SummaryInAustralia, young drivers aged 17–24 years, and especially males, have thehighest risk of being involved in a deadly crash. Investigate of young drivers’beliefs allows for a greater understanding of their relationship in riskybehaviors, for example, a speeding, beliefs are related to intentions, theantecedent to behavior. The theory of planned behavior (TPB) was used toconceptualize beliefs using a scenario-based survey distributed to licenseddrivers (N = 398). The survey measured individual’s beliefs and intentions tospeed in a specific situation. Consistent with a TPB-based approach, thebeliefs of those with low intentions to speed were compared with the beliefs ofthose with high intentions with such evaluations conducted separately for menand women. Overall, significant differences in the beliefs held by low and highintenders and for both women and men were found.
Specifically, for women, itwas found that high intenders were significantly more likely to identifyadvantages of speeding, less likely to identify disadvantages, and more likelyto be encouraged to speed on aware and improperly signed roads than women lowintenders. Women, however, did not differ in their opinions of support fromfriends, with all women reporting some level of disapproval from most friendsand all women reporting approval to speed from their male friends. The resultsfor men shown that high intenders were significantly more likely to speed onaware and improperly signed roads as well as having greater opinions of supportfrom all friends, except those friends with whom they worked. Low and highintending men did not differ in their opinions of the advantages anddisadvantages of speeding, with the exception of feelings of excitement wherebyhigh intenders reported speeding to be more exciting than low intenders. Thefindings are discussed in terms of how they may directly inform the content ofmass media and public education campaigns aimed at encouraging young drivers toslow down. Literaturereview The Kingdomranked second in the Arab world after Libya and ranked 23rd in the world interms of increasing road death rates by 27.4 per cent in the WorldHealth Organization’s 2015 report.6 As an average for 17 Saudi MiddleEastern occupants’ dies on the country’s streets each day, a report card Towardthe Kingdom’s general directorate of movement needs to be uncovered.
This newsgoes following the planet wellbeing association discovered Saudi Arabia on needthe world’s most elevated amount from maintaining deaths from way accidents,which Right away make up the country’s vital reason for death for grown-up guysage-old 16 to 36. 4 Trafficaccidents in Riyadh in 2015 was 138974 persons (33.78%) 5 In this study found Road traffic injuries are the mostcause of loss of disability-adjusted life years for males and females of allages in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We surveyed 5,235 Saudi men aged 15 yearsor older. Results among Saudi males, 71.
7% reported having had a driver’slicense, but more than 43% of unlicensed males drove a vehicle. This hazarddecreased among the more educated, current smokers, and those who arephysically active.?Up to 94.9% and 98.5% of respondents reported not wearing a seat belt inthe front, and the back-passenger seats, respectively. This study calls foraggressive monitoring and enforcement of traffic laws.
1 in this study theyobserve drivers in Riyadh. However, instead of improving safety, drivingthrough roundabouts in Riyadh can be a risky experience as many drivers do notfollow regulations. Unfortunately, no official statistics exist on accidents orviolations at roundabouts and no studies have been done to measure thisproblem. Results revealed that the percentage of drivers rupturing at least onetraffic regulation is approximately 90% of all drivers driving through these rotors,with leaving without flashing and entering the rotors without giving way is themost frequent violation types. Survey results from 384 respondents showed thatthere is a lack of information among most drivers on roundabout drivingregulations and that driver training and licensing process does not includeenough information related to this matter. Finally, practical suggestions asfor how to tackle this issue in terms of education, training and policing aregiven. 2 Drivers who are young, female, those with lower levels of educationor lower incomes understand the signs significantly worse than drivers who areolder, male, with higher levels of education or higher incomes. 3Intervention/program proposalpurpose of this program to educatepeople about dangers of speed driving and prevent injuries during the driving.
Target populations are all young males and females age 17-24 years drive a carin Saudi Arabia (Riyadh) similar to original program, I chose this population theyare used to speed and drift. it’s the most cause of mortality among young Saudimen. Driving in Saudi Arabia is exciting for some and frustrating for others.Also, they need entertainment, adventure and excitement by enforce them tofollow role and regulation.
Driver Intervention Program The program is session based byexperts in this field. The session takes from 1-2 hours and is usually held 2days per week for one month. People will be included in these sessions who werecaught by the police for high speed. The participants who drove at high speedare punished by taken his/her license and 3000 riyals penalty. He can’t renewhis license car unless he attended program.1- Who must attend the Program? Drivers aged 17-24 years who havebroken the conditions of their Saudi Arabia Riyadh Learner’s ProvisionalLicense and has been subsequently disqualified from driving. The conditionsstate that drivers must not: exceeding the speed limit by more than 20 km/h ordrive without License on the vehicle. Moreover, drivers must carry theirlicense while driving.
A maximum speedlimit of Depend on the street o provisional drivers. Even if a driversuccessfully appeals against their punishment of license disqualification, theymust still attend the program. 2- Program plan The program involves interactivesmall group discussions led by two organizers. These have been recruited from awide variety of fields and are not necessarily road safety specialists. Theyinclude people with a permanent disability as a result of a crash, others withan interest in road safety, and police officers. The maximum number ofoffending drivers attending each session is restricted to 12.
During themajority of the session, the group is divided into two smaller groups so thateach organizer has no more than 6 participants in a group. Rather than havingauthority figures lecture young drivers on road safety, the strategy behindthis program is for young drivers to find their own need for attitudinal orbehavioral changes and draw their own conclusions as to how they might change.It is believed that the process of placing young driver decisions underpersonal control will make them more motivated for attitudinal or behavioralchange. This strategy is also intended to enhance the young driverself-efficacy, that is, to perceive they have the opportunity and resources toperform the behavior. This perception is thought to facilitate behavioralchange.
In order to achieve these intended outcomes, the organizer’s role is toencourage participants to express their views and discuss road safety issues ina ‘friendly, supportive and non-threatening environment’. Organizers aredirected to guide debate on the issues within the structured program but notimpose their own beliefs and values or patronize participants. Participants areencouraged to conceptualize issues through their own experiences and frame ofreference so that they question their own driving behavior and consider therisk and consequences of crashing. To encourage open discussion and debate,participants are reassured that all conversations within the program remainconfidential to the group present. 3- Program content The main aim of this program is toreduce young driver crash involvement by challenging young drivers to thinkabout the potential risk and consequences of crashes and question their ownsense of strength. I chose the Social Cognitive Theory for thisprogram.1.
Reciprocaldeterminism: Encourage participants to expresstheir views and discuss road safety issues in a ‘friendly, supportive andnon-threatening environment’. Organizers are directed to guide debate on theissues within the structured program but not impose their own beliefs andvalues or support participants. 2. Self-efficacy: Demonstrate that the issues explored including thesituation of speeding in which the behaviour is perceived to be safe and,instead, it is dangerous; the influence of peers; and the potential strategiesto avoid engaging in that behaviour3. Expectations:Crash Damages Drivers must be aware about the crash consequences and drivecarefully. They have to think about their family and personal loss as well.4. Observationallearning: role model as a famouscharismatic character has the same passion for speed and youth look up to himas a person with talent and value.
5. Incentive Motivation: As kind of motivation and support, we may embrace thosepeople who have these type of passion, drive talent and move their attention topractice it. Then to improve their skills in a safe and equipped place as Reem& Dirab Racetrack. I believe if we take it as a serious business and investin those talents, one day we may come out with a number of champions rallydrivers.
6. Self-regulation: Prior to the initiation of the Driver InterventionProgram session, participants are asked to rate their skill as a driver. In thefinal section of the program, the results from the self-assessment of drivingability are discussed, while reinforcing that young drivers are not secure tocrash involvement. The strategy for this program isnot to lecture young drivers but to encourage them to voluntarily change theirattitudes or behaviors. “It is not the role of the organizer to describe rightfrom wrong or appropriate from inappropriate. Likewise, issues relatingdirectly to road safety initiatives and programs should be treated in a neutralmanner. Remember, the aim of the program is to encourage young drivers to confrontthe potential reality and consequences of the crash and to have them questiontheir own risk-taking and sense of strength.
” Evaluate the program:I follow the participants for oneyear with those responsible for violations (Saher system) if he committed morethan one violation in a year that is punishable by a financial fine, but if hedoesn’t commit an offense he will be rewarded.