Theorizing hit-and-run: A study of driver decision-making processes after a road traffic collision
| Published date | 01 February 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1748895817740173 |
| Date | 01 February 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895817740173
Criminology & Criminal Justice
2019, Vol. 19(1) 45 –61
© The Author(s) 2017
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1748895817740173
journals.sagepub.com/home/crj
Theorizing hit-and-run:
A study of driver decision-
making processes after a
road traffic collision
Matt Hopkins
Leicester University, UK
Sally Chivers
De Montfort University, UK
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. Although such an explanation appears plausible, previous research
has largely focused upon identifying contributory or contextual factors through analysis of
quantitative datasets rather than engaging with drivers in order to understand how they make
the decision to ‘run’. This article explores the application of the rational 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. in 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 article concludes with some implications for further research
and the prevention of hit-and-run collisions.
Keywords
Bounded rationality, driver typologies, hit-and-run, preventative strategies, rational choice
Corresponding author:
Matt Hopkins, Department of Criminology, Leicester University, The Friars, 154 Upper New Walk,
Leicester, LE1 7QA, UK.
Email: mh330@le.ac.uk
740173CRJ0010.1177/1748895817740173Criminology & Criminal JusticeHopkins and Chivers
research-article2017
Article
46 Criminology & Criminal Justice 19(1)
Introduction
A hit-and-run collision is a road traffic crash in which a driver of a striking vehicle flees
the scene without aiding the victim or offering information (Roshandeh et al., 2016: 22).
In the UK, the number of collisions involving a hit-and-driver in which an injury was
sustained increased from 15,390 in 2013 to 17,122 in 2015. Over the same period of
time, the proportion of accidents involving a hit-and-run driver (where any injury was
sustained to a pedestrian, driver or passenger) also increased from 11.1 per cent in 2013
to 12.2 per cent in 2015 (DfT, 2016).1 Previous research has recognized that the propor-
tion of collisions involving a hit-and-run driver varies internationally and according to
the collision type. For example, MacLeod et al. (2012) observed that in the USA between
1998 and 2007, a hit-and-run driver was involved in 18.1 per cent of collisions where
there was a pedestrian fatality compared to 9.6 per cent of similar collisions in Ghana
between 2004 and 2010 (Aidoo et al., 2013). Tay et al. (2008) also observed a rate of 1.8
per cent in all hit-and-run collisions in Singapore between 1992 and 2002, whereas Jiang
et al. (2016) observed a rate of 4.45 per cent for non-pedestrian hit-and-run collisions in
13 urban river-crossing tunnels in Shanghai (China) between 2011 and 2012. It is widely
accepted that hit-and-run collisions increase the risk of death for the victim as leaving the
scene can increase the time it takes for emergency services to arrive (see Roshandeh
et al., 2016; Tay et al., 2008). Other consequences include financial complications if
insurance claims need to be made for damages to vehicles or compensation paid to vic-
tims (Tay et al., 2008), as well as the potential emotional trauma caused to victims
(Mayou and Bryant, 2003).
Although a body of previous research has identified a number of contributory factors
associated with hit-and-run collisions (see below), two main criticisms can be levelled.
While there has been some development of explanatory theory – largely based around a
rational choice perspective – there has been little reflection on this or development of the
approach. In addition, no known research has engaged with offenders to garner their
accounts about the decision to leave the scene. Indeed, it has been commented that
research should attempt to better understand ‘motivating factors for the decision to flee’
(MacLeod et al., 2012: 371), though the previous research has commonly identified the
odds ratios of particular contributory factors being present in hit-and-run collisions,
rather than engage with drivers about decision making. Therefore, this article aims to
build upon the existing research in four stages. First, consideration is given to the previ-
ous research on offender decisions to leave the scene of a collision. Second, using an
analytical framework developed from rational choice perspectives on hit-and-run driv-
ing, the findings from a study of 52 hit-and-run drivers are outlined. Third, the findings
are used to develop topology of hit-and-run drivers. Finally, we consider the implications
for the prevention of hit-and-run and possibilities for future research.
Previous Research on Hit-and-Run
A body of research has explored the reasons for hit-and-run in countries such as China
(Zhang et al., 2014), the USA (MacLeod et al., 2012), Japan (Fujita et al., 2014), Singapore
(Tay et al., 2008) and Ghana (Aidoo et al., 2013). The majority of these studies have
To continue reading
Request your trial