Relationship Between Traffic Rule Violations and Socio-Economic Structure of Young Drivers in Turkey: Aydın and Malatya Examples

Abstract

Studies based on socio-economic data shows that, young drivers have more tendencies to traffic rule violations and play significant role on traffic accidents caused by sensation seeking and lack of experience. For this reasons Turkey, which is a country with large youth bulge, must be subjected to studies on young driver behaviors.Main objective of this study is to determine obedience of young drivers (18-29 ages) to traffic rules and to analyze relationship of traffic rule violations with variables such as socio-economic structure and driving experience etc. In this study, four main traffic rules indicating driver tendencies and also significant in traffic accidents are analyzed, which are red light violation, seatbelt violation, speed limit violation and drink driving. To analyze relationship of traffic rule violations and driving behaviors in detail, face to face survey data is used. Surveys which consist of personal information and traffic rule violation sections are conducted in central districts of two cities of Turkey with similar size but different cultural structure, Aydin and Malatya In Aydin 417 and in Malatya 400 Survey data of 18-29 age-old drivers with driving licence and at least one year driving experience, used in this study. Relationship between socio-economic variables, driving behavior variables and traffic rule violation tendency is analyzed using binary logit statistical models. As a result socio-economic, demographic and driving behavior variables of young drivers which are effective in traffic rule violations are determined.

Keywords

• Young drivers, Traffic rule violations, Driving behavior.

Genç Sürücülerin Trafik Kural İhlalleri ve Sosyo-Ekonomik Yapıları Arasındaki İlişkiler: Aydın ve Malatya Örnekleri

Öz

Sosyo-ekonomik verilere dayanarak yapılan çalışmalara göre gençlerin trafik kural ihlallerine daha eğilimli olduğu ve tüm dünyada genç sürücülerin, özellikle heyecan arama ve tecrübesizlik nedeniyle, trafik kazalarında büyük rol oynadığı bilinmektedir, bu nedenle genç nüfusun yoğun olduğu ülkemizde genç sürücü davranışları incelenmelidir.Bu çalışmanın ana hedefi; genç sürücülerin (18-29 yaş) trafik kurallarına ne kadar uyduklarını belirlemek ve genç sürücülerin sosyo-ekonomik yapıları, sürüş tecrübeleri gibi değişkenlerle trafik ihlalleri arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığını açıklamaya çalışmaktır.Çalışmada sürücü eğilimlerinin saptanmasında ve trafik kazalarında belirleyici olan; kırmızı ışıkta geçme, emniyet kemeri takmama, hız sınırını aşma ve alkollü araç kullanma olmak üzere dört ana kural ihlali incelenmiştir. Genç sürücülerin trafik kural ihlalleri ile sürüş davranışları arasındaki ilişkileri detaylı incelemek için yapılan anket çalışması ile toplanan veriler bu çalışmada kullanılmıştır. Kişisel Bilgiler ve Kural İhlalleri grupları altında toplanan sorulardan oluşan anket çalışması Aydın ve Malatya İlleri Merkez İlçelerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. sürücü ehliyetine sahip ve en az bir yıldır aktif olarak araç kullanan 18-29 yaş arası sürücüler hedeflenmiştir. Belirtilen özellikleri sağlayan, farklı eğitim ve gelir düzeylerine sahip, Aydın'da 417, Malatya'da ise toplam 400 genç sürücüye yüz yüze anket tekniği kullanılarak anket yapılmıştır.Sürücülerin sosyo-ekonomik verileri ve sürüş davranışı verileri toplanmış ve bu değişkenler ile kural ihlali yapma eğilimi arasındaki ilişki ikili (binary) logit model kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda genç sürücüler daha yakından tanınmış, gerçekleştirdikleri trafik kural ihlalleri, sürüş davranışları, sosyo-ekonomik ve demografik yapıları arasında ne gibi ilişkiler olduğu ortaya çıkarılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Genç sürücüler, Trafik kural ihlalleri, Sürücü davranışı.

Kaynakça

1. Warner HW, Özkan T, Lajunen T. “Cross-Cultural Differences in Drivers’ Speed Choice”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 41(4), 816-819, 2009.
2. Warner HW, Özkan T, Lajunen T, Tzamalouka G. “Cross- Cultural Comparison of Drivers’ Tendency to Commit Different Aberrant Driving Behaviours”. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(5), 390-399, 2011.
3. Özkan T, Lajunen T, Chliaoutakis JE, Parker D, Summala H. “Cross-Cultural Differences in Driving Behaviours: A Comparison of Six Countries”. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 9(3), 227-242, 2006.
4. Mohammadi G. “Prevalence of Seat Belt and Mobile Phone Use and Road Accident Injuries Amongst College Students in Kerman Iran”. Chinese Journal of Traumatology, 14(3), 165–169, 2011.
5. Horvath C, Lewis I, Watson B. “The Beliefs Which Motivate Young Male and Female Drivers to Speed: A Comparison of Low and High Intenders”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 334–341, 2012.
6. Mİller M, Haustein S. “Peer Influence on Speeding Behaviour among Male drivers Aged 18 and 28”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 64, 92–99, 2014.
7. Karacasu M, Er M. “An Analysis on Distribution of Traffic Faults in Accidents, Based on Driver’s Age and Gender: Eskisehir Case”. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 776-785, 2011.
8. Ryan GA, Legge M, Rosman D. “Age Related Changes in Drivers' Crash Risk and Crash Type”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30(3), 379-387, 1998.

9. McGwin G, Brown DB. “Characteristics of Traffic Crashes Among Young, Middle-Aged, and Older Drivers”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 31(3), 181–198, 1999.
10. Abdel-Aty MA, Hassan HM, Siddiqui C. “Young Drivers Safety Study Final Report”. Florida Department of Transportation District, 5, 2012.
11. Preusser DF, Williams AF, Lund AK. “Characteristics of Belted and Unbelted Drivers”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 23(6), 475-482, 1991.
12. Miller TR, Spiner RS, Lestine DC. “Who is Driving When Unrestrained Children and Teenagers are Hurt?”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30(6), 839-849, 1998.
13. Clark MJ. “Seatbelt Use on a University Campus”. Journal of American College Health, 41(4), 169-171, 1993.
14. Foss RD, Beirness DJ, Spattler K. “Seat Belt Use Among Drinking Drivers in Minnesota”. American Journal of Public Health, 84(1), 1732-1737, 1994.
15. Robertson LS. “Reducing Death on the Road: The Effects of Minimum Safety Standards, Publicised Crash Tests, Seat Belts, and Alcohol”. American Journal of Public Health, 86(1), 31-34, 1996.
16. Preusser DF, Lund AK, Williams AF, Blomberg AD. “Belt Use by High Risk Drivers Before and After New York's Seat Belt Use Law”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 20(4), 245-250, 1998.
17. Mortimer RG. “Extra Enforcement and the Use of Seat Belt by Drivers in Illinois”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 24(6), 661-666, 1992.
18. Koushki PA, Ali SY, Al-Saleh O. “Road Traffic Violations and Seat Belt Use in Kuwait: Study of Driver Behavior in Motion”. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1640, 17-22, 1998.
19. Lajunen T, Özkan T. “Kültür, Güvenlik Kültürü, Türkiye ve Avrupa'da Trafik Güvenliği”. TÜBİTAK, SBB-3023, 2004.
20. Forsyth E, Maycock G, Sexton B. “Cohort Study of Learner and Novice Drivers, Part 3: Accidents, Offences and Driving Experience in the First Three Years of Driving”. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, England, TRL Report 111, 1995.
21. Corbett C. Car Crime (Crime and Society Series). 1st ed. New York, USA, Willan Publishing, 2003.
22. Yang CYD, Najm WG. “Examining Driver Behavior Using Data Gathered From Red Light Photo Enforcement Cameras”. Journal of Safety Research, 38(3), 311-321, 2007.
23. Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü, Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. “Trafik Kaza İstatistikleri Karayolu”. Ankara, Türkiye, 4347, 2013.
24. United States Department of Health and Human Services. “The Surgeon General’s Workshop on Drink Driving”. Washington, D.C., USA, 1988.
25. Horwood LJ, Fergusson DM. “Drink Driving and Traffic Accidents in Young People”. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 32(6), 805-814, 2000.
26. Hallett C, Lambert A, Regan MA. “Text Messaging Amongst New Zealand Drivers: Prevalence and Risk Perception”. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 15(3), 261-271, 2012.