Among Bad Driving Behaviors, Speeding Is Strongest Predictor of Crashes

August 22, 2019

  • August 22, 2019 at 11:53 am
    An Actuary says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 19
    Thumb down 2

    28 crashes is a pathetically small data set. No wonder they were only able to find one statistically significant relationship. Unfortunately, some people will take from this article that the other three driver behaviors analyzed aren’t related to crashes, whereas the real takeaway is that researchers at Waterloo should gather more data before they rush to publish their findings.

  • August 22, 2019 at 1:13 pm
    Sue says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 6

    It says 28 MILLION – NOT 28.

    • August 22, 2019 at 2:00 pm
      sak74 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 6
      Thumb down 0

      The studied 28M trips but according to the article:

      “In the first study of its kind, researchers initially analyzed the data to identify 28 crashes based on indicators such as rapid deceleration.”

      The number of crashes studied to the number of trips information was gathered from is a very small portion.

    • August 22, 2019 at 2:14 pm
      Grant Gerrond says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 9
      Thumb down 0

      No Sue, it said 28 crashes which is a “nothing” data set for 28,000,000 trips. Also there are some assumptions that higher speeds are involved because of rapid deacceleration. This article doesn’t explain the methodology very well but if they intend to make rating decisions based on studies they are going to have to do a way better job than this. TX and Ontario don’t really sound like a representative sample of the US or even North America.

  • August 22, 2019 at 1:18 pm
    Steven Crowley says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 1

    I disagree. Texting while driving should be the strongest predictor of crashes. I have been rear ended 3 times over the last year and every accident was because of texting. By the way, every one of the drivers that hit me were in their early 20s.

    • August 22, 2019 at 3:10 pm
      Fair Playing Field says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 10
      Thumb down 0

      Steven – this study was of aggressive driving behaviors, of which distracted driving (including texting) isn’t one.

      I certainly agree with you regarding the correlation between distracted driving and loss expectancy, however.

  • August 22, 2019 at 1:22 pm
    Bond says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 8
    Thumb down 1

    “Steiner cautioned that the study was limited by several unknowns, such as different drivers using the same vehicle, and more research is needed to verify the results.”

    “But he said the analysis of telematics data could eventually revolutionize the insurance industry by enabling fairer, personalized premiums based on actual driving behaviour, not age, gender or location.”

    Driving in a rural area at 65 is far safer than driving on the LA freeway system at 25, period! Location still has an impact, we see far more injury accidents in the large metro areas than in the rural areas, most are inflated in the metro areas as well! According to the statement above, you will eventually see your rates controlled by a downloadable program given to an insurance company who will then determine what your rates will be, good thing? You decide.

  • August 22, 2019 at 1:31 pm
    Isaac says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 1

    28 crashes? Really? We’re publishing research based on a dataset of only 28 crashes? Insurance Journal must be desperate for content…

  • August 22, 2019 at 2:22 pm
    What??? says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 0

    I would suggest that running red lights at controlled intersections are a huge issue. I am seeing more and more of drivers running red lights, not just pushing yellow lights. They are so bold to think they are doing nothing wrong.

  • August 23, 2019 at 7:56 am
    Matt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    I would be interested to see the results when combining the agressive driving AND texting while driving attributes to the analysis.

  • August 23, 2019 at 8:08 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    28 crashes? Too small.

    28 million crashes? Too many for the level of accuracy needed, but acceptable if you have the stat package to handle the volume.

    2,800 or 28,000 crashes would be adequate, dependent on the stratification of the data set into various levels of detail.

    I suspect the article had a typo (missing ‘million’) which was corrected after Insurance Journal staff read the initial comments. Hence, the ensuing confusion.

    Back to the article content / thesis; speed being a major factor in crashes is a Capt. Obvious conclusion. But that is the problem with merely reviewing the title of an article. The other details were informative. Kudos to the author for admitting the weaknesses of the study as follows:

    ” Steiner cautioned that the study was limited by several unknowns, such as different drivers using the same vehicle, and more research is needed to verify the results. ”

    I would hope that similar future studies with more rigor and credibility would be used by legislators to change state MV laws for the worst driving behaviors…. if that is not already the case.

    One pet peeve; weaving (i.e. multiple lane changes and breaches) wasn’t mentioned in the study…. um, article. It seems it is often accompanies by speeding, but not always so. And we drivers in large metro areas would agree it is both prevalent and dangerous to drivers in the path of the ‘weavers (reckless drivers)’.

    • August 23, 2019 at 9:17 am
      Fair Playing Field says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 0

      Agree on weaving as a loss frequency predictor.

  • August 24, 2019 at 2:04 am
    Asus says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 2

    I checked all these statistics against the actual population and growth rates and the show just the opposite of these lies.

    For instance, they are claiming 6% more accidents caused by marijuana use yet Colorado’s population growth increased 8.5% from 2000 to 2015.

    Over a 5 year period ending in 2016 the Colorado economy grew by 15.96%!!!

    With that kind of growth, there will be more people and more accidents, yet the accidents didn’t grow as fast as the population or the economy. Seems like the Marijuana had nothing to do with increasing, in fact, it looks like it had everything to do with suppressing the rates.

    That’s ok we the people are getting used to being lied to in the media. Just keep posting your BS… we are learning whatever the media says, the opposite is true. We can debunk your lies with truth and facts. http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/colorado-population/

  • August 28, 2019 at 12:42 pm
    JACK says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Anyone else already getting RED FLAGGED by insurance journal ??



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*