Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2381/41615
Title: Theorizing hit-and-run: A Study of Driver Decision Making Processes after a Road Traffic Collision.
Authors: Hopkins, Matt
Chivers, Sally
First Published: 10-Nov-2017
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Citation: Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2017
Abstract: Explanations for driver decisions to hit-and-run have largely been based around a rational choice perspective that suggests drivers consider the expected costs of reporting a collision against the benefits of leaving the scene (see Tay et al., 2008; Fujita et al., 2014). Although such an explanation appears plausible, previous research has largely focused upon identifying contributory or contextual factors through analysis of quantitative datasets rather than engage with drivers in order to understand how they make the decision to ‘run’. This paper explores the application of the rational 2 choice perspective to hit-and-run driving. First, it develops an analytical framework based upon the rational choice decision making process put forward by Tay et al. (2008). Second, through analysis of 52 interviews with offenders, it examines how drivers structure the decision to leave the scene. Third, a typology of drivers is developed that illustrates that hit-and-run is not always based upon rational decision making. Finally, the paper concludes with some implications for further research and the prevention of hit-and-run collisions.
DOI Link: 10.1177/1748895817740173
ISSN: 1748-8958
eISSN: 1748-8966
Links: http://hdl.handle.net/2381/41615
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1748895817740173
Version: Post-print
Status: Peer-reviewed
Type: Journal Article
Rights: Copyright © 2018, SAGE Publications. Deposited with reference to the publisher’s open access archiving policy. (http://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved)
Appears in Collections:Published Articles, Dept. of Criminology

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Theorizing+%27Hit+and+run%27_accepted.pdfPost-review (final submitted author manuscript)375.45 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in LRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.