Young drivers

In 2009-2018, an annual average of 51 young drivers and passengers (aged 18-24) were killed in traffic[i] (Source: Statistics Netherlands; Figure 1).

Figure 1. The number of road deaths among young drivers and passengers (aged 18-24) in 2009-2018 (Source: Statistics Netherlands).

The crashes registered in the Netherlands show that young drivers are relatively often involved in crashes in the dark and in weekend nights (see Table 1). In 2015-2019, they were slightly more often involved in urban crashes and on 60km/h roads than drivers aged 30 to 65, but less often on 80km/h roads. Young drivers were also more often involved in single-vehicle crashes than drivers aged 30 to 65. Single-vehicle crashes are crashes in which no other road user is involved, such as collisions with trees or other objects (BRON, 2015-2019).

Share of crashes	Young drivers (aged 18-24)	Drivers aged 30 to 65
In and outside the urban area
By speed limit
By light condition
Day-night (20:00-06:00, from Friday to Saturday and from Saturday to Sunday)
Single-vehicle crash and crashes with a crash opponent

Table 1. Characteristics of crashes of young drivers (aged 18-24) and of drivers aged 30 to 65 in 2015-2019 (BRON, 2015-2019).

An international review of research into crashes involving young drivers shows that they are relatively often involved in crashes in the dark, and on rural roads [1].

The risk of involvement in a fatal crash per billion kilometres travelled [i], is 4,5 times higher for young drivers  (aged 18-24) than for drivers aged 30 to 65: 13 young drivers (aged 18-24) compared to 3 drivers aged 30 to 65 (BRON, 2015-2019, OViN/ODiN, 2015-2019).

---

Somewhat older Dutch research shows that crash risk is highest just after acquisition of the driving licence and that it decreases fast during the first years due to drivers gaining more experience [2]. In 2017, Curry and colleagues found the same effect among a large group of American novice drivers [3]: the younger the driver, the higher the crash risk at the start of the driving career. During the first few years, the crash risk for young novice drivers does decrease more rapidly than it does for older novice drivers [3]. Vlakveld [2] also clearly shows this in the figure below.

Figure 3. Decrease of crash risk for novice drivers who started their driving careers early and for novice drivers who started their driving career later/late (based on self-reported crashes and mileage; [2]).

Crash risk for young drivers is determined by several related factors [1]. The relatively high crash risk for young drivers is due to individual factors such as development of the brain, lack of higher-order skills (such as the ability to predict how traffic situations will progress), lack of driving skills and the driver’s attitude towards driving a car. In addition, temporary factors and the social environment may increase the risk.

Development of the brain

A person’s brain is only fully developed around age 25. The part of the brain that urges us to ‘to think first and act later’ is the last part to fully develop. It ensures that previous experiences are used to make decisions [4]. The part of the brain that regulates emotions, motivation, and satisfaction of needs is much quicker to fully develop [5]. Due to this asynchronous development, young drivers are more inclined to take risks, are susceptible to peer pressure and seek to satisfy their own needs such as ‘pleasure’ [6]. The capacity of our working memory, that enables us to remember items as long as they are relevant to us, also continues to develop during adolescence. The slow development of this capacity is associated with a self-reported increased crash risk [7].

Higher-order skills

Reference is often made to higher-order skills or executive functions that are still in the making due to the slow development of the brain. Thus, young drivers have trouble predicting how a traffic situation will progress, which makes them less proficient in anticipating potential dangers than more experienced drivers [8]. They also have trouble fully appreciating risks and are inclined to overestimate their skills. That is why their (risky) behaviour is not in accordance with their abilities [9]. In addition, a certain negligence towards risk makes particularly young men tolerant of higher traffic risks [10]. Due to the limited capacity of the working memory and the inability to fully control impulses, young road users are less able to process stimuli and focus their attention on relevant elements of the traffic situation, to make decisions, and plan how to behave [7].

Driving experience

Young drivers run the highest risks during the first year of driving independently (for more information, see the question How does chrash risk develop during the driving career?). They consider the acquisition of a driving licence to be proof of their driving proficiency, which was after all established by an examiner [11]. However, they still have to gain experience in applying the acquired skills in different situations during the first few years after their initial qualification [12].

Attitude towards driving and risky driving behaviour

For young drivers that really appreciate cars and love driving, or for those who really enjoy going out, crash risk is higher than average (e.g. see the Danish study by Møller and Sigurðardóttir [13]). Their friends affect the risk behaviour of young drivers. The attitude of their friends towards risky driving behaviour (the peer group standards) relates to the extent to which young drivers display risky driving behaviour (e.g. see studies in Germany [14] and Israel [15]).

Factors that temporarily reduce fitness to drive

When comparing young drivers to middle-aged drivers, the following effects of temporary factors can be noted:

• Young drivers do not drink-drive more often, but do run higher risks when drink-driving (see the question Is the use of drugs and alcohol a problem among young drivers? and SWOV fact sheet Driving under the influence of alcohol).
• Young male drivers more often drive under the influence of drugs. See the question Is the use of drugs and alcohol a problem among young drivers? and SWOV fact sheet Drugs and medicines for more information about drug use by young drivers.
• International research shows that young drivers are more often distracted by young passengers while driving [16] and by the use of audio devices and mobile phones [17], which greatly increases crash risk. For more information about this subject, see the question Is distraction a problem for young drivers?.
• For young drivers, fatigue is of more importance, because they more often drive at night, when the natural inclination to fall asleep is felt ([18]; SWOV fact sheet Fatigue). In addition, a mismatch exists between the biological development of the sleep-wake rhythm, the amount of sleep young people need and the daily rhythm imposed by school, education or work [19]. Yet, for young people fatigue caused by lack of sleep is hard to intuit and therefore also hard to control [20]. A UK study shows that lack of sleep is related to a higher crash risk [21].
• Extreme emotions may cause young drivers to display risk behaviour. The way in which emotions affect behaviour, depends on the personality of the young drivers and the context in which they find themselves [22].

Social environment

A ‘sporty driving style’ is adopted to impress friends. For young drivers with one or more young passengers, crash risk is higher than if they drive without passengers. Conversely, crash risk decreases in the presence of middle-aged passengers. The presence of young passengers increases risk more strongly for male drives than for female drivers. For young male drivers, the effect of the presence of a passenger is greater when the passenger is male than when she is female [16]. Parents set the example for their children; a parent’s driving behaviour therefore predicts the driving behaviour of young drivers [23]. Moreover, a young driver’s risk behaviour depends on the extent to which parents encourage safe behaviour and set clear boundaries [4].

Speed

International literature shows that young drivers are relatively often involved in crashes caused by not adjusting their speed to the traffic conditions [24], for example when cornering [25]. The inability to adjust speed to traffic conditions is related to several factors mentioned above, such as insufficient driving experience, trouble in balancing risk behaviour and one’s own skills and coping with peer pressure. Dutch research into self-reported speeds shows that young drivers do not exceed speed limits on motorways just after driving licence acquisition, but that this changes when they are somewhat older (aged 20-24) [8].

Environment

Young drivers relatively often drive in conditions that also increase crash and injury risk for experienced drivers: they often drive in somewhat older cars with fewer passive and active safety devices [26] and they probably drive in the dark more often.

Alcohol

According to key figures of Trimbos Institute, the Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, young adults (aged 18-29) are more often prone to excessive or heavy drinking than older adults [27], During weekend nights, however, young drivers do not drink-drive more often than older drivers [28]. but, compared to older drivers, their crash risk is higher at a lower blood alcohol level [29] [30]. This is probably caused by inexperience in alcohol consumption, inexperience in driving and by a combination thereof. Of all young drivers with a blood alcohol level in excess of the limit, 60% are accompanied by one or more passengers [31]. Because of this accumulation of risks, drink-driving by young drivers is a matter of concern. For more information about drink-driving, see SWOV fact sheet Driving under the influence of alcohol).

Drugs

Young men more often drive under the influence of drugs than both older drivers and young women, especially where cannabis use is concerned. Yet, not much is known about the relationship between substance use and crash risk (see SWOV factsheet Drugs and medicines). What international research has made clear, however, is that the use of multiple drugs, or the combination of drugs and alcohol results in a higher crash risk [32] [33].

For young drivers, distraction by mobile phones or other in-car systems, but also distraction by peer passengers, increases crash risk. See SWOV fact sheet Distraction in traffic for more information about distraction in traffic in general.

Young people are inherently curious about new stimuli [19], they have trouble focusing on the traffic stimuli that are most opportune, and their ability to suppress impulsive reactions is not very well-developed yet (see the question Why is crash risk higher for young drivers?). Among other things, this is reflected by increased distraction by mobile phones and other media. Young American drivers (aged 16-29) are more often engaged in distracting activities such as texting behind the wheel (3.3 % of the driving time) than drivers aged 30 to 64 (1.1% of the driving time) [34]. A study that compared drivers of different age groups shows that operating a screen (e.g. for texting, searching the internet, or entering a phone number), or reaching for an object, will increase the risk of a crash for all drivers in all age groups [34] [35] [36]. Unlike older drivers, younger drivers also run a higher crash risk if they are accompanied by young passengers [16] [34] [37] [38] [39] or if they make a phone call while driving [34] [37]. Conversely, if they are accompanied by an adult passenger, the crash risk for young drivers is lower than when they are unaccompanied [39] [40].

Dutch driver training aims to teach aspiring drivers to acquire the skills needed to drive a car, to apply traffic rules and to teach them how to behave in traffic. Higher-order skills that are troublesome for young people (see the question Why is crash risk higher for young drivers?) are hardly practiced at all. Yet, these skills are essential to safe traffic participation. This is one of the reasons why a strong link between driver training and crash risk for young drivers is hard to ascertain (see SWOV fact sheet Driver training and driving tests).

In the Netherlands, freedom of education is laid down by law. Therefore, the government cannot impose what topics should come up during driving lessons. That is why the Netherlands, in contrast to other countries, does not have a national curriculum. Driver training topics are therefore largely determined by what is tested during driving tests. This implies that, in spite of their importance to road safety, a number of skills that are hard or impossible to test are not addressed at all. Examples of these omissions are risk acceptance, self-awareness, and resilience to peer pressure [24] [41] [42] [43]. Young drivers will have to develop these higher-order skills by clocking up mileage behind the wheel. At the time of writing this fact sheet (July 2021), experiments to reduce crash risk for young drivers are underway [44] [45]. For more information about driver training and driving tests in the Netherlands, see SWOV fact sheet Driver training and driving tests.

Provisional licence

In the first five years after initial qualification, whatever the driving licence category, a simple demerit point system applies. The associated licence is called a provisional licence. Two serious traffic offences for which the driver was apprehended are followed by an investigation to assess the offender’s driving skills. The effectiveness of provisional licencing appears to be limited. Research has not been able to show that provisional licencing has a deterrent effect (general preventive effect) on novice drivers [46] [47]. Knowledge about the rules and sanctions, and the driver’s own opinion about the legitimacy of the rules, determine compliance with the rules, as shown by a study of the support base for graduated licencing (which includes provisional licencing) among young people in  Australia [48]. For more information about the provisional licence, see SWOV fact sheet Driver training and driving tests.

Lower alcohol limit for novice drivers

International research shows that lowering the alcohol limit for novice drivers results in less drink-driving and fewer crashes. Dutch figures, however, do not show such a reduction. In the Netherlands, lower alcohol limits for novice drivers (mostly young drivers) were introduced in 2006. Data about drink-driving by young road users in the four years before and after the introduction of the lower limits (2002-2010) show that drink-driving by young road users did not decrease more strongly than drink-driving by older road users [28]. Neither did the number of alcohol-related road casualties among young people decrease in the first two years after introduction of the lower limits [49]. For more information, see SWOV fact sheet Driving under the influence of alcohol.

LEMA

The Light Educational Measure Alcohol (LEMA) is a rehabilitation course intended for novice drivers who were caught drink-driving with a blood alcohol content between 0.5 and 0.8, and for experienced drivers caught drink-driving with a blood alcohol content between 0.8 and 1.0. The course intends to make participants aware of the causes and risks their problem behaviour entails and to show them how they may change their behaviour to avoid future problems. Participants have to pay for the course themselves. A study by the Research and Documentation Centre WODC found no demonstrable effect of LEMA on recidivism (both general traffic offence recidivism and drink-driving) [50]. For more information, see SWOV fact sheet Traffic enforcement.

Accompanied driving (2toDrive)

Since 2011, accompanied driving – in the Netherlands known as ‘2toDrive’ – has given young people the opportunity to drive a car under the supervision of an adult, starting at the age of 17. The experience gained under supervision is expected to result in fewer crashes once these young drivers start driving independently. An evaluation of the 2toDrive experiment in 2015 was inconclusive about its road safety effect [51]. In other countries, for example Sweden and Germany, positive effects on crash rate were reported, although there are other countries where no positive effects were found, such as Norway and France. The number of kilometres driven while accompanied and the variation in circumstances (sufficient learning opportunities) are aspects that are important to the effectiveness of accompanied driving (SWOV-factsheet Driver training and driving tests).

The literature shows that the quality of driver training and driving tests does not affect the road safety of young drivers (SWOV fact sheet Driver training and driving tests). Additional training or adding an extra phase to the graduated licence may improve driver training or driving tests.

Additional training

Additional training following licence acquisition may affect the road safety of young drivers if it addresses higher-order skills and social factors that are relevant to their high crash risk. Examples are hazard perception training and training courses to enhance traffic insight and self-awareness. Moreover, young drivers may benefit from general training courses about risk behaviour and ways to increase resilience. SWOV fact sheet Driver training and driving tests addresses these issues in more detail. 

Graduated driver licensing

At the moment, the Netherlands have implemented two phases of graduated driver licencing (see SWOV-fact sheet Driver training and driving tests):

• a learner phase (accompanied driving: 2toDrive) in which novice drivers are supervised to gain experience in driving after initial qualification;
• a provisional licence in which the novice driver can drive independently, governed by strict rules.

The introduction of an intermediate phase during which young road users are only allowed to drive in relatively safe conditions (for example no alcohol or no young passengers) could result in a reduction of risk for young drivers [52]. This allows novice drivers more time to practice and to gain experience with situations that are not a priori risk-increasing. Safety effects of graduated licencing are mainly due to a delay in exposure to dangerous driving circumstances and to accompanied driving; there are less strong indications that graduated licencing will improve young people’s driving skills [53] [54]. There are, however, indications [55] that active parent involvement in the phases of graduated licencing will reduce crash risk for young drivers.

Modular driver training

Modular training is often mentioned as a method to improve Dutch driver training. However, in the Netherlands, teaching methods may not be imposed on driving schools. The ‘Driver Training in Steps’ (In Dutch: De Rijopleiding In Stappen (RIS)) and its successor ‘Tailored Driver Training’ (In Dutch: De Rijopleiding Op Maat (ROM)) take a modular approach to teaching candidates to drive. RIS consists of four modules in an ascending order of difficulty (for more information, see rijbewijs.nl). An initial study shows that ROM had a positive effect on driving behaviour half a year after licence acquisition [56]. Yet, no solid conclusions may be drawn, since the study did not make use of random selection. Further research into the effectiveness of modular driver training in reducing crash risk for young drivers is needed, since modular training is not only known for the speed with which skills are acquired but also for reduced retention of these skills and the insufficient application of the skills in new situations [57]. Moreover, scientific research shows that the quality of the driver training does not affect the road safety of young drivers, since driver training teaches basic skills that are a prerequisite for safe traffic participation, but hardly affects the factors that increase crash risk for young drivers (see SWOV fact sheet Driver training and driving tests).

Systems for monitoring behaviour and feedback

Systems that monitor driving behaviour of young people and give feedback to the young drivers themselves or to their parents/supervisors have existed for some time; they are sometimes deployed by insurance companies. Driving behaviour is monitored by in-car devices, a datalogger or a phone app. The system measures g-forces exerted on the car, speed, road position, use of safety belts and distance to other traffic. It can give direct feedback on driving behaviour, or feedback to the young drivers or their parents/supervisors after the car journey. International research shows that monitoring-feedback systems may reduce dangerous driving behaviour by more than 50% [33] [58]. If this also translates into a reduction of crash risk, has not yet been sufficiently researched to allow for sound conclusions. Implementation thresholds of monitoring-feedback systems concern acceptance by young drivers and their parents/supervisors that is related to issues of privacy and the bonds of trust between parents and children. Positive framing of the use of monitoring-feedback systems may improve acceptance rates, for example by adding a game element [59]. Expectations are that such a system will not be effective for all young drivers. Particularly young drivers who overestimate their own skills will benefit from the system, as Ouimet and colleagues [60] showed for alcohol interlock instalment in the cars of young drivers.

Systems to prevent distraction by phone use

Possibly, telephone use while driving can be prevented by certain phone apps. Various apps are available on the Dutch market (for a description see the ANWB website). The apps can block incoming messages for as long as the young drivers are behind the wheel which reduces distraction. Yet, we expect that it is precisely the group of young drivers that display the most dangerous behaviour that will not use such an app, or will find ways to circumvent it [38]. Installing a ‘soft blocking’ app – which only blocks the telephone sound while driving – is a less rigorous option that might therefore be easier to accept [61]. In the Netherlands, the Auto-modus app of insurance company Interpolis was assessed. This app not only blocks incoming messages, but also hands out compliments or awards merit points to young drivers when they have not used their phones while driving. Compared to the control group, the participants reported less phone use in the weeks they used the app [62].

Below you will find a list of references used in this fact sheet. All sources used may be accessed via our library portal, where more literature on this subject may also be found.

Relevant reviews about young drivers:

International handbook on young drivers: [65]. Fisher, D.L., Caird, J.K., Horrey, W.J. & Trick, L.M. (2017). Handbook of teen and novice drivers: research, practice, policy, and directions. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

Dutch review of the state of knowledge about young drivers, dating from 2005: Vlakveld, W.P. (2005). Jonge beginnende automobilisten, hun ongevalsrisico en maatregelen om dit terug te dringen [Young, novice motorists, their crash rates, and measures to reduce them. A literature study]. R-2005-3 [Summary in English]. SWOV, Leidschendam

Sources:

[1]. Cassarino, M. & Murphy, G. (2018). Reducing young drivers’ crash risk: Are we there yet? An ecological systems-based review of the last decade of research. In: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 56, p. 54-73.

[2]. Vlakveld, W.P. (2005). Jonge beginnende automobilisten, hun ongevalsrisico en maatregelen om dit terug te dringen [Young, novice motorists, their crash rates, and measures to reduce them. A literature study]. R-2005-3 [Summary in English]. SWOV, Leidschendam.

[3]. Curry, A.E., Metzger, K.B., Williams, A.F. & Tefft, B.C. (2017). Comparison of older and younger novice driver crash rates: Informing the need for extended Graduated Driver Licensing restrictions. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 108, p. 66-73.

[4]. Gicquel, L., Ordonneau, P., Blot, E., Toillon, C., et al. (2017). Description of various factors contributing to traffic accidents in youth and measures proposed to alleviate recurrence. In: Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 8, nr. 94.

[5]. Gogtay, N., Giedd, J.N., Lusk, L., Hayashi, K.M., et al. (2004). Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, PNAS, vol. 101, nr. 21, p. 8174-8179.

[6]. Steinberg, L. (2008). A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. In: Developmental review DR, vol. 28, nr. 1, p. 78-106.

[7]. Walshe, E.A., Winston, F.K., Betancourt, L.M., Khurana, A., et al. (2019). Working memory development and motor vehicle crashes in young drivers. In: JAMA network open, vol. 2, nr. 9, p. e1911421.

[8]. Vlakveld, W.P. (2011). Hazard anticipation of young novice drivers: assessing and enhancing the capabilities of young novice drivers to anticipate latent hazards in road and traffic situations. Dissertation Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. SWOV-dissertation series. SWOV, Leidschendam.

[9]. Craen, S. de (2010). The X-factor. A longitudinal study of calibration in young novice drivers. Dissertation Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. SWOV-dissertation series. SWOV, Leidschendam.

[10]. Cordellieri, P., Baralla, F., Ferlazzo, F., Sgalla, R., et al. (2016). Gender effects in young road users on road safety attitudes, behaviors and risk perception. In: Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 7, nr. 1412.

[11]. Vissers, J., Dekker, G.M. & Rijniers, R. (2019). Diepteonderzoek beginnende bestuurders. Royal Haskoning DHV, Amersfoort.

[12]. McDonald, C.C., Sommers, M.S. & Winston, F.K. (2017). Novice teen driver crash patterns. In: Fisher, D.L., et al. (red.), Handbook of teen and novice drivers: research, practice, policy, and directions. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

[13]. Møller, M. & Sigurðardóttir, S.B. (2009). The relationship between leisure time and driving style in two groups of male drivers. In: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 12, nr. 6, p. 462-469.

[14]. Geber, S., Baumann, E., Czerwinski, F. & Klimmt, C. (2019). The efects of social norms among peer groups on risk behavior: A multilevel approach to differentiate perceived and collective norms. In: Communication Research.

[15]. Guggenheim, N., Taubman – Ben-Ari, O. & Ben-Artzi, E. (2020). The contribution of driving with friends to young drivers’ intention to take risks: An expansion of the theory of planned behavior. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 139, p. 105489.

[16]. Ouimet, M.C., Pradhan, A.K., Brooks-Russell, A., Ehsani, J.P., et al. (2015). Young drivers and their passengers: A systematic review of epidemiological studies on crash risk. In: Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 57, nr. 1, p. s24-S35.e26.

[17]. Klauer, S.G., Guo, F., Simons-Morton, B.G., Ouimet, M.C., et al. (2014). Distracted driving and risk of road crashes among novice and experienced drivers. In: New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 370, nr. 1, p. 54-59.

[18]. European Commission (2018). Fatigue. European Commission, Directorate General for Transport.

[19]. Jolles, J. (2017). Het tienerbrein. Over de adolescent tussen biologie en omgeving. Amsterdam University Press B.V., Amsterdam.

[20]. Paterson, J.L. & Dawson, D. (2017). Fatigue and road safety for young and novice drivers. In: Fisher, D.L., et al. (red.), Handbook of teen and novice drivers: research, practice, policy, and directions. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

[21]. Groeger, J.A. (2006). Youthfulness, inexperience, and sleep loss: the problems young drivers face and those they pose for us. In: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention, vol. Suppl 1, p. i19-i24.

[22]. Scott-Parker, B. (2017). Emotions, behaviour, and the adolescent driver: A literature review. In: Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 50, p. 1-37.

[23]. Taubman - Ben-Ari, O., Musicant, O., Lotan, T. & Farah, H. (2014). The contribution of parents’ driving behavior, family climate for road safety, and parent-targeted intervention to young male driving behavior. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 72, p. 296-301.

[24]. McKnight, A.J. & McKnight, A.S. (2003). Young novice drivers: careless or clueless? In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 35, p. 921-925.

25]. Clarke, D.D., Ward, P., Bartle, C. & Truman, W. (2006). Young driver accidents in the UK: The influence of age, experience, and time of day. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 38, nr. 5, p. 871-878.

[26]. Newstead, S. (2009). Vehicle safety and young drivers stage 1: Profile of young driver vehicles. Monash University, Accident Research Centre MUARC, Clayton, Victoria.

[27]. Trimbos Instituut (2020). Alcoholgebruik onder volwassenen in Nederland. Kerncijfers 2018. AF1726. Trimbos-Instituut, Utrecht.

[28]. I&O Research (2021). Rijden onder invloed in Nederland in 2006-2019. Ontwikkeling van het alcoholgebruik van automobilisten in weekendnachten. Ministerie van Infrastructuur & Waterstaat IenW; Rijkswaterstaat Water, Verkeer en Leefomgeving WVL, ‘s-Gravenhage.

[29]. Peck, R.C., Gebers, M.A., Voas, R.B. & Romano, E. (2008). The relationship between blood alcohol concentration (BAC), age, and crash risk. In: Journal of Safety Research, vol. 39, nr. 3, p. 311-319.

[30]. Jongen, S., Sluiszen, N.N.J.J.M. van der, Brown, D. & Vuurman, E.F.P.M. (2018). Single- and dual-task performance during on-the-road driving at a low and moderate dose of alcohol: A comparison between young novice and more experienced drivers. In: Human Psychopharmacology, vol. 33, nr. 3.

[31]. Houwing, S., Twisk, D. & Waard, D. de (2015). Alcoholgebruik van jongeren in het verkeer op stapavonden. R-2015-12. SWOV, Den Haag.

[32]. Herrera-Gómez, F., García-Mingo, M., Colás, M., González-Luque, J.C., et al. (2019). Drivers who tested positive for cannabis in oral fluid: A longitudinal analysis of administrative data for Spain between 2011 and 2016. In: BMJ Open, vol. 9, nr. 8.

[33]. Asbridge, M., Wickens, C., Mann, R. & Cartwright, J. (2017). Alcohol, cannabis, and new drivers. In: Fisher, D.L., et al. (red.), Handbook of teen and novice drivers: research, practice, policy, and directions. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

[34]. Guo, F., Klauer, S.G., Fang, Y., Hankey, J.M., et al. (2017). The effects of age on crash risk associated with driver distraction. In: International Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 46, nr. 1, p. 258-265.

[35]. Gershon, P., Sita, K.R., Zhu, C., Ehsani, J.P., et al. (2019). Distracted driving, visual inattention, and crash risk among teenage drivers. In: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 56, nr. 4, p. 494-500.

[36]. Lu, D., Guo, F. & Li, F. (2020). Evaluating the causal effects of cellphone distraction on crash risk using propensity score methods. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 143, p. 105579.

[37]. Caird, J.K., Simmons, S.M., Wiley, K., Johnston, K.A., et al. (2018). Does talking on a cell phone, with a passenger, or dialing affect driving performance? An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. In: Human Factors, vol. 60, nr. 1, p. 101-133.

[38]. Caird, J.K. & Horrey, W.J. (2017). A review of novice and teen driver distraction. In: Fisher, D.L., et al. (red.), Handbook of teen and novice drivers: research, practice, policy, and directions. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

[39]. Ouimet, M.C., Simons-Morton, B.G., Zador, P.L., Lerner, N.D., et al. (2010). Using the U.S. National Household Travel Survey to estimate the impact of passenger characteristics on young drivers' relative risk of fatal crash involvement. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 42, nr. 2, p. 689-694.

[40]. Engström, I., Gregersen, N.P., Granström, K. & Nyberg, A. (2008). Young drivers - Reduced crash risk with passengers in the vehicle. In: Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 40, nr. 1, p. 341-348.

[41]. Clarke, D.D., Ward, P. & Truman, W. (2005). Voluntary risk taking and skill deficits in young driver accidents in the UK. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 37, nr. 3, p. 523-529.

[42]. Curry, A.E., Hafetz, J., Kallan, M.J., Winston, F.K., et al. (2011). Prevalence of teen driver errors leading to serious motor vehicle crashes. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 43, nr. 4, p. 1285-1290.

[43]. Møller, M. & Haustein, S. (2014). Peer influence on speeding behaviour among male drivers aged 18 and 28. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 64, p. 92-99.

[44]. Rij-instructie (2019). Rijopleiding en examen gaan op termijn op de schop. Rij-instructie. Onafhankelijk vakblad voor de verkeersopleiding. Accessed on 29-06-2021 at www.rij-instructie.nl/nieuws/actueel/24327/rijopleiding-en-examen-gaan-op-termijn-op-de-schop.

[45]. Kok, R. (2019). Aanpassing rijopleiding en -examen noodzakelijk. RijschoolPro. Het vakblad voor de rijschoolbranche. Accessed on 29-06-2021 at www.rijschoolpro.nl/rijschool/2019/12/19/aanpassing-rijopleiding-en-examen-noodzakelijk/.

[46]. Smit, W., Hulst, J. van der & Homburg, G. (2018). Evaluatie van de beginnersregeling. Publicatienr. 17025. Regioplan (in opdracht van WODC), Amsterdam.

[47]. Vlakveld, W. & Stipdonk, H.L. (2009). Eerste verkenning naar de effectiviteit van het beginnersrijbewijs in Nederland [Effectiveness of the Dutch licence on probation]. D-2009-2.[Summary in English]. SWOV, Leidschendam.

[48]. Truelove, V., Freeman, J. & Davey, J. (2019). “you can't be deterred by stuff you don't know about”: Identifying factors that influence graduated driver licensing rule compliance. In: Safety Science, vol. 111, p. 313-323.

[49]. Weijermars, W.A.M. & Schagen, I.N.L.G. van (2009). Tien jaar Duurzaam Veilig. Verkeersveiligheidsbalans 1998-2007 [Ten years of Sustainable Safety. Road safety assessment 1998-2007].. R-2009-14.[Summary in English]. SWOV, Leidschendam.

[50]. Blom, M., Blokdijk, D. & Weijters, G. (2017). Recidive na een educatieve maatregel voor verkeersovertreders of tijdens een Alcoholslotprogramma. Cahier 2017-15. Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek- en Documentatiecentrum WODC, Den Haag.

[51]. Schagen, I.N.L.G. van & Craen, S. de (2015). Begeleid rijden in Nederland. Heeft 2toDrive effect op zelfgerapporteerde ongevallen en overtredingen? R-2015-11. SWOV, Den Haag.

[52]. Senserrick, T. & Williams, A.F. (2015). Summary of literature of the effective components of graduated driver licensing systems. AP-R476-15. Austroards, Sydney.

[53]. Williams, A.F., Tefft, B.C. & Grabowski, J.G. (2012). Graduated Driver Licensing Research, 2010-Present. In: Journal of Safety Research, vol. 43, nr. 3, p. 195-203.

[54]. Williams, A.F. (2017). Graduated driver licensing (GDL) in the United States in 2016: A literature review and commentary. In: Journal of Safety Research, vol. 63, p. 29-41.

[55]. Curry, A.E., Peek-Asa, C., Hamann, C.J. & Mirman, J.H. (2015). Effectiveness of parent-focused interventions to increase teen driver safety: A critical review. In: Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 57, nr. 1, p. S6-S14.

[56]. Roelofs, E., Vissers, J. & Wijlick, P. van (2018). Rijopleiding op Maat (ROM) – Pilot met een ontwikkelingsgerichte rijopleiding. Paper presented at the Colloquium Vervoersplanologisch speurwerk, Amersfoort.

[57]. Groeger, J.A. (2000). Understanding driving. Applying cognitive psychology to a complex everyday task. Psychology Press Ltd., Hove.

[58]. Toledo, T. & Lotan, T. (2017). Feedback technologies to young drivers. In: Fisher, D.L., et al. (red.), Handbook of teen and novice drivers: research, practice, policy, and directions. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

[59]. Shanly, C., Ieti, M., Warren, I. & Sun, J. (2018). BackPocketDriver-a mobile app to enhance safe driving for youth. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, SEKE. p. 246-249.

[60]. Ouimet, M.C., Brown, T.G., Corado, L., Paquette, M., et al. (2020). The effects of alcohol dose, exposure to an in-vehicle alcohol feedback device, and subjective responses to alcohol on the decision to drink-drive in young drivers. In: Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 139, p. 105495.

[61]. Albert, G. & Lotan, T. (2019). Exploring the impact of “soft blocking” on smartphone usage of young drivers. In: Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 125, p. 56-62.

[62]. Groot-Mesken, J. de, Wijnen, W., Stelling-Konczak, A. & Commandeur, J.J.F. (2016). Interpolis SlimOpWeg-programma: de AutoModus-app. Vragenlijstonderzoek naar het effect van een app om smartphonegebruik in de auto te verminderen [Interpolis SlimOpWeg programme: the AutoModus app. Survey into the effect of an app on reducing smartphone use while driving a car].. R-2016-3.[Summary in English]. SWOV, Den Haag.