ABSTRACT A STUDY OF CERTAIN FACTORS RELATED TO THE PATTERNS OF DRIVING, ACCIDENT AND VIOLATION RATES OF A36, 17 AND 18 YEAR-OLD LICENSED DRIVERS FROM TWO LANSING CATHOLIC SCHOOLS By Sister Marie Therese Emery, O.P. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the relationship between certain facets of driving expo- sure, (i.e., total driving per week, total hours of night driving per week, mileage and parental control) with fac— tors of age, sex and car—ownership. The following sub- problems were considered: (1) to determine if a rela- tionship existed between accident and violation rates with the factors of age, sex and car-ownership; (2) to determine if a relationship existed between the combined effect of two or more of the exposure variables with age, sex and car-ownership. Four hundred thirty—six high school students from two Lansing, Catholic high schools served as subjects. The subjects were 17 and 18 year-old males and females holding a valid Michigan drivers license. Sister Marie Therese Emery, O.P. A questionnaire was used to obtain the information concerning the variables under consideration in the study. A personal interview with each subject was used to obtain a more accurate account as to the geographic location and frequency of the driving exposure. A driving record of each subject was obtained from the Department of State, Lansing, Michigan. The data collected were analyzed statistically. Simple correlations between the driving factors of expo— sure (i.e. driving hours per week, night driving hours per week, total miles per week, accidents, violations and par- ental control) were made with the variables (i.e. age, sex and car—ownership). A significant 5 indicated the presence of significant correlations. A multiple regres- sion was computed on various combination of variables to determine where significant correlations of variables existed with age, sex and car-ownership. In all cases of statistical analysis the .05 level of significance was selected as the criterion for rejecting the null hypothe- sis. The information gleaned from the questionnaire and personal interview concerning the location and freQuency of each subjects driving was analyzed descriptively. Each subjects pattern of driving as represented by loca- tion and frequency was recorded and placed on a spot map Sister Marie Therese Emery, O.P. to determine if a significant relationship existed between these factors and other variables being considered. Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions Were made: 1. Total driving hours per week, night driving per week, and total mileage showed strong correlation with age. Eighteen year-olds drove more hours per week, more hours per night and more mileage than 17 year—olds. 2. There is a significant negative correlation between sex and violations. Males had more violations. 3. There is a significant correlation between total miles and violations. As mileage increased, violations increased. A. There is a significant correlation between total driving hours per week, night driving per week and total mileage. Total driving hours per week and night driving per week increased as mileage increased. 5. There is a significant correlation between acci- cents and violations. As accidents increased, violations increased. 6. There is a significant negative correlation between accident rate and parental control. As accident rates decreased, parental control became stricter. 7. There is a significant negative correlation between sex and car-ownership. Males owned more cars. Sister Marie Therese Emery, O.P. 8. Total driving time, total miles driven and vio- lations were the major contributors as predictors of attri- butes of sex. Males drove more hours, more at night and more miles than females. 9. Night driving, violations and parental control were the major contributors as predictors of age. Eight- een year-olds drove more miles, had more violations and less parental control than 17 year—olds. lO. Accident rate and parental control are the major contributors as predictors of car-ownership. Seventeen year-olds had more (69) accidents and less parental con- trol than 18 year—olds (56). ll. Exposure as to location and frequency showed that the 17 and 18 year-old drivers in this sampling fre- quented a ten mile radius of Lansing, and had most of their accidents and violations within this area. The spot map reinforced this idea. A STUDY OF CERTAIN FACTORS RELATED TO THE PATTERNS OF DRIVING, ACCIDENT AND VIOLATION RATES OF A36, 17’ AND 18 YEAR-OLD LICENSED DRIVERS FROM Two LANSING CATHOLIC SCHOOLS By Sister Marie Therese Emery, O.P. A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Education 1969 DEDICATION THIS STUDY IS DEDICATED TO BLANCHE F. EMERY MOTHER, TEACHER, AND COUNSELOR ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Sincere appreciation is expressed to Doctor Robert O. Nolan, Chairman of the advisory committee for the encour- agement and guidance which he so generously gave through- out this dissertation. Appreciation is expressed to the other helpful members of the advisory committee, Doctor Charles A. Blackman, Doctor William A. Mann and Mr. Gor- don H. Sheehe for their keen sense of humor, constructive criticisms and friendliness. Appreciation is extended to Mr. Leslie Silvernale whose enthusiasm in traffic safety gave inspiration to this work. Grateful acknowledgement is made to Dr. Mary A. Rice whose educational knowledge and encouragement have been invaluable sources Of help. Sincere thanks is expressed to Sister Sharon Cook whose friendship gave understanding and empathy. Gratitude is expressed to Mr. Steve Dobuszynski who gave of his time and talents in proof—reading this work. A special note of thanks is expressed to Brother Athanatius and the students from John A. Gabriel and John w. O'Rafferty High Schools for their willingness to assist in this investigation. iii A debt of gratitude is extended to Sister John William, O.P. who helped with the initial typing of this study. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . iii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . vii LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . viii LIST OF GRAPHS . . . . . . . . . . . xi LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . xi I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . l The Problem A Importance of the study A Sub- -problem . . 5 Delimitations 7 Definitions of Terms Used 8 Exposure . . . 8 Night driving 8 Parental control. 8 Basic Assumptions 9 Chapter Overview . . 9 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 11 III. PROCEDURES . . 19 Subjects . . 21 Procedures for Collecting Data. . 22 Questionnaire. . . . . . . . 22 Interview . 23 Driving records . . . . . 23 Methods of Collecting Data . . . . 2“ Methods of Analysis of Data. 25 IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . 27 Introduction. . 27 Preparation Of Data fOr Statistical Analysis 28 Results of Statistical Analysis. Simple Correlation . . . . Multiple Correlations Results of Descriptive Analysis of Data. . . . . . Summary of Findings. V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BIBLIOGRAP APPENDICES Summary of the Study Discussion of the Findings Simple correlations . Multiple correlations . Conclusions Recommendations Implication of the Study HY vi 28 29 145 61 Table 10. 11. LIST OF TABLES Simple Correlations Between Driving Factors with Age, Sex and Car-ownership . . . . . . . . . Simple Correlations Between Each Predictor Variable. . . . Simple Correlations Between the Specific Variables of Sex, Age and Car-Ownership. Multiple Regression of the Predictor Combinations of Variables with Sex . . Multiple Regression of Combinations of Predictor Variables with Age . . .. Multiple Regression of Combinations of of Predictor Variables with Car-ownership . . . . . . . . Correlation of Multiple Factors of Driving with Sex . . . . . . Correlation of Multiple Predictor Variables with Age. . . . . . . . Correlation of Multiple Driving Factors with Car-ownership. . . . . . . . Total Night Driving Hours per Week . . Accident and Violation Rates vii Page 30 32 33 35 36 37 38 “3 AA 50 53 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1. Location and Frequency of Driving Exposure for a Group of 17 and 18 Year-Old Drivers . . . . . . . . A7 viii Graph 10. ll. 12. LIST OF GRAPHS Frequency of Exposure by Location and Violation Rates. . . . . . Location and Number of Violations and Accident Rates for 17 and 18 Year-old Licensed Drivers . . . . . . . . . Average Hours of Night Driving Per Week for 17 and 18 Year-Old Drivers . . . . . . Hours of Day and Night Driving for 17 and 18 Year-Old Male and Female Licensed Drivers . . . . . . . . . Accident and Violation Rates for 17 and 18 Year-Old Licensed Drivers . . . The Relationship of Parental Control with Average Miles Driven Per Week for 17 Year-old Males . . . . . . . The Relationship of Parental Control with Average Miles Driven Per Week for the 17 Year-old Females . . . . . . . . The Relationship of Violations to Sex and Car Ownership of 17 and 18 Year-old Drivers Accidents Compared to Parental Control for 17 and 18 Year-Old Licensed Drivers . Percentage of Accidents for Car Owners and Non-Car Owners with Various Degrees Of Parental Control . . . . . . . . . Number of Car Owners and Non-Car Owners with no Accidents and Various Levels Of Parental Control . . . . . . . . Percentage of Accident and Violation Rates of 17 and 18 Year-old Male and Female Licensed Drivers and Car Owners Related to the Varied Degrees of Parental Control ix Page “9 51 52 5A 55 57 58 59 60 62 63 6A Graph 13. IA. 15. Percentage Of Accidents and Violations of 17 Year-old Licensed Drivers, Non-Car Owners Related to the Varied Degrees of Parental Controls . . . . . . Percentage Of Accidents and Violations of 18 Year-Old Licensed Drivers, Car Owners Related to the Variers, Car Owners Related to the Varied Degrees of Parental Control Percentage of Accident and Violation Rates of 18 Year-old Licensed Drivers, Non-Car Owners Related to the Varied Degrees of Parental Control . . . . . . . . Page 65 66 67 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix , Page A. Driver Education - Questionnaire . . . 88 B. Interview Sheet . . . . . . . . . 91 C. Request for Michigan Driver Record Information . . . . . . . . . . 95 D. Summary of Data . . . . . . . . . 98 xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION According to information compiled by the Michigan Department of State Police for the year 1968, there were 305,495 reported accidents of which 100,237 were personal injury and 203,2“3 were property damage accidents. This record included 2,015 fatal accidents. Of these fatal accidents, 16.3% of these drivers were under twenty years of age.1 Records indicate that 12,20A accidents occured in Ingham County: 35 were listed as fatal; 3,386 were 2 Ingham personal injuries and 8,78A were property damage. County was one of the A9 Counties of the State of Michigan that showed a decided increase in accident rates in the past year, and of 83 Counties in Michigan, Ingham is listed among the top sixteen in regard to accident rates.3 There is much available data establishing young drivers under 25 years of age as an extraordinary high-risk 1Department of State Police, Michigan Traffic Acci- dent Facts 1968 (Michigan: The Department of State Police, pp. 5-38. 21bid., p. 38. 3Ibid., p. 11. group.” Pelz and Schuman5 stated that some groups of drivers are distinctly more dangerous than others. They conclude that young males, ages 15 to 25, constitute a high-risk group with an accident—death rate that far exceeds any other age group. Klein6, reports in a survey of drivers, that the proportion of violations, fatalities, and reportable accidents involving licensed teen-agers was significantly higher than any other group Of drivers. How- ever, he stated that a true picture of accident and viola- tion rates could not be acquired without a complete study of the young drivers' types and amount of exposure to risk. Gesteland7, in an article on teen-age driving, indicated that the teen—age boy did most Of his driving at night. He pointed out that the traffic death rate for teen—age males was about two and two-thirds higher at night. Geste- land infers that the young driver is a high risk because he needs to be trained how to OOpe with night driving situations. ”Ibid., p. 7. 5Donald C. Pelz and Stanley H. Schuman, "Dangerous Young Drivers," The Society of Automotive Engineers Jour- nal, LXXVI (October, 1968), pp. 61-68. 6David Klein, "A Reappraisal of the Violation and Accident Data on Teen—age Drivers," Traffic Quarterly, XX (October, 1966), pp. 502-510. ' 7Norman Gesteland, "Let's Teach the Teen—ager How to Drive When They Drive the Most Often at Night," Traffic Digest, XV (November, 1967), pp. 3-7. National and local statistics support the opinion of authorities in the field of traffic safety who label the young driver a dangerous driver. Since the young driver of today comprises an impor- tant part of the driving population, it was the purpose of this study to investigate a segment Of the pOpulation Of young drivers in Lansing in order to Observe some of their driving patterns. It has been a rewarding experience to work with, and teach young drivers. This study was selected to get a sharper focus Of the young drivers' problems and their pat— tern Of driving. An in-depth study Of A36, 17 and 18 year-Old li- censed drivers from two Lansing, Catholic high schools was selected. These subjects came from middle-class socio-economic groups. The geographic location of their homes would be classified as urban. This sampling was taken from a selected group and does not claim to be a sampling of an average population. Total behind-the-wheel driving experience for the 17 year-Old drivers was one year. Actual experience of the 18 year-Old subjects was approximately two years. In some cases, these subjects used the car for business purposes. However, the majority Of driving was done for recreational purposes. It was noted that the young drivers drove most frequently within a ten mile radius from the center of Lansing: Most of their driving involved travel to and from eating establishments and places of entertainment. With this information at hand, it was possible to study certain exposure factors con— fronting the young driver as he drove more miles and more hours under a variety Of conditions. Exposure factors considered were, total hours driven, total night driv- ing hours, miles driven and degrees of parental control. Accident and violation rates of the subjects were studied, as were factors of exposure recorded to further assist in determining their driving patterns. The Problem Statement of the Problem It was the purpose of this study to determine the relationships between certain facets Of driving exposure, namely: total hours the subject actually drove, total hours of night driving, miles driven, and parental-control, with factors of sex, age and car-ownership of a group of A36, 17 and 18 year—Old licensed drivers from two Catholic high schools in the city of Lansing, Michigan. Importance of the Study To obtain an accurate picture of the 17 and 18 year- old licensed driver, it was necessary to do an in-depth study Of their patterns of driving. Each young driver is a priceless commodity in our society. Each has dignity and worth that should not be measured in monetary values. In order to save the lives and limbs of these young drivers, a closer look at the difficulties they face on the highway must be considered. It is imperative that through research studies, ways and means be found to assist these young drivers in making useful and safe decisions. Hence, the inspiration for this study came from teen-age drivers themselves, as they participated in driver education courses conducted by the author. It was believed that this study would provide a better understanding Of the depth and complexity of the exposure problem. In addition, it was hoped that this study would identify some unique problems in the driving patterns established by 17 and 18 year—Old licensed drivers. Since driving habits may reflect the nature Of a driver education program, a significant contribution of this study would be the assistance it would provide driver education teachers in their search for a more meaningful curriculum. Sub-problem The following sub-problems were considered: 1. To determine if there was a relationship between accident and violation rates and the factors of age, sex, and car-ownership. 2. To determine if there was a relationship where variables such as: total hours driven per week, total night hours of driving per week, mileage, and parental control were combined and compared with such factors as age, sex, and car-ownership. For the purpose of stating the null-hypotheses, the following variables are referred to as predictive variables (i.e.,total hours driven, total night driving hours, vio- lations, accidents and parental control). It was hypothe- sized that: 1. There is rm) relationship ‘between each dependent variable (i.e., age, sex and car-ownership) with the predictive variables. 2. Total hours driven, total night driving, total mileage are not predictors of age. 3. Car-ownership is not related to sex. A. There is no interaction between violations and total miles driven as predictors Of sex. 5. There is no interaction among total night driv- ing hours, violations and parental control as predictors of age. 6. There is no correlation between accident rates and parental control. 7. There is no relationship between total miles driven and the number of violations received. 8. There is no interaction among total hours driven, total night driving hours, violation rates and parental control as predictors Of accident rates. 9. There is no interaction between accident rates and car-ownership when considered in combina- tion with the predictive variables. 10. There is no correlation between car-ownership and parental control. Delimitations Driving exposure as referred to in this study did not consider all factors inclusive in the concept Of expo- sure. This investigation was therefore limited to the following areas Of exposure: total hours driven per week; total miles driven per week; total hours of night driving per week and the locations to which each subject drove and pertinent degrees of parental control. It is recog- nized that factors of driving exposure are extremely com- plex. The major limitation Of this study is that it deals with one small segment of the vast exposure problem. The A36 subjects were taken from two Catholic high schools in the city of Lansing, Michigan. The numbers of each group of students comprising the population were as follows: 18 year—old male car-owners, 50; 18 year-Old male non-car-owners, 50; 18 year-old female car-owners, 26; eighteen year-Old female non-car-owners, 50; 17 year-old Ill—II'IIIIIIIII. III. II‘II'II" male car-owners, 50; 17 year-old male non-car-owners, 50; seventeen year-Old female car-owners, 50; 17 year-Old female non-car-owners, 110. Definition of Terms Used Exposure For the purpose of this study, the term exposure will be applied only to that small segment of the total exposure problem dealt with in this investigation. Expo- sure is in this sense the total hours driven per week by the subject, the total night driving per week, the total miles driven per week, and the locations to which the sub- ject drives. Night-driving Night driving is the amount of driving hours the subject drives after sunset and before sunrise and the locations to which the subject drives. Parental Control Parental control included the permission and re- strictions enforced strictly, moderately, or never by the parent as considered by the subjects. Basic Assumptions For the purpose of this study, it was assumed that: l. The use of the questionnaire was appropriate 8 for the kind of information needed. The questionnaire was designed to reveal information from 17 and 18 year-Old drivers in the following areas: sex, age, car-ownership, parents' occupations, miles driven, night driving, car-usage, restrictions, violations and accidents. 2. The interview technique was used to supplement the questionnaire. The interview further explored in-depth driving patterns that the questionnaire did not cover. A spot map was used in conjunction with the personal inter- view. Specific locations to which the students drove and the number of times these locations were frequented were recorded. Organization of the Chapters Chapter I introduces the nature of the driving prob- lem of a limited number of 17 and 18 year-Old drivers rep- resenting a segment Of the total population of licensed drivers in Lansing, Michigan. Chapter 11 reviews some of the related literature pertinent to this specific study. Chapter III considers the procedures conducive to an in-depth study of the driving performance of the chosen segment of the population of Lansing, Michigan. 10 Chapter IV includes both a statistical and descrip- tive analysis of the data. Chapter V contains the summary, discussion, con- clusions and recommendations of the findings. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A review of the literature revealed that many of the previous studies conducted on the young driver empha- sized attitudinal behavior of this group and attempted to compare its accident rate with the rate for older drivers. Recently, however, there has been an attempt to present a more accurate picture of the young driver by studying the type and amount of driving exposure that he has and comparing this to the types and amount of expo- sure had by the older driver in relation to the accident rates of each. The references selected for this review were concerned with the accident status of the young driver, and with the needs and methods of more accurately delineating his driving exposure. According to Accident Facts, accident rates in twentjw—four states for the year 1968 shows that drivers under the age Of twenty comprise only 9.5% of the driving population, but are involved in 1A.1% Of fatal accidents and 114.9% of all accidents.l lNational Safety Council, Accident Facts, 1968 Edi- tion (Cfldicago: The Council, 1968), p. 8. ll 12 Klein2 felt that such statistics are misleading and have a tendency to relate accident rates directly with age. It is his opinion that such evidence does not stand up under scrutiny. To get a true picture, it is necessary to thoroughly evaluate the problem of exposure. Klein believes that a valid picture of accident and vio- lation rates must be based upon the amount and the types of exposure while taking into account such factors as total mileage, road and traffic conditions, roadside char— acteristics, number of occupants in the car and similar important items. In an earlier study Lauer3 used a round—the-clock sampling technique to distinguish the driving habits of the licensed population with regard to age, sex, speed and other related factors. The investigation covered over a six month period and included some 11,000 subjects of all ages. As a result of the study, Lauer concluded that the driving habits of men and women were quite dif— ferent and that the women represented a slightly better actuarial risk than did the men. His study also indicated 2David Klein, "A Reappraisal of the Violation and Accident Data on Teen-age Drivers." Traffic Quarterly, .XX (October, 1966), pp. 502-510. 3A. R. Lauer, "A Sampling Survey of Drivers on the Iiighway for the Twenty-four Hour Period - Driver Charac- teeristics and Accidents," Highway Research Board Bulletin, LXXIII, 1953, pp. 1A-25. 13 that the teen-age driver was likely to drive during the hours when traffic conditions and weather were the moSt hazardous. Both Klein and Lauer supported the idea that when more accurate means of measuring exposure are Obtained and are used in research, the teen—age driver will be found to have no higher accident and violation rates than any other driver. Pelz and Schuman“ in a study of 288 drivers between the ages Of 16 and 25, found that young males between the ages Of 16 and 25 have a death rate from automobile acci- dents that exceeds any other age group, and that the death rate is lower for females of the same age group. The data in their study indicated that there were some factors operating within this age group that predisposed them to involvement in accidents. They conducted a follow—up study at drive-ins and similar locations through the use Of interviews with the same age group. They saw the picture of the young driver gradually change from the initially inexperienced, emotional, impulsive driver to the cautious driver, with numerous, but minor accidents. AS the young drivers became more self-confident, the acci- ciO-economic status tends to predict the proportion of‘ points for speeding. Intelligence tends to predict prnaportion of violation points for moving violations, otflaer than speeding Violations. In a study of 7,A30 California drivers to deter- Inirie whether prediction of recorded accidents and con- ‘ficrtions could be made on the basis of driver charaCter- ifirtcics, Levonianl2 concluded that from four variables ‘ 11Robert W. Gutshall, "An Exploratory Study of the Irrteerrelations Among Driving Ability, Driving Exposure ark: Socio—Economic Status of Low, Average and High Intel- igence Males." (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), 1<3rligan State University, 1967. 12Edward Levonian, "Prediction of Accidents and Con- V1431Zions," Traffic Safegy Research Review, XI (September, 1967). pp. 75-79. 18 there were significant predictors of the negligent oper- ators. The significant factors were found to be age, sex, driving exposure and marital status. Peck and Coppinl3 did an extensive survey of driver record data to deter- mine if such records were significant for the prediction of accident involvement. Their results showed statis- tically Significant relationships between some convic- tions and accidents. They found variation between the sexes driving patterns to be among the violation vari- ables that were significant. 13Raymond C. Peck and Ronald S. Coppin, "The Pre- diction Of Accident Involvement Using Concurrent Driv- ing Record Data," Traffic Safety Research Review, XI (June, 1967), pp. 3A-A1. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between specific facets of driving exposure, namely: total hours the subject actually drove, total hours of night driving, mileage driven per week, and par— ental control, with factors Of sex, age and car-ownership of a group Of A36, 17 and 18 year-Old licensed drivers from two Catholic high schools in the city of Lansing, Michigan. It was also the purpose of this study to determine the relationship of accident and Violation rates with factors of age, sex and car-ownership. The relationship of the combined effect of the predictor variables (i.e., total hours driven, night driving, mile- age, accidents, violations and parental control), were considered with age, sex and car—ownership. For the purpose of stating the null-hypotheses, the following variables are referred to as predictive vari- ables (i.e., total hours driven, total night driving hours, violations, accidents and parental control). It was hypothesized that: 19 2O 1. There is no relationship between each dependent variable (i.e., age, sex and car-ownership) with the predictive variables. 2. Total hours driven, total night driving, total mileage are not predictors of age. 3. Car—ownership is not related to sex. A. There is no interaction between violations and total miles driven as predictors of sex. 5. There is no interaction among total night driv— ing hours, violations and parental control as predictors of age. 6. There is no correlation between accident rates and parental control. 7. There is no relationship between total miles driven and the number of violations received. 8. There is no interaction among total hours driven, total night driving hours, violation rates and parental control as predictors Of accident rates. 9. There is no interaction between accident rates and car—ownership when considered in combination with the predictive variables. 10. There is no correlation between car-ownership and parental control. The computer was used to find the simple correlations and the multiple regression analysis. The simple correlation 21 between the variables of exposure time in hours per week, night driving hours per week, miles driven per week, acci- dents, violations and parental control were compared with age, sex and car-ownership. To help clarify the infor- mation resulting from the computerization, descriptive analysis was made by use of graphs. Any information that showed significant correlation on the tables Of the com- puterized information was given an asterisk. An expla- nation of each table, figure and graph was noted on the preceeding page. Multiple correlation coefficients were obtained in order to determine the effect of various com- binations of the predictor variables of total hours, total night driving, mileage, violations, accidents and parental control upon sex, age and car—ownership. "The multiple regression was used to determine relationships between specific combinations of predictor variables with sex, age and car-ownership. Subjects Four hundred thirty—six Lansing high school students served as subjects for this study. The sampling included all 17 and 18 year-Old licensed drivers at Monsignor John A. Gabriel, and Monsignor John W. O'Rafferty High Schools. The numbers of each group within the population were as follows: 50, 18 year-old male car—owners; 50, 18 year-Old male non—car-owners; 26, 18 year—Old female car-owners; 50, 18 year-old female non-car-owners; 50, 22 17 year-Old male car-owners; 50, 17 year-old male non—car- owners; 110, 17 year-old female non-car-owners; 50, 17 year-old female car-owners. Procedures for Collecting Data Questionnaire Information concerning the subjects' age, car-ownership, sex, car~usage and parental control was obtained through a questionnaire. Car-usage was categor- ized as being total driving hours per week, night driv- ing hours per week, night driVing hours per week, and mileage covered per week. The questions on the question- naire were categorized according to the degrees of the subjects' use of the car. The degrees used were: always, frequently, sometimes, rarely and never. Accident and viola- tion rates were itemized in detail and the data were recorded. Pertinent questions concerning parental control were asked and the responses qualified as to strict control, moderate control or no control. This included permissions and restrictions by the parents. A pilot study conducted on 175 high school drivers indicated that the questionnaire ‘was a suitable tool for obtaining part of the data required to conduct the investigation. The questionnaire covered such questions as sex, age, car-ownership, par- ents' occupation, miles driven, hours Of day and night oH mo. um cofiumHoALOO unmeamficwfim * I omo.I *Hem.I omo.I wwo.I moa.l A.o.mv Honpcoo Hmpcmnwm .m mNH.I I *mmm.+ *mmm.+ momm.+ us:m.+ A.>v mcofipmaofi> .m *mzm.I *wmm.+ I *mom.+ naa.+ mmH.+ A.apa unwaz .m moa.I *sz.+ mma.+ *aao.+ *mam.+ I A.m.o.ev mgsox wcH>HpQ Hmpoe .H .o.m .> .< .z.e .m.a.z .m.o.e mofinmfipm> pouoapmpm manmfigm> nonofipmpa comm Consumn :ofipmaoppoo OHOEHw m mam»; 33 correlation between sex and car-ownership. More males than females were car-owners.' There was a significant correlation between age and car-ownership. The study revealed that a greater number of 17 year-old drivers owned cars than did the 18 year-Old drivers. There— fore, the null hypothesis was rejected. TABLE 3 Simple correlations between the specific variables of sex, age and car-ownership Specific Variables Sex Age Car—ownership Sex - -.181 -.302 * Age —.181 - -.388 * Car-ownership -.302 * -.388 * - * Significant at .05 level Multiple Correlations Multiple correlation coefficients were obtained in order to determine the effect of various combinations of the predictor variables upon sex, age and car-ownership. The multiple regression revealed that significant cor- relations between specific combinations of predictor variables and sex existed. A multiple regression equa- tion indicated the following significant correlations between groups Of predictor variables with sex. 3A There was a significant negative correlation between violations and sex, when violations were con- sidered in combination with time, night, miles, acci- dents and parental control. The violation rate of males was higher than females when this group of variables was considered. There was a significant negative correlation between total miles driven and sex, when miles were con- sidered in combination with total driving time, night driving, accidents, violations and parental control. Miles alone did not have a significant correla- tion with sex, but in combination with any other driv- ing factor, it was significant. There was a significant correlation between acci- and sex when accidents were considered in combination with total driving time, night driving, miles driven, violations and parental control. Accidents lose a sig- nificant correlation with sex when total driving time and night driving are dropped from consideration. A summary of the multiple correlation coefficients between groups of driving factors with sex, age and car-ownership appears in Tables A, 5, 6, and 7. Hypothesis A.--There is no interaction between vio- lations and total miles driven as predictors of sex. Total driving time, total miles driven and violation rates were the major contributors as predictors Of sex. 35 TABLE A Multiple regression of the predictor combinations of variables with sex Source of Variation due to Regression df SS MS F T, N, M, A, v, P 6 8.A16 1.A03 6.027* Error A29 99.8A1 0.233 Total A35 108.257 N, M, A, V, P 5 8.A03 1.681 7.238* Error A30 99.853 0.232 Total “35 108.257 ' M, A, V, P A 7.735 1.933 8.291* Error A31 100.522 0.233 Total A35 108.257 M, A, V 3 7.085 2.362 10.084* Error A32 101.172 0.23A Total A35 108.257 M, v 2 6.A88 3.2AA l3.803* Error A33 101.768 0.235 Total A35 108.2A7 V 1 5.278 5.278 22.2A2* Error A3A 102.980 0.237 Total A35 108.257 F significant at _ .05 level (F-a statistical 'term that denotes the presence of significant corre- lation or differences which are not due to chance. .Hence, the null hypotheses must be rejected.) - Exposure (Total Driving Time) - Exposure (Night Driving Time) - Accidents - Violations T N M - Total Miles Driven A V P - Parental Control SS — Sum of the Square MS - Mean Squared df - Degrees of Freedom Violations is the best predictor of sex. 36 TABLE 5 Multiple regression of combinations of predictor variables with age Source of Variation due to Regression df SS MS F T, N, M, A, V, P 6 1A.650 2.AA 11.599* Error A29 90.305 .210 Total A35 10A.95A N, M, A, v, 5 1A.612 2.93 13.909“ Error A30 90.3A2 .210 Total A35 10A-95A N, M, v, P A lA.lll 3.528 16.738* Error A31 90.8A2 .211 Total A35 10A.95A N, V, P 3 12.986 A.329 20.333“ Error A32 91.968 .213 Total A35 10A.95A that denoEes the presence differences which are not esis must "U<3>32|-3 SS MS df .05 level (F-a statistical term of significant correlation or due to chance. The null hypoth- F significant at be rejected.) Driving Time) Driving Time) Miles Driven) Exposure (Total Exposure (Night Exposure (Total Accidents Violations Parental Control Sum of the Square Mean Squared Degrees of Freedom Total night driving, violations and parental con- trwal are best predictors of age. 37 TABLE 6 Multiple regression of combination of predictor variables with car—ownership Source Of Variation due to Regression df . SS MS F T, N, M, A, v, P 6 A.577 '0.763 3.A88* >Error A29 93.818 0.219 Total A35 98.30A T3 N, A: V: 5 “-575 .915 “.193* Error A30 93.819 .218 Total A35 98.39A T, N, A, P A A.573 1.1A3 5.252* Error A31 93.821 .217 Total A35 98.39A N, A, P 3 A.537 1.51 6.960* Error A32 93.858 .217 Total A35 98.39A A, P 2 A.506 2.253 10.390“ Error A33 93.889 .217 Total A35 98-39“ " E significant at .05 level (F-a statistical term that denotes the presence of significant correlation or difference which are not due to chance. be rejected at an .05 level of confidence.) eses must "U<>32'-3 U) U) I MS - df - Exposure (Total Driving Time) Exposure (Night Driving Time) Exposure (Total Miles Driven) Accidents ’ Violations Parental Control Sum of the Square Mean Squared Degrees of Freedom The null hypoth- Accidents and parental control are best.predictors of car-ownership . 38 TABLE 7 Correlation of multiple factors of driving with sex Source of Variation Regression Beta due to Regression Coefficients Weights t Time +.001 -.027 -.226* pg Night +.010 +.122 +1.05A 2~4 Miles +.OOO -.175 -2.912* .122 Accidents +.l30 +.059 +1.96A* EHS Violations +.l62 +.059 -A.371* U) Parental Control +.063 +.0A8 +1.739 o8 Night +.008 +.010 +1.69? 3,4 Miles -.001 -.177 -3.00A* E}: Accidents +.129 +.116 +1.960* £3 Violations -.l63 -.257 -A.392* 0) Parental Control +.06A +.085 +1.772 c '33 Miles -.000 -.118 —2.A75* eh» Accidents +.123 +.110 +1.872 553 Violations -.156 -.2A6 -A.221* ,3 Parental Control +.061 +.080 +1.67O : 353 Miles +.000 -.115 -2.A10* g4; Accidents +.10A +.092 +1.595 gr: Violations -.158 -.250 -A.283* a: 8 fig Miles +.000 -.108 -2.270* :Lg Violations .12A -.196 -A.110* &.o a: r of + .19A required for significance at .05 level t of +1.96 required for significance at .05 level * Significant correlations at .05 level Miles and violations are best predictors of sex." 39 Males drove more hours, more miles, and had more vio- lations than females. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected. Hypothesis 5.——There is no interaction among total night driving hours, violations and parental control as predictors Of age. Total driving time, total miles driven, violation rates and parental control were major contributors as predictors of age. As driving hours, night driving and violation rates increased, parental control decreased. Seventeen year-olds drove less and had stricter parental control, and less violations. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis 6.--There is no correlation between accident rates and parental control. There was a sig— nificant negative correlation between accident rates and parental control. As parental control increased, accidents decreased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis 7.--There is no relationship between total miles driven and the number of violation rates :received. There was a significant correlation between ‘total miles and violation rates. As mileage increased, *violations increased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis 8.--There is no interaction among total ruyurs driven, total night driving hours, violation rates A0 and parental control as predictors of accident rates. There was a significant correlation between total hours driven, total night driving hours, violation rates and parental control as predictors of accident rates. As total driving hours increased, total night driving hours increased, violation rates increased, parental control decreased and accidents increased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis 9.--There is no interaction between accident rates and car-ownership when considered in com- bination with the predictor variables. There was a sig- nificant correlation between accident rates and car-ownership when considered in combination with the predictor variables. As accident rates and car-ownership increased, total hours driven, total night driving hours, night driving hours, accident and violation rates increased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. A multiple regression equation indicated the fol- lowing significant correlations between groups Of inde- pendent variables and age: 1. There was a significant correlation between Iniles and age when miles were considered in combination 1M1th total driving time, night driving, accidents, vio- liations and parental control. 2. There was a significant correlation between ‘vixalations and age when violations were considered in A1 combination with total driving time, night driving, miles, accidents and parental control. 3. There was a significant correlation between parental control and age, when parental control was considered in combination with total driving time, night driving, miles, accidents and violations. A. Night driving, miles driven, violations and parental control showed a significant correlation with age when considered in combination with each other and with accident rates. A summary of the multiple cor- relation coefficients between groups of predictor fac- tors and age appears in Table 8. 5. A multiple regression equation indicated sig- nificant correlations between groups of predictor vari- ables and car—ownership. There was a significant nega- tive correlation between parental control and car-ownership when parental control was considered in combination with total driving hours per week, night driving hours per week, miles driven, violations or with any one single variable. 6. There was a significant correlation between accidents and car-ownership when accidents were consid- ered in combination with total driving time, night driv- ing, miles driven, violations or in combination with any one single variable. A summary of the multiple A2 correlation coefficients between groups of predictor variables and car-ownership appears in Table 9. A3 TABLE 8 Correlation of multiple predictor variables with age Regression Beta ' Driving Factors Coefficients Weights t ‘ c Time +.oo2 +.oA7 - .A20 ;)3 Night +.012 +.1A7 +1.31? mls Miles +.000 +.l36 +2.350* ftg Accidents -.097 +.088 -l.55A* THE Violations +.016 +.l71 +3.01A* Parental Control +.120 +.161 +3.A60* a Night +.l60 +.188 +3.312* '33 Miles +.000 +.1Ao +2.A67* 8?; Accidents -.097 -.087 -1.5A3 era Violations +.107 +.172 +3.0A1* ‘06; Parental Control +.ll9 +.159 +3.A38* o 8 Night +.016 +.192 +3.390* 333' Miles +.ooo +.l3l +2.3ll* étfi Violations +.077 +.l23 +2.623* (2 Parental Control +.128 +.172 +3.776* n 5 Night +.o22 +.269 +5.825* 4J¢4 Violations +.850 +.136 +2.913* 3;,” Parental Control +.l32 +.l76 +3.867* 8'3 03 r of + .19A required for a significance at .05 level t of +1.96 required for significance at .05 level Significant correlations at .05 level Total night violations, and parental control are best predictors of age. AA TABLE 9 Correlation of multiple driving factors with car-ownership Regression Beta Driving Factors Coefficients Weights t ' Exposure - Time —.002 -.050 - .A22 pg Exposure — Night +.00A +.060 + .508 'mwi Exposure - Miles +.000 +.005 + .086 .5313 Accidents +.1A9 +.le + .335 ENS Violations +.003 +.005 + .088 a) Parental Control -.093 +.128 -2.61A* 'USZ Exposure - Time -.002. -.0A9 - .AlA 5.9 Exposure - Night +.005 +.061 + .526 8g; Accidents +.l50 +.1A0 +2.359* wri Violations +.003 +.005 + .091 £063 Parental Control +.092 -.l28 -2.619* 8 Exposure - Time -.002 -.0A8 - .A10 '81: Exposure — Night +.005 +.061 + .528 ‘23 Accidents +.153 +.1A3 +2.926* Br?) Parental Control -.092 -.l27 -2.626* :3 Exposure - Night +.001 +.018 + .377 fig Accidents +.151 +.1Al +2.902* E33 Parental Control -.091 +.126 -2.601* orI &.o a) 8 fig Accidents +.15A +.1AA +2.98A* :33 Parental Control —.096 -.l26 -2.618* &.o a) r of 1 .19A required for significance at .05 level t of t a Significant Correlations 1.96 required for significance at .05 level Accidents and parental control are best predictors of car-ownership. A5 Results of Descriptive Analysis of Data The data were analyzed visually to show important relationships between the variables being studied. A personal interview with each of the subjects in the study revealed information concerning the location of their driving exposure and the frequency of this exposure. Specific questions were asked to determine the exact places to which the subjects drove and the estimated number of times per week, or year, each situ- ation occurred for one year's time. The interview was designed to include vacation and weekend driving perfor- mance, as well as routine daily driving. Each subject's pattern of exposure, as represented by location and fre— quency, was recorded and placed on a spot map. Distinc- tive markings were placed in the appropriate spot on a map for each of the eight groups studied, namely: 17 year-old 17 year-old 18 year-old 18 year-old 17 year-old 17 year-Old 18 year-old 18 year-Old (13%thme male male male male car-owners . non-car-owners . car-owners . non-car-owners . female car-owners. female non—car—owners. female car-owners. female non-car—owners. The exposure data were recorded on the spot map in the following categories. 1. Within a locus of 0-10 miles from the center of Lansing. 2. Within a locus Of 11-25 miles from the center of Lansing. 3. Within a locus of 26-50 miles from the center of Lansing. A6 A. Within a locus Of 51-200 miles from the center of Lansing. 5. Beyond a locus of 200 miles from the center Of Lansing. A record of driving habits of the subjects studied, as reflected by the location (places) and frequency (trips) of exposure, is shown in Figure 1. Locations frequented the most were places of enter- tainment and eating. The results Of this descriptive analysis of driving exposure indicated that for all groups the greatest por- tion of their driving exposure was limited to a circle Of 0-10 miles radius from the center of Lansing. .The next most frequented areas of exposure included locations within a circle of 51-200 miles radius from the center of Lansing and locations beyond a 200 mile radius from the center Of Lansing. A study of the information gathered would indicate that most driving by the 17 and 18 year- old drivers, whether alone or with members of a peer group, was confined to the area Of the 10 mile radius on the spot map. Driving beyond that area was largely associated with family weekends or vacation trips. This fact was substantiated by the information obtained from the interviews with the subjects regarding the location of‘their exposure. The accident and violation citations acquired by Ieach of the groups of 17 and 18 year-old drivers studied A7 A5 200 Miles 50 Miles 2 'iles AA Frequency Amount Of Location Trips of Exposure A1 - Radius 0 - 10 Miles 113,912 A2 - Radius 11 - 25 Miles 69 A3 - Radius 26 - 50 Miles 87 AA - Radius 51 -200 Miles 388 A5 - Radius 201 + Miles 563 Figure l.--Locaton and Frequency of Driving Exposure for a group of 17 and 18 Year—old Drivers. A8 were given in the locale Of the greatest driving concen- tration, namely, the 0-10 mile circle from the center of Lansing. The frequency Of exposure in each of the geographic areas was studied and arbitrarily rated in order to show the magnitude of exposure in each area. The violations were studied in regard to the geographic area in which they occurred. They were arbitrarily rated to determine the extent of violation received in each area. Graph 1 depicts this qualitative analysis of the relationship between the location of driving exposure and the number of violations received. The graph shows a heavy concen— tration of violations in the area within a 10 mile cir- cle from the center of Lansing. The graph indicated an excessive frequency Of exposure in that same area. It was discovered through the interview and driving records ‘that the heavy exposure in more distant areas was not accompanied by a correspondingly high violation rate. IExposure in this geographic area was found to be associ- zited with vacation periods. For that reason, greater pnarental supervision was present. A high percentage of tune vacation driving was done with the parents who exerted controls that possibly prevented violations. ET“? number of violations received in the various geo- graphic areas for males and females indicated that other than in the circle of the 10 mile radius from the center U"! A9 ----- Violations Frequency of Exposure \ \ I \ /”/ / \ /’ / \ /’ . ‘\_ __ __ _. -.¢/ 1 4 L L l T I I I l * 0—10 11-25 26-50 51-200 200(Over) Mile Radius Verbal description Violations Freqpency Of Exposure Score none 0 — A l slight 5 - 9 l - 100 2 moderate , 10 - 19 101 - 200 3 heavy 20 - 29 201 - 300 A very heavy 30 - 200 301 - 600 5 excessive over 200 over—1000 *Distances from the center of Ingham County Graph l.-—Frequency of Exposure by Location and Violation Rates. 50 of Lansing the violation rates for both sexes differed negligibly. In the area of greatest exposure the rate of male violations exceeded the rate for female viola- tions. This was in line with the difference in driv- ing exposure for the two groups. The difference in the violation rate in the various areas for males and females is shown in Graph 2. The total violations were seventy-nine, the total accidents were 158 for both groups. Several additional graphic representations of sig- nificant correlations between variables were made to A visually depict the relationships. Table 10 and Graph 3 show the average number Of hours of night driving per week for 17 and 18 year-Old male and female drivers. Table 10 Hours/week night driving Own Non-own . Total Hours Sub Hours Sub Hours Sub .Age Sex at Night Total at Night Total at Night Total M 6 5 ll 17 ll 7 18 F 5 2 7 M 10 8 18 18 18 15 33 F 8 7 15 'Total 29 22 51 and Violation Rates Accident 1104p 110.. 51 Accidents "““ Violations 80« Y I 70. 601. .1 In} 0-10 11-25 26-50 51-200 200(Over) Mile Radius ‘- Graph 2.—-Locatior and Number Of Violations and Accident Rates for 17 and 18 Year-old Licensed Drivers. Average Hours }-' HNUUJI‘U'IQNGDWO C) 52 10 Male \§§ Female ‘1 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\8 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 7 \\\\\\\\\\ l 5 N\\\\ 2 17 year Old 17 year old 18 year old 18 year Old car-owners non-owners car—owners non-owners Graph 3.--Average Hours of Night Driving Per Week for 17 and 18 Year-Old Drivers. 53 Since there was a significant correlation between total driving time, night driving time and total miles driven with car-ownership, it might be concluded that the same correlation is true with each of those vari- ables with age and sex. Table 11 and Graph A show the relationship between day and night driving Of the 17 and 18 year-Old licensed drivers. Graph 5 shows the relationship between the accident and violation rates for allgroups investigated in the study. For all groups studied, with the exception of the 17 year-Old female, non-car-owners, the accident rate was accom- panied by a correspondingly high violation rate. Although the non-car—owners had both a higher accident and violation rate than the car-owners, the difference was not great enough to be statistically significant. Table 11 Accident and Violation - Own Non-own Total .Age Sex A V A V A V M A ll 19 30 23 A1 17 F 17 15 A 13 21 28 M 2 18 19 5A 21 72 18 F 9 l3 5 9 1A 22 Total 32 57 A7 106 79 163 5A 98:30 LmoIcoc madame posse two damask oHo .pz ma gonzo smoIco: damask oHo .h» NH Locso. Loo Loczo Damask oHo .Az LMOICOC sH .ss ma .maopflsa oomEOOHq saoeom can own: UHOILmo> ma ohm ma now wCH>HLQ pzmfiz new has mo mszomII.: cacao Lwczo pmo mane pao oflma UHO came oHo .Lm ma LQCZO Lwo ICOC .Lz NH LOCSO mama pflo .ssIsH onwaz th 09 L I 8 s \\\\\\\ \\\\\\N\X\\\\\\\\\\\ 518 \S\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ n98 I68 *7 I 9 \\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\X\\\\\\\\\\\\\‘ “\\\\\\\V\\\\\\\\\\\\ L82 90$ {In 8 0 n \\\\\\\\\\V\\\\\§\\\\\\\\X\\ I09 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 908 BIZ ‘8 I E \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 388 L l J .mm iuom .ms ivooH e m2 % I on; m I ASH 1.oomxw YI .mmmm :omm we ..msmnu “w . oom A .mmmmw 9s ..omm .msm ivoo: .Tmm: 1.0m: l.ms: ..oom .Tmmm r0mm I.msm .000 Accident and Violation Rates 50 1- A8-~ A6~~ AA1_ A2__ A0.. 38.. 36 -- 3A a- 32 <~ 30 -- ~— 28 A- \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\N 19 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\N19 55 Violations D a Accidents 19 l3 N Z \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\1Y\l 17 17 yr. 17 yr. 18 yr old old Old male, male male . 18 yr. 17 yr. 17 yr. 18 yr. 18 yr. old old Old old old male female female female female car ’ non- non-car car car non- 'car non-car owner car owner owner owner car owner owner owner owner Graph 5.--Accident and Violation Rates for 17 and 18 Year—old Licensed Drivers. 56 Graph 6 indicated the relationship Of parental control with the average miles driven per week for the 17 year-Old males. Graph 7 indicates the same rela- tionship for the 17 year-Old female drivers. Although a greater amount of parental control was evident, it was still not a statistically significant influence in relation to average miles driven per week. Graph 8 shows the relationship of violation rates to sex, and car-ownership of 17 and 18 year-old drivers. In all instances the violation rate of males was greater than that of females. The violation rates for car-owners was slightly higher than non-car-owners for both males 'and females. I Another statistically significant relationship was evident between accident rate and parental control. A visual description of this correlation appears in Graph 9. The accident rates of the subjects with strict parental control was noticeably lower than that of drivers with less parental control. A more complete understanding of the interrelation- ship between the various factors Of exposure and age, sex, and car-ownership was obtained by a study of the multiple correlations. Through an examination of the strength of the statistical correlations the contribu- tion of each factor as a predictor of sex, age and car-ownership was determined. A descriptive analysis Miles Driven 224- 21.. 20" 19-- 18.. 17- 16. 15. 1A1 C] No Control Moderate Control E§ Strict Control 18 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\117 6 5 r“ Q \\\\\\\\\ . —j< I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\,\\ 20 50—100 100—300 over 300 Miles Radius C) I U7 0 Graph 6.—-The Relationship of Parental Control with Average Miles Driven Per Week for 17 Year-old Males. Average Miles Driven ,30—31 29-30 27—28 23-2A 21—22 17—18 15-16 l3-lA 11-12 9—10 7-8 5-6 3-14 UT 03 3, EJNO Parental Control EEMOderate Parental Control Strict Parental Control l6 16 \\X\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 11 11 \\\\ \ \\ \\\ X\\\ \\\\\ 2 5 5 \\\ " \\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\X\\\\\i\\ 2 8 0 - 50 50 - 100 100 - 300 over 300 Graph 7.--The Relationsnip of Parental Control with Average Miles Driven Per Week for the 17 Year-old Females. Number of Violations 51-55 A6-50 Al-A5 36-A0 31-35 26-30 21-25 16—20 11-15 6-10 0— 5 59 4, C] Males «r Females «A- “r O ”- m dL— 1- Ln m H H 4" /" r 2' pjjj ///< -I- 1—1/ ¢ 18 m H \ a 5A I\\\‘ 9 17 year-old 17 year-old 18 year-old 18 year-old car owners Non—car owners car owners Non-car owners Graph 8.--The Relationship of Violations to Sex and Car Ownership of 17 and 18 Year-Old Drivers. Accidents 1004 1901 1807 T l70~ 160dt 1501. lAO.- 130+!- f l20~ 110‘ 100‘ I T I I 901 I 803+ 70+ 60 on» Op empmawm mumsso smo new mno>fipa concooaq madame was was: UHOIpmo» ma cam NH mo mmumm coapmaoa> one pcmcfioo< mo swapcoonomII.mH nacho mucoofiooa. D ooa 8383; N Stucco o2Im 2s: m Hospcoo oudhopoZIm 33:8 sensual” ransom E: Hosucoo Houcmnmm mamczo moo UHOIamm» ma cam NH 9891uaoasd 65 .maonpcoo Hmuconmm mo moohwmo poapm> on» on ooumfiom mhmczo amelcoz .mhm>HAQ oomCOOfiq UHOIumo» NH no mCOfiumHoa> new mucopfioo< mo ommpcoonmmII.mH sumac OH om om o: om om cs om om 00H 86 accepfioo< mu Acheson soaaomIm nsoaosaoa> mu Hospcoo mpmnooozIm . Hososoo ozIH moss: mm Hospcoo Hmucmumm moamamm DE aSeqUaoaaa 66 .HONpcoo Hmpcmsmm mo moonwoo coasm> on» O» oouwaom whocso poo .mso>ann oomcoofiq UHOInmow ma no macapmHoa> ocm mnemofiooe mo owmpcmohomII.:H camps OH om om 0: om om ow om om modppaco< ooa OOI OOI Hososoo ooasomIm meoaooaoa> H OLuCOO m Dwefiwflozlm Hospcou OZIH moans Hosucoo acucoumm cacaom aiequeoaad 67 .Honpcoo Hopconmm mo mmopwoa poapm> on» on nonmaom mnoczo amulcoz .mnm>fipm omwcmoaq oao Imam» ma mo moumm coaumaofi> was pcooaoo< no owwucmonomII.mH sumac m N H 0 , 0 O aiequaoaed mucooaoo< flu Honpcoo OZIm mCOfipmHOfi> m“ ooa Hospcoo mumsmoozIm 83.80 825m; moans m Houucoo Hopconmm mmHmEmm FE 68 Total driving hOurs, night driving time, and total miles driven showed strong correlation with age. Eight- een year-olds drove more hours, more hours at night, and more miles than 17 year-Old drivers. Violations showed a significant negative correla- tion in relationship to males and females. More males V had violations than females. There was a significant correlation in the relationship between total driving hours per week and night driving hours per week. More driving was done at night. There was a significant correlation with a rela- tionship between total driving time and total miles driven. Seventeen and 18 year-Olds drove a significant amount of miles and hours. There was a significant correlation in the rela- tionship between total driving time and violations. Violations increased as driving hours increased. There was a significant correlation in the rela— tionship between night driving and total miles driven. As mileage increased, night driving increased. There was a significant correlation in the rela- tionship between night driving and violations. As night driving increased, violations increased. There was a significant correlation in the rela- tionship between total miles driven and accident rate. As more miles were driven, accident rates increased. 69 There was a significant correlation in the rela- tionship between total miles driven and violation rates. As mileage increased, violation rates increased. There was a significant correlation in the rela- tionship between accident rates and violation rates. As accident rates increased, violation rates increased. There was a significant negative correlation in the relationship between accident rate and parental con— trol. As parental control became stricter, accident rates decreased. There was a significant negative correlation in the relationship between age and car-ownership. The 17 year-olds owned more cars in this sampling. One hundred, l7 year-olds own cars; 76, 18 year-olds own cars. A significant negative correlation in the relation- ship between violations and sex was noted when violations were considered in combination with total driving time, night driving, miles, accidents and parental control. Males did more driving, night driving, drove more miles, and had more violations than females. A significant negative correlation was evident between total miles driven and sex, when total miles was considered in combination with total driving time, night driving, accidents, violations, and parental con- trol. Males did more driving than females. 70 There was a significant correlation between acci- dents and sex, when accidents were considered in combin— ation with total driving time, night driving, miles driven, violations and parental control. Males had more accidents and drove more than females. There was a significant correlation between total miles driven and age, when miles were considered in com— bination with total driving time, night driving, acci- dents, violations and parental control. Eighteen year-olds drove more than 17 year-olds. There was a significant negative correlation between violations and age when violations were considered in com- bination with total driving time, night driving, miles, accidents and parental control. Eighteen year-olds had more violations than 17 year-olds. There was a significant negative correlation between parental control and age, when parental control was con- sidered in combination with total driving time, night driving, miles, accidents and violations. Seventeen year-olds had stricter parental control than 18 year- olds. Night driving, miles driven, violations and par- ental control showed a significant correlation with age, when considered in combination with each other. As par- ental control increased, mileage decreased. 71 A significant negative correlation between parental con- trol and car—ownership was evident when parental control was considered in combination with total driving time, night driving, miles driven, violations or with any one of the variables. Males and females who had stricter parental control owned fewer cars. There was a significant correlation between acci- dents and car—ownership when accidents were considered in combination with total driving time, night driving, miles driven, violations or in combination with any One of the variables. As car-ownership increased, accident rates increased. The findings of the descriptive analysis supported the findings in the statistical analysis. In addition, the descriptive analysis pictured the relationship between the variables and helped to give a clearer picture of the statistical findings. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary This study investigated the relationship between certain factors of driving exposure (i.e., total driv- ing time, night driving time, total mileage, and par- ental control) with sex, age and car-ownership of a group of high school drivers. The relationship of acci- dent and violation rate with age, sex and car-ownership was studied, as well as the combined effects of two or more of the variables.v The relationship of the location of driving exposure to age, sex and car-ownership was considered. Four hundred thirty-six, 17 and 18 year-Old drivers from two, Catholic high schools in the city of Lansing, Michigan served as subjects for the study. Information concerning age, sex, car-ownership, driving exposure factors, accidents and violation rates were Obtained for each subject. The data were analyzed statistically to determine the differences among the factors being tested. Simple correlations between the different variables of driving 72 73 exposure factors and the various variables of age, sex and car-ownership were determined. In those cases where the obtained 3 was greater than the critical value of g at the .05 level of confidence, a significant correla- tion was evident. The same simple correlations were Obtained for the interrelationship of age, sex and car-ownership and for the interrelationship of total hours, night driving, mileage, accidents, violation rates and parental control. Multiple correlations were computed to determine the relationship of groups of driving factors and age, sex and car-ownership, and the relative contribution by the variables toward the predictive efficiency of the group. In those cases where the obtained 3 value was greater than the critical 3 value at the .05 level of confidence a significant correlation was evident. A descriptive analysis of the data was made. The geographic limits of each subject's driving, as well as the frequency of this exposure was noted on a spot map. This information was plotted for all groups of drivers that were studied. Difference in location Of exposure was observed and compared with other variables. The data collected for the statistical analysis in the study was portrayed graphically in several different combin- ations. 7A Discussion of Findings Simple Correlations Simple correlations were computed and indicated significant relationships between three highly related 'factors of the driving exposure patters; namely, sex, age, and car—ownership. Total driving time, total miles driven, and night driving time showed strong correla— tions with age. Both males and females, the 18 year- Old drivers spent a greater amount of time in the car, traveled more miles, and drove more at night than the 17 year-Old drivers. This statistically significant fact was also noted in the graphic representation in Graph 2, page 51. Since there was a high correlation between total driving time, night driving, and total miles driven, the relationship expressed for night driving was also applicable to the other two variables. These 17 and 18 year-olds drove more hours per week, more miles per week, and more night driving per week. The number of violations showed a significant negative correlation with sex. It was indicated that male drivers of both age groups had a higher violation rate. than female drivers. Graph 6, page 57, represents this relationship and indicates a slightly higher rate of violations for male car-owners when compared with female car-owners. Although these differences were evident in the descriptive analysis, they were not 75 statistically significant. The factors of exposure (i.e., total hours, total miles driven, night driving and par— ental control) and car-ownership contributed to the higher violation rate of the male driver. The male drivers drove more miles, had more exposure to the complex driving situ- ations, and owned more cars than females. There was a significant correlation between the total hours, total night driving, total mileage, accident and violation rates with the exception of parental con- trol with age, sex and car—ownership. It was evident from the interrelationships Of the independent variables that total driving time, night driving and total miles driven were all significantly related to each other. As the levels of exposure factors increased, accident and violation rates also increased. It was further evident that there was a strong relationship between accidents and violations. As the accident rate increased, the violation rate increased as well. Graph 3, page 52, shows this relationship which was evident for all groups studied. There was a significant negative correlation between parental control and accidents. There was no significant correlation between parental control and miles driven, night driving, and other factors of expo- sure. It was evident that those subjects in the study who were involved in accidents, regardless of age and sex, were consistent in their evaluation of parental 76 restriction. They stated parental control was lacking when they were involved in accidents. Graph 7, page 58, shows this statistically significant finding. Multiple Correlations Several significant correlations between groups of predictive variables with age, sex and car-ownership, were revealed by the regression analysis. Tables A, 5, 6, 7 and 8, 9, 10, pages 35-50, show the correlation of multiple predictive variables with sex, age and car-ownership. When exposure time, night driving, miles driven and violations were the major contributors to the prediction of sex, all showed significant correlation with the male drivers. Accident rate showed a lesser tendency to be linked with the female driver. Violation rates and accident rates as predictors of sex were evident in all of the multiple regression equations. For all of the equations analyzed (for the correlations between com- binations of independent variables with age, miles driven), violations and parental control were the major contribu- tors tO the prediction Of age. Table 9, page AA, shows the correlation of multiple independent variables with car-ownership. For all the equations analyzed (for the correlation of various combinations of driving factors with car-ownership),accident rates and parental control were the major contributors to the prediction of car-ownership. There was a significant relationship 77 between accident rates and car-ownership, and a signifi- cant relationship between parental control and car-ownership. As accidents increased, car-ownership increased, and as parental control decreased, car-ownership increased. Conclusions Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions were made. For the purpose Of stating the null hypotheses, the following variables are referred to as predictive variables (total hours driven, total night driving hours, violations, accident rates and parental control). It was hypothesized that: 1. There is no relationship between each dependent variable (i.e., age, sex and car-ownership) with the predictive variables. Total driving hours per week, night driving hours per week and total mileage per week showed strong cor- relation with age and sex. Eighteen year-Old males drove more hours and miles than 17 year- Old males or females. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. 2. Total hours driven, total night driving, total mileage are not predictors of age. .There was a significant correlation between total driv— ing time, night driving hours, and total mile— age with age. All of these factors increased 78 with the 17 and 18 year-Old drivers. There- fore, the null hypothesis was rejected. Car—ownership is not related to sex. There was a significant negative correlation between sex and car—ownership. Males owned more cars than females. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. There is no interaction between violations and total miles driven as predictors of sex. Total driving time, total miles driven and violation rates were the major contributors as predictors of sex. Males drove more hours, more miles, and had more violations than females. There- fore, the null hypothesis was rejected. There is no interaction among total night driv- ing hours, violations and parental control as predictors of age. Total driving time, total miles driven, violation rates and parental con- trol were major contributors as predictors of age. As driving hours, night driving and vio- lation rates increased, parental control decreased. Seventeen year—olds drove less and had stricter parental control, and less viola- tions than 18 year-olds. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. 79 There is no correlation between accident rates and parental control. There was a significant negative correlation between accident rates and parental control. As parental control increased, accidents decreased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. There is no relationship between total miles driven and the number of violation rates received. There was a significant correla- tions between total miles and violation rates. As mileage increased, violations increased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. There is no interaction amOng total hours driven, total night driving hours, violation rates and parental control as predictors of accident rates. There was a significant cor- relation between total hours driven, total night driving hours, violation rates and par- ental control as predictors of accident rates. As total driving hours increased, total night driving hours increased, violation rates: increased, parental control decreased and acci- dents increased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. There is no interaction between accident rates and car-ownership when considered in combination 10. 11. 12. 80 with the predictor variables. There was a sig- nificant correlation between accident rates and car-ownership when considered in combination with the predictor variables. As accident rates and car-ownership increased, total hours driven, total night driving hours, accident and viola- tion rates increased. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. There is no Correlation between car-ownership and parental control. Car-ownership showed a significant correlation with parental control. Car-owners with stricter parental control had fewer accidents. Seventeen year-olds owned more cars and had fewer accidents than 18 year-Old drivers. Therefore, the null hypoth- esis was rejected. As regards to exposure to location, it was noted that the 17 and 18 year-Old drivers in this sampling frequented the area within a radius of ten miles from the center of the city of Lansing, and had most of their acci- dents and violations within this area. The spot map, page A7, showed the significance of the location and frequency distribution. Non-car—owners drove A5,017 total mileage, car-owners drove A1,232 total mileage. 81 (Non-car-owners drove 3,785 more miles than car-owners.) 13. Of the A36 subjects, they had 158 total acci— dents (36%) and total violations were 79 (13%). Recommendations 0n the basis of the findings from this investiga- tions, it is recommended that: l. A similar study be conducted using a greater age range. 2. A study similar to this one be conducted in which parental control is more objectively evaluated. 3. A more intensive study be conducted concen- trating upon the young driver and the location of his driving in relation to circumstances, conditions, acci- dents, violation rates, and driving problems. Implications Of the Study The important point, stressed in all of the re- lated literature cited in regard to the young driver, is that exposure must include factors other than just total mileage. This investigation agrees with this idea of the vast exposure picture which was especially 82 3.in their re- emphasized in Stewartl, Boekz, and Klein search. Some important factors influencing exposure that indicated significant implications were parental control, location of driving, and possibly car-ownership. Although parental control indicated an influence in predicting accident rates, age of driver and car-ownership, it was evident that more Objective means of assessing this factor was necessary. It was suggested that fur- ther study conducted between the young car-owner and non- car-owner might reveal important findings in relation to the total picture of exposure. The results of the investigation in relation to location Of driving indicated that the teen-ager did most of his driving in an area ten miles from the center of the city of Lansing, Michigan. This indicates the nature of conditions to which he was exposed. The study indicated that location of driving was an important part Of exposure. A more detailed study of the exposure factor is needed in order to help minimize the severity 1Roger G. Stewart, "Driving Exposure: What Does It Mean, How Is It Measured?," Traffic Quarterly, IV (March, 1966), pp. 9-11. 2Jean K. Boek, "Driver Behavior and Accidents" (a paper presented to American Public Health Associa- tion, Atlantic City, New Jersey, November, 1956). Secondary source, Traffic Quarterly, IV (March, 1960), p. 11. 3David Klein, "The Teen-age Driver—A Research Paradigm," Traffic Quarterly, XXV (January, 1968), pp- 97-107. 83 and frequency Of violation and accident rates. This study might aid in altering the driving environment to the ad— vantage Of the young driver's safety. The instructors of driver education courses might take a closer look at this study, and take into consid- eration the exposure elements Of the 17 and 18 year-old Lansing drivers when presenting various driving attitudes and Skills. BIBLIOGRAPHY 8A BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Aaron, James E. and Strasser, Marland K. Driver and Traffic Safepy Education. New York: The Mac- millan Company, 1966. American Automobile Association. Teaching Driver and Traffic Safety Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1965. Anderson, William G. In-Car Instruction: Methods and Content. Reading: Addison Wesley Publishing Company, 1968. Center for Safety Education. Driver Education and Traf- fic Safety. University of New York, New York: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1967. Garrett, Henry E. Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1965. Good, Carter V., and Scates, Douglas E. Methods of Phsearch. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 195A. The Automobile Insurance Industry. Driver Behavior, Cause and Effect. Proceedings of the Second Annual Traffic Safety Research Symposium. Washington, D.C.: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 1968. Periodicals Boek, Jean K. "Driver Behavior and Accidents." Paper presented to American Public Health Association. Atlantic City, New Jersey, November, 1956. Campbell, B. J. "Driver Age and Sex Related to Acci- dent Time and Type." Traffic Safety_Research Review. X (June, 1966). 36-A0. Department of State Police. Michigan Traffic Accident Digest, 1968. Michigan: Department of State Police, 1968. 85 86 Gesteland, Norman. "Let's Teach the Teen-ager How to Drive When They Drive the Most Often at Night." Traffic Digest, XV (November, 1967). 3-7. Gutshall, Robert. "An Exploratory Study of the Inter- relations Among Driving Ability, Driving Exposure and Socio-Economic Status of Low, Average and High Intelligence Males." Unpublished Doctoral Disser- tation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1967. Kavanaugh, Keith J.; Kemper, Warren A.; and Klamm, Edward R. "The High School Student and the Automobile." Traffic Safety Research Review, IV (August, 1953). *A-8. Klein, David. "The Teen Age Driver -A Research Paradigm." Traffic Quarterly, XXII (January, 1968). 97-107. Lauer, A. R. "A Sampling Survey of Drivers on the High- way for the Twenty-Four Hour Period-—Driver Char- acteristics and Accidents." Highway Research Board Bulletin, LXXIII (1953). 1A-25. Levonian, Edward. "Prediction of Accidents and Convic- tions." Traffic Safety Research Review, XI (Sep- tember, 1967). 75-79. National Safety Council. Accident Facts. Chicago: National Safety Council, 1968. Peck, Raymond C., and Coppin, Ronald S. "The Prediction of Accident Involvement Using Concurrent Driving Record Data." Traffic Safety Research Review, XI (June, 1967). 3A-Al. Pelz, Donald C., and Schuman, Stanley C. "Dangerous Young Drivers." The Society for Automobile Engineers, LXXVI (October, 1968). 61-68. Stewart, Roger G. "Driving Exposure: What Does it Mean, How Is It Measured?" Traffic Safety, IV (March, 1960). 9-11. APPENDICES 87 APPENDIX A DRIVER EDUCATION - QUESTIONNAIRE 88 APPENDIX A DRIVER EDUCATION — QUESTIONNAIRE Sister Marie Therese Emery, O.P. Age Male Female Driving experience (months) Parents living: Yes NO Separated: Yes No Divorced: Yes No Deceased: Mother Father Father's Occupation: Mother's Occupation: Guardian's Occupation: Approximately how many hours do you drive per week: How many miles do you drive per week: Night driving: I Hours per week: Hours per night: Do you own a car: Yes No Comment PLACE A CHECK ON THE BLANK PROVIDED Always Frequently Sometimes Rarely Never ____ ____ 1. Is the car yours to use as you see fit? 2. Are there any restrictions placed upon your use of the car? 3. Must parents ap- prove the des- tination to which you wish to drive? A. Are you permitted to drive at night? 89 90 Always Frequently Sometimes Rarely Never 10. 11. 5. Are limits placed on distances you are permitted to drive? 6. Must you be home by a definite time when using the car? 7. Are limits set on the number of peo- ple who may ride with you? 8. Is your use of the car based upon your academic per- formance in school? Have you been involved in a collision (or collisions) while driv- ing the car? If so, how many collisions Explain in detail: Here you at fault? Yes NO . Did you receive a citation for the collision or collisions? Yes No How Many Have you received a citation for a traffic Violation other than a collision? How many? What for: Explain 19 full detail, please: Please list any restrictions that are placed upon your driving the car, if the restrictions were not included in the first part of this questionnaire: APPENDIX B INTERVIEW SHEET 91 APPENDIX B INTERVIEW SHEET Subject # Name Age Car-Ownership Yes NO Sex The subject was asked to respond to the following three categories of questions. The check list was util- ized to stimulate response. QUESTIONS 1. Name the exact locations to which you drive during the school week. How often? Location recorded as: l (10 mile radius) 2. (ll-25 mile radius) 3. (26-50 mile radius) A. (51-200 mile radius) 5 (200 miles and over) 2. On weekends do these locations change? Yes NO Exactly where are the locations of weekend driving? Every weekend? Yes ____ NO ____ How often? ____ Location: 1 2 3 A 5 (circle one) Frequency: ____ (no. of times) Approximate miles: Day: ____ Night: ____ (Time driven) DRIVING 3. Vacation: Are there changes in the locations of your driving: Yes: No: Specifically where: What places do you visit during the different vacation times? Winter Spring _ Summer Fall 92 93 Location: Area 1 2 3 A 5 (circle one) Frequency Season: Winter Spring Summer Fall The interviewer prepared a map of the area with the five sections carefully delineated to use for reference during the interview. ITEM CHECK SHEET (Used in conjunction with questionnaire) Checks were made in appropriate spots as subjects responded to the questions. Also these served as stimu- lators to subjects' responses. 'Minutes to and from des- tination noted. Errands (Family and personal) Frequency Grocery store Drug store Gas station Bank Clothing store Other Church School Daily Activities at school Away games and activities Other activities Library (not school) Recreation Locally? Where? Out of Town Where Dances Movies Bowling Drag racing supervised Drive-ins Parties Others 9A Vacation Driving: Winter: Where? Nearest big city How Often? Spring: Where? Nearest big city How often? Summer: Where? Nearest big city How often? Fall: Where? Nearest big city How Often? APPENDIX C REQUEST FOR MICHIGAN DRIVER RECORD INFORMATION 95 REQUEST FOR MICHIGAN DRIVER RECORD INFORMATION nC - 70 DEPARTMENT OF STATE, LANSING, MICHIGAN 489I8 IF ADDRESS ONLY wANTED CHECK CIRCLE THIS SPACE FOR NAME AND ADDRESS OF COMPANY OR PERSON SUBMITTING REQUEST ' STATE DEPT. ACCOUNT NO. LICENSE NO. (INPORTANT) NAME FIRST MIDDLE LAST ADDRESS OPER LIC. CHAUF LIC 8mg" EXPIRES ON 19 __ EXPIRATION DA 3 BIRTHDAY DATE Tms SPACE FOR USE OF COMPANY SUBMITTING REQUEST CONVICTION 0,. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY RECORD CASE No. ACCIDENT DATE REASON FOR P R. ACTION LOCATION DATE ACTION LIFTBD PROBATE COURT FINDING DRIVER RECORD IN FORMATION 0R ARREST DATE AchDENT DATE LOCATION OFFENSE. ACCIDENT, OR DEPT. ACTION LOCATIONS OFFENSES I. DETROIT 6. GRAND RAPIDS A. SPEEDING F. INPROPER PASSING 2. HIGHLAND PARK 7. KALAMAZOO B. RAN RED LIGHT G RECKLEss DRIVING a. LINCOLN PARK 8. LANSING C. RAN STOP SIGN H. INTERFERING WITH TRAFFIC 4. LIVONIA 9. FLINT D. IMPROPER LEFT TURN I FAILURE To YIELD RIGHT OF WAY S. DEAREORN Io. SAGINAN E IMPROPER RIGHT TURN J. BASIC SPEED (ALI. OTHERS WRITTEN) (ALL OTHERS WRITTEN) 96 Information provided basic facts pertaining to record. It does not show as: 1. Court fines 97 herein is intended to show only the the individual's historical driving details pertaining to each entry such and sentences 2. Date documents received by Department of State 3. Minor traffic offenses over seven years old A. Attempts to pick up drivers licenses from those suSpended or revoked. S. Attempts to notify subject of pending re-examination 6. Length of time required to schedule and hold a re-examination due to statutory requirements that must be adhered to Use of this record to determine the effectiveness of the law enforcement, judicial or driver improvement programs should not be attempted as it does not contain sufficient detail from which accurate conclusions can be reached. Those attempting this type of study should write directly to Driver Services Division, Central Records Section stating the purpose of the study. included with the record. Sufficient detail will then be III II" IlllIII-l-IIII. 1 I'll-I'll]! II A .Itvfl III III!!! ICE." [till I. "I ll IIIIIEIIEIIII ll 5' ll 5 I." III I APPENDIX_D SUMMARY OF DATA 98 APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF DATA domBzoo Q mm9HmQ BmUHz xmmz mmm mmbom ozH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m mmeHmQ emez xmm3 mmm mmbom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m mme¢m BzmQHoo< xmmz mmm moHmQ BmUHz xmm3 mmm mmbom 02H>Hmm mHmmmmzzo m mmeHmm BmUHz xmmB mmm mmbom ozH>HmQ mHmmmmz3O m¢o mu< xmm Bomhmsm 25 60 l7 l7 l7 l7 l7 l7 l7 17 17 17 l7 l7 17 17 17 l7 17 17 17 57 58 59 A0 200 1A 20 60 A5 100 61 62 75 75 100 10 63 6A 10 65 66 67 30 250 10 200 68 20 69 150 70 300 15 15 15 16 71 100 72 200 73 100 7A 100 75 103 APPENDIX D.--Continued HomBzoo A¢Bzmm¢m mme mmeHmQ BmUHz mmmz mmm mmaom UzH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m mmeHmQ EmUHz xmm3 mmm mmbom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m WMEHmQ BmOHz xmm3 mmm mmaom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo mdo mo¢ xmm Bommmbm 60 A25 18 20 1A 18 18 18 '18 11A 13 10 1 115 A00 1 116 300 117 250 10 25 15 1A 1 118 500 21 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 1 119 50 250 120 121 A00 11 122 1A 200 20 l 123 300 15 10 12A 100 1 125 A00 11 1 126 300 15 20 l 127 200 1A 1 128 21 300 30 1 129 28 900 A8 130 100 15 131 100 132 106 APPENDIX D.--Continued domezoo A mm9HmQ BIUHZ xmmz mmm mmbom 02H>Hmo mHmmmmzzo m mmBHmQ BZUHZ xmm3 mmm mmbom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m mmeHmD BmOHZ xmm3 mmm mmbom UZH>HmD mHmmmmzzo m mm9HmQ BIUHZ xmmz mmm mmbom mzH>HmD mHmmmmZBO m mMBHmQ BmUHz xmm3 mmm mmbom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m mmBHmQ BmUHz xmmz mmm mmaom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmz3o m mm9HmQ EmUHz xmmB mmm mmbom GZH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m WMBHmQ BmUHz xmmz mmm mmbom UZH>HmQ mHmmmmz3o m mmeHmQ Emon xmm3 mam mmaom 02H>Hmm mHmmmMZSO m mmeHmQ BmUHz xmm3 mmm mmbom ozH>HmQ mHmmmmzzo m mm9HmQ EmUHz xmm3 mmm mmaom UZH>HmD mHmmmmzzo m mmeHmQ BmGHz xmmz mmm mmsom UZH>HmD mHmmmmZBO m mmeHmQ BmOHz xmm3 mmm mmbom UZH>HmQ mHmmmMZBO m mmBHmQ BmcHz . same ems mason ozH>Hmo mHmmmmzzo m mmeHmD BmmHz xmm3 mum mmbom ozH>HmQ mHmmmmz3O m mmeHmQ BmmHz xmmz mmm mmbom OZH>HmQ mHmmmMZEO m