|

INVESTIGATING THE LEVEL OF RISK IMPOSED BY DIFFERENT DRIVER GROUPS USING DIFFERENT TYPES OF LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES

Author(s): Dabbour, Singh, Young, Dabbour

Slidedeck Presentation:

CARSP Presentation

Abstract:

Background:

Certain types of light-duty vehicles are more likely to be used by certain driver groups. For example, minivan vehicles are more likely to be used by female drivers living in suburban areas, pick-up truck vehicles are more likely to be used by male drivers living in rural or suburban areas, and compact sedan vehicles are more likely to be used by male or female drivers living in urban areas. Furthermore, there is variation among different types of light-duty vehicles in terms of their respective weight. Therefore, it is important to understand if there is a correlation between the type of the light-duty vehicle operated by a driver with certain characteristics, and the level of risk that vehicle imposes on other drivers.

Aims:

This study aims at investigating the correlation between the type of the light-duty vehicle, as well as the characteristics of its driver, and the level of risk imposed on other drivers. The findings of this study will help decision-makers allocate the resources to improve awareness programs and licensing procedures dedicated to driver groups that impose an increased level of risk on other drivers. The findings of this study will also help insurance firms in estimating the insurance premiums that should be paid by different driver groups, which drive certain types of light-duty vehicles, to better reflect the level of risk imposed by those groups on other drivers.

Methods:

The level of risk imposed on drivers is determined by analyzing all two-vehicle collisions that occurred in North Carolina in five years (from 2014 to 2018). By analyzing these records, it was possible to determine the probability that certain light-vehicle drivers would be more likely to be at fault in a two-vehicle collision. The types of light-duty vehicles analyzed include passenger cars, pick-up trucks, mini-vans, and sports-utility (SU) vehicles. Male and female drivers were divided into different groups based on their ages. The age groups included youth (16 – 24 years), younger adults (25 – 44 years), older adults (45 – 64 years), and seniors (more than 65 years). This study also determines the probability that at-fault drivers of certain types of vehicles would cause injuries to themselves or to other drivers. The probabilities were determined by comparing the proportion in each group to the respective proportion in the remaining population using the Z-test at a 0.05 significance level.

Results:

After excluding two-vehicle collisions between two vehicles of the same type (e.g., a passenger car vs. another passenger car), there were 235,480 two-vehicle collisions involving different types of light-duty vehicles. The analysis found that male drivers (less than 65 years) in passenger cars, pick-up trucks, and SU vehicles are more likely to be speeding or driving while impaired. At-fault male and female drivers (of all ages) in pick-up trucks are more likely to cause injuries to other drivers. Male and female senior drivers are more likely to be at fault, but not speeding or impaired driving, without causing injuries to other drivers.

Discussion:

The driver group that imposes the greatest risk to other drivers in two-vehicle collisions is the group of male drivers (ages 25 – 44 years) in pick-up trucks. This group is more likely to be speeding, driving impaired, and to cause injuries to other drivers in two-vehicle collisions. Young male drivers in passenger cars are more likely to be speeding or driving impaired, but they do not impose a significant risk of causing injuries to other drivers. This might be explained by the smaller weight of passenger cars when compared to other types of light-duty vehicles. Male and female senior drivers (in all types of light-duty vehicles) are more likely to be at fault in two-vehicle collisions, which might be explained by their deteriorating sensory and cognitive abilities. However, they are less likely to be speeding or driving impaired. They are also more likely to cause injuries to themselves and less likely to cause injuries to other drivers. At-fault female drivers, in general, were found to be more likely to cause injuries to themselves and less likely to cause injuries to other drivers. This might be explained by the smaller body structure of female drivers when compared to their male counterparts, which makes them more susceptible to injuries in traffic collisions.

Conclusions:

Policymakers can use the findings of this study to allocate more resources to improve awareness programs and licensing procedures dedicated to driver groups that impose the greatest risk to other drivers. Insurance firms may also use the findings of this study to provide more realistic and justified estimates of the insurance premiums that should be paid by different driver groups, based on the level of risk they impose on other drivers.