, b) individual feedback, c) family feedback, and d) family feedback plus parent training in vigilant care. Feedback and risk assessment were conducted through in-vehicle data recorders. A significant difference was found in favor of the vigilant care group compared to the no feedback group. When only the drivers in the high risk percentiles were considered, the vigilant care group was found superior to the family feedback group. The findings suggest that parental training in vigilant care may help reduce driving risk.

This study focuses on investigating the driving behavior of young novice male drivers during the first year of driving (three months of accompanied driving and the following nine months of solo driving). The study's objective is to examine the potential of various feedback forms on driving to affect young drivers' behavior and to mitigate the transition from accompanied to solo driving. The study examines also the utility of providing parents with guidance on how to exercise vigilant care regarding their teens' driving. Driving behavior was evaluated using data collected by In-Vehicle Data Recorders (IVDR), which document events of extreme g-forces measured in the vehicles. IVDR systems were installed in 242 cars of the families of young male drivers, however, only 217 families of young drivers aged 17-22 (M = 17.5; SD = 0.8) completed the one year period. The families were randomly allocated into 4 groups: (1) Family feedback: In which all the members of the family were exposed to feedback on their own driving and on that of the other family members; (2) Parental training: in which in addition to the family feedback, parents received personal guidance on ways to enhance vigilant care regarding their sons' driving; (3) Individual feedback: In which family members received feedback only on their own driving behavior (and were not exposed to the data on other family members); (4) Control: Group that received no feedback at all. The feedback was provided to the different groups starting from the solo period, thus, the feedback was not provided during the supervised period. The data collected by the IVDRs was first analyzed using analysis of variance in order to compare the groups with respect to their monthly event rates. Events' rates are defined as the number of events in a trip divided by its duration. This was followed by the development and estimation of random effect negative binomial models that explain the monthly event rates of young drivers and their parents. The study showed that: (1) the Parental training group recorded significantly lower events rates (-29%) compared to the Control group during the solo period; (2) although directed mainly at the novice drivers, the intervention positively affected also the behavior of parents, with both fathers and mothers in the Parental training group improving their driving (by -23% for both fathers and mothers) and mothers improving it also in the Family feedback group (by -30%). Thus, the intervention has broader impact effect beside the targeted population. It can be concluded that providing feedback on driving behavior and parental training in vigilant care significantly improves the driving behavior of young novice male drivers. Future research directions could include applying the intervention to a broader population, with larger diversity with respect to their driving records, culture, and behaviors. The challenge is to reach wide dissemination of IVDR for young drivers accompanied by parents' involvement, and to find the suitable incentives for its sustainability.

Young drivers in Israel, as in other parts of the world, are over-represented in car crashes. In an effort to reduce their crash involvement, a graduated driver licensing (GDL) system has been introduced, which requires all new drivers to be accompanied by an experienced driver for the first three months after obtaining a driving license. This study aims to characterize the driving patterns of young drivers in the accompanied driving period and immediately thereafter. We use information gathered from an in-vehicle data recorder (IVDR), which was installed in the primary vehicles driven by 217 young male drivers. It monitors all trips made with the vehicle and identifies the driver. We study the amount of driving young drivers undertake and the characteristics of the temporal and spatial distributions of these trips. We find substantial differences between the driving patterns characteristics in the two periods. These changes suggest an increase in exposure to risk in the solo period: The young drivers almost double the amount of driving they undertake in the solo period compared to the accompanied period. The amount of driving is highest immediately after the transition to solo driving, and gradually decreases in the weeks that follow. The timing of their driving time also changes as they drive much more during riskier conditions in the late evening and night hours and in more complex driving environments in built areas and on arterial and collector roads during the solo period. These results may be useful in that they can be used to generate realistic guidance to novice drivers and their accompanying drivers on required or suggested amounts of accompanied driving overall and in various situations. They may also suggest ways to refine the constraints imposed on novice drivers within the GDL program, such as on nighttime driving.

One of the prominent issues in contemporary research on young drivers deals with the mechanisms underlying parents' influences on their offspring's driving behavior. The present study combines two sets of data: the first gathered from in-vehicle data recorders tracking the driving of parents and their teenage sons, and the second derived from self-report questionnaires completed by the young drivers. The aim was to evaluate the contribution of parents' driving behavior, participation in a parent-targeted intervention, and the teen drivers' perception of the family climate for road safety, to the driving behavior of young drivers during solo driving. The data was collected over the course of 12 months, beginning with the licensure of the teen driver, and examined a sample of 166 families who were randomly assigned to one of three intervention groups (receiving different forms of feedback) or a control group (with no feedback). Findings indicate that young male drivers' risky driving events rate was positively associated with that of their parents. In addition, any type of intervention led to a lower rate of risky driving events among young drivers compared to the control group. Finally, a higher perception of parents as not committed to safety and lower perceived parental monitoring were related to a higher risky driving events rate among young drivers. The results highlight the need to consider a complex set of antecedents in parents' attitudes and behavior, as well as the family's safety atmosphere, in order to better understand young drivers' risky driving. The practical implications refer to the effective use of the family as a lever in the attempt to promote safety awareness among young drivers.

This study examines the impact of the provision of feedback and guidance about parental monitoring on the safety performance of young male drivers during their first year of driving. The research used an in-vehicle data recorder (IVDR), which documented events of extreme gravitational forces measured in the vehicles that participated in the experiment. Two hundred forty-two families of young male drivers participated in the research. Participants were randomly allocated into four groups: (a) family feedback, no guidance, in which all members of a family were exposed to feedback on their own driving and on that of other family members; (b) family feedback, parental guidance, in which, in addition to the family feedback, parents received personal guidance on ways to enhance their involvement with and monitor their sons' driving; (c) individual feedback, no guidance, in which family members received feedback only on their own driving behavior and not that of other family members; and (d) a control group, which received no feedback at all. IVDRs were installed in family cars for 12 months, starting from the time that the young driver received his driver's license. This period included the initial 3 months of the accompanied driving phase and 9 months of independent driving. The driving exposure of young drivers increased significantly during the solo period compared with that during the accompanied period. The results indicate substantial differences in behavior between young drivers in the control group and the group that received both feedback and guidance on parental involvement.