Predicting Crashes Using Traffic Offences. A Meta-Analysis that Examines Potential Bias between Self-Report and Archival Data

PLoS One. 2016 Apr 29;11(4):e0153390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153390. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

Background: Traffic offences have been considered an important predictor of crash involvement, and have often been used as a proxy safety variable for crashes. However the association between crashes and offences has never been meta-analysed and the population effect size never established. Research is yet to determine the extent to which this relationship may be spuriously inflated through systematic measurement error, with obvious implications for researchers endeavouring to accurately identify salient factors predictive of crashes.

Methodology and principal findings: Studies yielding a correlation between crashes and traffic offences were collated and a meta-analysis of 144 effects drawn from 99 road safety studies conducted. Potential impact of factors such as age, time period, crash and offence rates, crash severity and data type, sourced from either self-report surveys or archival records, were considered and discussed. After weighting for sample size, an average correlation of r = .18 was observed over the mean time period of 3.2 years. Evidence emerged suggesting the strength of this correlation is decreasing over time. Stronger correlations between crashes and offences were generally found in studies involving younger drivers. Consistent with common method variance effects, a within country analysis found stronger effect sizes in self-reported data even controlling for crash mean.

Significance: The effectiveness of traffic offences as a proxy for crashes may be limited. Inclusion of elements such as independently validated crash and offence histories or accurate measures of exposure to the road would facilitate a better understanding of the factors that influence crash involvement.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Accidents, Traffic / statistics & numerical data*
  • Automobile Driving / statistics & numerical data*
  • Bias
  • Criminals / statistics & numerical data*
  • Data Interpretation, Statistical
  • Humans
  • Safety
  • Self Report

Grants and funding

Support for this project was provided by the Australian Research Council Discovery Grant DP130101443 while Anders af Wåhlberg is supported by a scholarship from the Ax:son Johnson Foundation (Sweden). Please note that Empirica is simply the business entity used by Anders af Wåhlberg and he is the sole employee. Empirica, “the funder” provided support in the form of salaries for authors [AafW].The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.