1. travel
2. transports
3. road travel
4. road accident

Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Accident Analysis and Prevention
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aap
Convicted of fatigued driving: Who, why and how?
Igor Radun ∗ , Jenni E. Radun
Department of Psychology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 9 November 2008
Received in revised form 26 April 2009
Accepted 29 April 2009
Keywords:
Sleepiness
Fatigue
Motor-vehicle accidents
Seasonality
Alcohol
Amphetamines
a b s t r a c t
Fatigue is a major cause of road traffic accidents. However, due to the blurred concept of fatigue and
the lack of reliable testing devices (cf. the breath analyzer for alcohol levels), it is extremely difficult to
incorporate fatigue in operationalized terms into either traffic or criminal law. Even though the Finnish
Road Traffic Act explicitly forbids driving while tired, it is done only on a general level among other
factors (sickness, etc.) that impair a driver’s fitness to drive (Article 63). The present study was done
to investigate the circumstances of fatigue driving offenses. From the Finnish Vehicle Administration
driver record database we extracted all drivers (N = 768) punished under Article 63 from 2004–2005. Of
these drivers, 90.4% committed a fatigue-related traffic offense. Accidents, predominantly single vehicle,
were the most common (92.5%) consequence of fatigued driving. Although fatigue-related accidents are
thought to be serious, our data shows that most of the accidents (81.6%) did not involve personal injuries.
Almost every twentieth driver was punished because his vehicle was drifting on the road. The presence
of alcohol or drugs was noted in 13% of the cases. Only 3.1% of the punished drivers officially denied being
tired or falling asleep. Young men (≤35 yrs) represented 50% of all punished drivers. Time of day and
seasonal effects were clear in this data. This study shows that even without a reliable fatigue detector
and unambiguous criteria for recognizing the contribution of fatigue to accident causation, Finnish police
and the courts punish a significant number of drivers every year on the basis of fatigue.
© 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Recognizing an accident as sleep related is a central problem
when dealing with fatigue and sleepiness problems while driving.
An adequate identification of the risk factors and risk groups is
necessary to be able to conduct safety campaigns aiming at the
reduction of sleep-related accidents. Prosecuting drivers on the
basis of tiredness/sleepiness also depends on the validity and reliability of the accident investigation process.
The official statistics from many countries regarding fatiguerelated accidents are missing because causal factors are not
routinely recorded (Horne and Reyner, 1999). Furthermore, even
when a checklist of accident causes is included on police accident
reporting forms, it does not necessarily include fatigue as one of
the choices (Knipling and Wang, 1994). Nevertheless, reanalyzing
and revaluating police reports is a usual practice when estimating
the number of fatigue-related accidents (e.g., Horne and Reyner,
1995). For example, in the US from 1989 to 1993, 1% of all policereported accidents and 3.6% of fatal accidents were attributed to
∗ Corresponding author at: Human Factors and Safety Behavior Group, Department of Psychology, PO Box 9, 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland.
Tel.: +358 9 19129508; fax: +358 9 19129481.
E-mail address: igor.radun@helsinki.fi (I. Radun).
URL: http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/radun (I. Radun).
0001-4575/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.aap.2009.04.024
driver drowsiness (Knipling and Wang, 1994). Similarly, in Switzerland sleepiness was a causative factor in 1% of traffic accidents that
included bodily injury or property damage in excess of 500 Swiss
francs (Laube et al., 1998). In Sweden, from 1994 to 2001, 3% of
single vehicle accidents reported to the police were fatigue related
(Anund et al., 2002). Finally, in New South Wales, Australia about
20% of fatal accidents were found to be fatigue related (Roads and
Traffic Authority, 2001).
In addition to the blurred concept of fatigue, the inexistence of a
validated and reliable device for detecting the level of sleepiness (cf.
the breath analyzer for alcohol levels) aggravates the work of investigating officers. Unfortunately, there is little evidence that such a
device will be available in the (near) future. Therefore, investigating officers have to rely on other clues coming from the participants
themselves, eyewitnesses, and the characteristics of the crash itself.
However, there are no criteria for the unambiguous detection of
fatigue/sleepiness as a major or contributing factor in accident causation. Whether the particular accident will be coded into official
statistics as sleep related or not depends solely on police officers’
subjective opinions.
When judging whether driver fatigue contributed to an accident,
investigating officers, obviously, do not have direct knowledge of a
driver’s preaccident condition. In addition, a driver’s arousal and
emotional state changes after the accident and does not necessary
reveal anything about the preaccident condition. Drivers might also
have difficulties recollecting the period prior to the accident and
870
I. Radun, J.E. Radun / Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
even the accident itself due to traumatic effects of the accident. In
a case when a driver falls asleep and causes the accident, the recollection might be even poorer. Such an assumption comes from
experimental results showing that subjects who fall asleep usually
deny having been asleep if woken up within two minutes (Bonnet
and Moore, 1982; Horne and Reyner, 1999). On the other hand, in
cases when drivers are able to recall information about the causes of
the accident, they do not necessarily report it. It might be that some
drivers are not willing to admit to falling asleep due to the embarrassment of being labeled a bad driver or concerns about insurance
and legal consequences (Corfitsen, 1999; Reyner and Horne, 1998).
How police officers attribute the cause of an accident is undoubtedly influenced by current developments in safety research and
practices. As Ogden and Moskowitz (2004) pointed out, “Police
descriptions of crashes are typically assigned to the cause of current interest.” These authors offer an example of how through
the second half of the twentieth century “inattention” became a
favored explanation instead of “loss of control” for the same type of
crashes at T-intersections. Furthermore, focusing on other aspects
of the accident, typically on alcohol involvement, might leave the
role of fatigue/sleepiness in the accident causation unnoticed (e.g.,
Corfitsen, 2003). However, it is well known that besides stimulatory effects, alcohol has sedative effects that are present at higher
doses and at the descending phase of the BAC (blood alcohol concentration) curve (Roehrs and Roth, 2001). Even minimal alcohol
consumption and increased sleepiness represent a hazardous combination (Banks et al., 2004).
Given these difficulties in defining and detecting fatigue, it is a
real challenge to incorporate fatigue in operationalized terms into
either traffic or criminal law. Worldwide, there are many current
discussions on how this challenge can be met.
An in-depth debate on this topic was recently conducted in
Australia (Victorian Government, 2004; Tasmania Law Reform
Institute, 2007) and the UK (House of Commons, 2006). The biggest
step toward addressing the legal responsibilities concerning driver
fatigue was taken in the state of New Jersey, US, with the introduction of the so-called “Maggie’s Law.” Under this law, a driver who
causes an accident after being awake for more than 24 consecutive hours can be convicted of second-degree vehicular homicide
and sentenced to up to 10 years in prison and fined a maximum of
$100,000.
The Finnish Road Traffic Act (RTA) explicitly forbids driving while
tired in Article 63 (3.8.1990/676), which addresses the driver’s fitness to drive: a person that does not meet the requirements for
driving because of illness or tiredness or another similar reason or
whose health condition no longer fulfills the requirements needed
for granting a driver’s license must not drive a vehicle (unofficial
translation). It is unknown how many drivers are charged because of
fatigued driving under Article 63 and what the actual consequences
are of such fatigued driving. Therefore, the aim of the study was to
describe how this law is applied in practice and to determine the circumstances of fatigue driving offenses, including the identification
of risk factors and risk groups.
2. Method
2.1. Data
From the Finnish Vehicle Administration driver record database
we extracted all drivers (N = 776) punished under Article 63 of the
RTA from 2004 to 2005. Of these drivers, 632 received a punishment
directly from the prosecutors, 131 from the district courts and 13
from the courts of appeal. The decisions covering the selected sample were requested from the prosecutor offices and courts in charge
stationed around Finland. Court decisions in Finland are available
to the public, and obtaining them for research purposes is free of
charge. We obtained altogether 768 out of 776 cases (99%); due
to unknown reasons only eight cases could not have been traced.
More specifically, we obtained 628 out of 632 (99.4%) prosecutor
decisions, 129 out of 131 (98.5%) district court decisions, and 11 out
of 13 (84.6%) courts of appeal decisions.
2.2. Prosecutor and court decisions
A prosecutor decision is based on police investigation form that
includes a list of predefined information to fill in (date, time, place,
etc.), a short description of the offense (in police officer’s own
words), and in most cases an explanation of the offense and the
basis for the charge. The accused has to sign the completed form
and by doing so accepts what is written there; however, the accused
has the possibility to give a statement providing his view of the
incident, which can be contrary to the information provided by the
investigating police officer. If the defendant officially contests the
notification, a charge might be brought in a district court. Compared
to prosecutor decisions, district court and court of appeal decisions
have significantly more text and information available (e.g., eyewitness statements). They are written by the court and include the final
decision, the reasoning and the grounds on which it was based, and
a summary of the court process. Although for each and every case
we had one type of court decision, the analysis of the whole sample
was possible because all three types of court’s decisions contained
information (age and sex of defendant, vehicles involved, injury
severity, defendant’s testimony, etc.) necessary for the purpose of
the research.
2.3. The law
There are a number of acts and decrees covering road safety
in Finland, of which the Road Traffic Act (267/1981) is the most
important. The Road Traffic Act (RTA) and the Penal Code (PC) define
penalties for traffic crimes, but only the PC defines crimes leading to
imprisonment. Fixed fines are used only for minor traffic offenses
(e.g., slightly exceeding the speed limit); while day-fines (from 1
to 120) are the predominant form of punishment. The actual sum
of a day-fine depends on the monthly income and the assets of the
offender (Joutsen et al., 2001).1 This day-fine system has been used
in Finland as a form of punishment for all kinds of offenses (not only
traffic offenses) since its introduction in 1921.
A very important issue regarding the Article 63 that forbids fatigued driving is that breaking it, by default, is a traffic
offense that brings a day-fine punishment (RTA Art.103). However, depending on the seriousness of the offense, a fatigued
driver can be charged with Endangering Traffic Safety (RTA Art.
98; PC Ch. 23, Sec. 1) and possibly with Gross Endangering Traffic Safety (RTA Art. 99; PC Ch. 23, Sec. 2). Breaking these articles
brings criminal responsibility and might lead to imprisonment
(see Appendix). (An unofficial translation of PC can be found at:
www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1889/en18890039.pdf).
2.4. Data analysis
Our analysis was based on information extracted from the prosecutor and court decisions. A list of variables included sex, age and
profession of the driver, date, time and place of the incident, vehicles
1
Since traffic offenders pay fines in proportion to their incomes, without
any upper limit, it is possible for someone to pay an extremely high fine
for committing a traffic offense: for example, in 2004 a Finnish millionaire
was fined D 170,000 or $216,000 for speeding (26 days’ income of D 6,538)
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3477285.stm).
I. Radun, J.E. Radun / Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
involved, possible injuries and intoxication, the presence of other
crimes and charges in addition to the charge with Article 63, and
driver’s testimony. Using these variables we present the characteristics of the fatigue-related incidents mostly in terms of descriptive
statistics. Chi-square, t-test and logistic regression were used for
the comparison of drivers who were judged to have fallen asleep or
been only fatigued. A hierarchical log-linear analysis was used to
examine the seasonality and time-of-day effects in relation to the
age and sex of the drivers. Both backward elimination and forward
selection procedures were used to obtain the best fitting model. A
log-likelihood ratio goodness-of-fit statistic (G2 ) was used to evaluate the adequacy of the model. In order to avoid empty cell values
in cross tabulations in logistic regression and log-linear analyses,
the following variables were categorized: age (≤25, 26–35, 36–45,
56–65, ≥66), time of day (00:01–06:00, 06:01–12:00, etc.), and
season (January-March, April-June, etc).
3. Results
3.1. Basis for a charge
Although Article 63 of the RTA lists not only fatigue, but also
sickness and other factors concerning a driver’s fitness to drive,
after examining all decisions (N = 768) in detail, we found that
most (N = 694, 90.4%) of the drivers punished under this article
committed a fatigue-related traffic offense. Other reasons (6.9%)
mostly included driving impairment due to different diseases (diabetes, epilepsy, etc). In 21 cases (2.7%) we were unable to find any
information about why these drivers were punished under Article
63. In further analysis, only fatigue-related offenses were included
(N = 694).
Whether a particular case went to a district court and later possibly to a court of appeal or whether it stayed only at a prosecutor
level depended mostly on drug/alcohol involvement, injury severity, and the presence of other crimes (drug possession, robbery, etc.)
rather than on the “severity” of fatigue inducing behavior. Among
the drivers punished of fatigued driving, 71.6% were accused of
falling asleep behind the wheel; for the rest, fatigue was noted as a
major contributor to their driving incidents.
3.2. Traffic incidents and consequences
In 92.5% of the cases, a fatigued driver was involved in some
kind of an accident, mostly a single vehicle accident (81% of all incidents) (Table 1). Almost every twentieth (4.9%) driver was punished
because his vehicle was drifting on the road and endangering road
safety even though there was no physical contact with other vehicles. Three drivers (0.4%) were found asleep in a car in the crossing
while waiting to turn or join the main road. Some drivers (1.9%)
committed other driving offenses (crossing an intersection against
a red light, driving in the wrong direction, etc.) due to fatigue. Only
in two cases (0.3%) was no information available about the driving
incident.
871
Naturally, personal injuries were present only in accidents
(N = 642), of which 81.6% did not involve injuries. In 17.1% of the accidents, someone was slightly or seriously injured, and eight (1.2%)
accidents were fatal. There was no connection between accident
severity (injury vs. no injury) and whether the driver was judged to
have fallen asleep or been only fatigued (Chi-square test, 2 = 0.33,
d.f. = 1, p > 0.05).
In addition to the charge of driving while fatigued, a large majority of drivers (96.1%) were convicted of endangering traffic safety
(RTA Art. 98), 11 drivers (1.6%) of grossly endangering traffic safety
(RTA Art. 99), and 16 (2.3%) of a less serious traffic offense (RTA
Art.103). A day-fine was the most predominant (90.3%) type of punishment with an average number of 16 day-fines. The rest of the
drivers (9.7%) received a prison sentence: of these 32.8% actually
went to prison, for 52.2% the prison sentence was suspended, and
14.9% did community work instead of going to prison. Similarly
to the severity of the charge, the severity of the punishment was
mostly related to drug/alcohol involvement, injury severity, and the
presence of other crimes (drug possession, robbery, etc.) rather than
on the “severity” of fatigue inducing behavior.
3.3. Alcohol and drugs
The presence of alcohol or drugs was noted in 92 (13.3%) cases.
Five drivers had a BAC below the legal limit of 0.05%, 60 drivers were
above the limit (40 had their BAC above 0.12%, which is in Finland
regarded as gross drunkenness). An additional 27 drivers consumed
substances which were generally illegal or whose usage is forbidden
while driving (15 cases of amphetamines, 4 cases of drug mixtures,
5 cases of taking sleeping pills, 1 of cannabis, 2 of medicine). There
was no difference in BAC levels between intoxicated drivers who
were judged to have fallen asleep or who had only been fatigued
(t-test, t = 0.84, d.f. = 58, p > 0.05).
3.4. Drivers’ testimony
Every sixth driver admitted to falling asleep or being tired,
drowsy, or sleepy before the incident (Table 2). Only 3.1% of the punished drivers officially denied being tired or falling asleep; however,
four of the eight drivers that caused a fatal accident did so. One of
these four drivers suggested that the appearance of a moose on the
road was the cause of the accident. Another told the police officer
just after the accident that he had fallen asleep but denied this later
in court. Most of the drivers admitted the charge of fatigued driving by accepting the charge as a whole or a more specific charge of
fatigued driving.
3.5. Age, sex, and profession
The drivers were predominantly men (80.7%) and of young age;
men 35 years old and younger represented 50% of all punished
drivers (Fig. 1). Regarding the profession of the drivers, there was
Table 2
Drivers’ testimony regarding the charge of fatigued driving.
Table 1
Type of fatigue-related offense.
N
N
%
Single accident
Head-on accident
Rear-end accident
Other accidents
Drifting
Fell asleep in a stopped car in the crossing
Other driving incident
Unknown
562
41
14
25
34
3
13
2
81.0%
5.9%
2.0%
3.6%
4.9%
0.4%
1.9%
0.3%
Total
694
100.0%
%
Accepts the charge/decision by signing (prosecutor)
Admits the charge generally or specifically (district court
or court of appeal)
Admits to having fallen asleep
Admits to being tired/drowsy/having a lack of sleep
Denies falling asleep/being tired
Admitted then denied
No information (district court)
469
85
67.6%
12.2%
68
44
15
6
7
9.8%
6.3%
2.2%
0.9%
1.0%
Total
694
100.0%
872
I. Radun, J.E. Radun / Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
Fig. 1. Number of fatigue-related offenses by sex and age of drivers (N = 694).
a large variability in reporting details in the available documentation. For 5% of the drivers, the profession was unknown. Of the rest,
we managed to identify the following large distinct groups: 17.7% of
the drivers were students, 8.8% were professional drivers, 7.1% were
retired, and 2.1% were military conscripts. The rest were difficult to
classify, but roughly 40% of the drivers had low education. Regarding the 58 professional drivers, we found that at least 41 (70.7%) of
them were driving on duty; nine truck drivers had broken the rules
about duty and rest hours.
3.6. Time of day
A clear overall time-of-day effect can be seen in Fig. 2, while a
distinct time-of-day and age pattern are depicted in Fig. 3. It should
be noted here that time of the offense was unknown in 5.2% of the
cases; therefore number of cases in Figs. 2 and 3 is 658. The best
fitting model in hierarchical log-linear analysis (G2 = 16.99, d.f. = 23,
p = 0.81) included the main effect of sex and an interaction between
time-of-day and age. This indicates that men commit more fatiguerelated offences (as also Fig. 1 shows), although men and women
do not differ across age groups in terms of time of day. The interaction between age and time-of-day is such that the youngest drivers
Fig. 2. Time of day distribution of fatigue-related offenses (N = 658).
Fig. 3. Time of day distribution of fatigue-related offenses by age of drivers (N = 658).
(≤25 yrs) had their fatigue-related offenses predominantly at night,
while the proportion of daytime offenses increases with drivers’ age
(Fig. 3). Almost two-thirds (62.5%) of the offenses for drivers up to
25 years old occurred between Friday and Sunday.
3.7. Season
The data also shows a clear seasonal effect. After a sharp rise
from April to May, the peak of fatigue-related offenses is reached
in July (Fig. 4). A hierarchical log-linear analysis showed no interactions between variables season, and age and sex of the drivers;
only the main effects of all three factors were significant (G2 = 40.84,
d.f. = 38, p = 0.347). This indicates that the seasonality of fatiguerelated offenses is present across all age and sex groups.
3.8. Falling asleep vs. fatigue
In order to predict whether a driver was judged to have fallen
asleep or being only fatigued when causing an accident (N = 642),
we applied a logistic regression with several predictor variables.
These included age and sex of the driver, intoxication (no, BAC
above the limit, or under the influence of drug/medication), time
of day, and season. The only two variables with some predic-
Fig. 4. Monthly distribution of fatigue-related offenses (N = 694).
I. Radun, J.E. Radun / Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
tive power were time of the accident and intoxication. Compared
with nonintoxicated drivers, those who were under the influence
of drug/medication were less likely found to have fallen asleep
(OR = 0.29, CI 0.10–0.79), while there was no difference for those
who were intoxicated above the legal BAC limit of 0.05% (OR = 0.80,
CI 0.40–1.61). Compared with accidents occurring from 18:01 to
24:00, drivers were more likely found to have fallen asleep during
the night hours 00:01–06:00 (OR = 2.21, CI 1.19–4.11), and afternoon
12:01–18:00 (OR = 2.20, CI 1.18–4.13), while there was no difference
for morning hours 06:01–12:00 (OR = 1.61, CI 0.87–3.01).
4. Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study that analyzes the circumstances of fatigue-related traffic offenses from a large set of
data. Previous studies reported only single accidents (Rajaratnam
and Jones, 2004) or a few cases (Desai et al., 2003). In our recent
study (Radun et al., 2009), we also analyzed only nine fatal headon crashes and reported differences in the discussions held and
conclusions reached between multidisciplinary accident investigation teams and Finnish district courts regarding the contribution of
fatigue to accident causation.
Given the well-known difficulties in recognizing fatigue and
convicting a driver on the basis of fatigue, the strength of the
present data is that the contribution of fatigue to accident causation
has been “confirmed” on several levels: police officer investigation, court rulings, and driver testimony. Only 3.1% of the punished
drivers in our study officially denied being tired or falling asleep.
Of course, it is possible that some expressed objections remained
unmentioned in the available documentation. Nevertheless, we can
assume that such a possibility is unlikely since most of the accused
signed a statement (for a prosecutor decision) or verbally admitted
the charge (in a district court or court of appeal). On the other hand,
given the generally low penalties typical of the Finnish legal system
(Joutsen et al., 2001) and the fact that breaking Article 63 does not
bring harsher penalties, it might be that some drivers did not find it
necessary to object to the charge of falling asleep behind the wheel
or being impaired due to fatigue. We may only speculate that if the
law had been significantly different (stricter), as is Maggie’s Law, for
example, more people probably would have objected. The fact that
four of the eight drivers who caused a fatal accident denied being
tired prior to the accident supports the hypothesis that defendants
are reluctant to admit to being tired or falling asleep and take the
responsibility in a case of a more serious traffic offense and thus
possibly face a harsher penalty. In our previous study (Radun et al.,
2009), we reported a similar situation in which one of nine defendants changed his statement during the investigation process and
the other blamed the cause of a fatal accident on a moose.
This study brings new findings concerning fatigue-related incidents
as well as the recognition of fatigue in traffic. It is generally believed
that sleep-related accidents are likely to have serious consequences
(Horne and Reyner, 1999); however, the present data shows that
more than 80% of fatigue-related accidents did not involve personal
injuries. This is in contrast with, for example, a report by Pack et al.
(1995) in which only 40.6% of the falling-asleep accidents did not
involve personal injuries. However, there is a possibility that some
differences in reporting minor accidents exist between Finland and
the US, especially when dealing with single vehicle accidents.
It is also thought that police officers are likely to neglect the
contribution of fatigue in the case of an intoxicated driver (e.g.,
Corfitsen, 2003). Our data shows that 13% of the drivers were
convicted on the basis of fatigue in addition to the presence of intoxication. In some cases, it was evident from the available material
that police officers pointed to the high BAC as the cause of falling
asleep behind the wheel. This shows that these police officers in
873
their investigation went beyond simply attributing the accident
to high levels of alcohol. However, given that a drunk driver was
involved in 18% of 6767 accidents involving personal injuries in
2004, while in 2005 the proportion was slightly smaller (16.1% of
7002 accidents) (Statistics Finland, 2007), it seems that fatigue is
not often investigated in connection with intoxication. Interestingly, every sixth intoxicated driver had traces of amphetamines
in his blood sample. Amphetamines are stimulants, but it is typical
that after a long acute use and prolonged wakefulness (e.g., several
days), an exhausted user will fall asleep and remain asleep for 12
to 18 h (Murray, 1998). From the available documentation it was
unclear what role, if any, amphetamines had in the development of
the drivers’ fatigue. Driving under the influence of drugs, especially
amphetamines, is an increasing problem in Finland (Ojaniemi et al.,
2009).
Another important finding is that 4.9% of all the punished drivers
were found guilty of fatigued driving because their vehicle was
drifting on the road, endangering road safety. However, as in the
case of an accident, drifting is a sufficiently significant traffic offense
that accompanying charge of fatigued driving can be rather seen as
an explanation for the action than as a more serious charge. Therefore, it is not surprising that none of these drivers denied being
tired. Otherwise, it would have been indeed difficult to “prove” that
their increased fatigue had resulted in the vehicle’s drifting. As we
understand from our contacts with Finnish police, this seems to be
a problem that police officers face on a daily basis. It is not unusual
for a police officer to stop a driver because of weird driving (drifting)
and suspected intoxication, only to discover that the driver seems
only very tired.
The seasonality of fatigue-related traffic offenses is clear in this
data. This is similar to our two studies where the number and proportion of sleep-related fatal accidents were much higher in the
summertime (Radun and Radun, 2006; Summala et al., 2003). Our
recent survey data indicated a similar trend in self-reported cases
of falling asleep while driving (Radun and Radun, 2008). To our
knowledge, only a few reports have discussed the possible seasonal
variation of sleep-related road accidents. For example, Langlois et al.
(1985) reported a seasonal pattern in fatigue-related single-vehicle
accidents in Texas, with the highest number in May and July and
the lowest number in January and February. The reasons behind
this seasonality are still to be discovered; we proposed an explanation in relation to different driving and lifestyle habits between
seasons, including sleep quality and age effects (Radun and Radun,
2006).
Our study also confirms previous findings on a new type of data
regarding the characteristics of fatigue-related crashes. Time-of-day
effects are clearly visible in this data and are consistent with
those found on fatigue-related accidents investigated by the police
(Horne and Reyner, 1995) or multidisciplinary investigation teams
(Radun and Summala, 2004). Age and sex effects are also in line
with previous results. Men 35 years old and younger represented
50% of all punished drivers. Similarly to the data on fatal accidents (Summala and Mikkola, 1994), older (retired) drivers commit
their fatigue-related offenses mostly during the afternoon, while
younger drivers are overrepresented at night (especially during
weekends). Many of these young drivers were students who often
sleep too little as a part of their lifestyle habits (Carskadon, 1990).
On the other hand, some of these young drivers were military conscripts, and although they represented 2.1% of all the drivers, one
of the eight fatal accidents in this data was caused by a young military conscript. This conscript was driving home from the garrison
after a long night march. There is growing evidence that Finnish
military conscripts are at high risk of falling asleep while driving,
especially when driving home from the garrison (Partinen, 1982;
Radun et al., 2007; Sipinen, 1990). Professional drivers were also
identified as a risk group, with some of them breaking the rules
874
I. Radun, J.E. Radun / Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
about duty and rest hours. Self-reported data shows that 40% of
Finnish long-haul drivers drive more than 10 h within a 24-h period,
breaking EC Regulation No. 3820/85 (Häkkänen and Summala,
2000).
The present data shows that Finnish police and courts punish on
average one driver per day on the basis of fatigued driving (years
2004–2005). Given that the number of accidents involving personal injuries in 2004 was 6767 while in 2005 was 7002 (Statistics
Finland, 2007) and that the number of drivers involved in injury
accidents and punished of fatigued driving during these two years
was altogether 118, as identified in the present study, a rough estimation is that less than 1% of injury accidents were related to
fatigue. However, data available from other sources suggests that
this is underestimating the role of fatigue in accident causation in
Finland. There is a long tradition of in-depth analysis of all fatal
road crashes in Finland that is a part of the national safety program. Multidisciplinary investigation teams investigating accidents
in depth should by default provide more reliable identification of
the contribution of fatigue in accident causation, and therefore this
method should result in a more accurate estimation of fatiguerelated accidents. Our analysis based on the data collected by these
teams shows that in a sample of nonprofessional nonintoxicated
drivers, 10.1% of the drivers fell asleep and caused a fatal accident,
while fatigue was a contributing factor in an additional 5.2% of the
cases (Radun and Summala, 2004). Another estimation based on the
same data gives an upper estimate of 30% with alcohol-intoxicated
drivers included (Partinen, 2004). Furthermore, our recent survey
on a representative sample of Finnish driving population shows that
19.5% of the surveyed drivers had fallen asleep while driving at some
point during their driving career, while 15.9% reported being close
to falling asleep or having difficulties staying awake while driving during the last 12 months (Radun and Radun, 2006). In all of
these studies young male drivers were identified as especially risky
group.
4.1. Limitations
Estimating the proportion of injury accidents as fatigue related
on the basis of fatigue-related offences obviously produces an
underestimation. As previously noted such underestimations are
typical for data based on police officer judgments. However, this is
still a respectable proportion given that these drivers were actually punished on the basis of fatigued driving. This proportion is
similar to official statistics from other countries that are based on
checklists of accident causes included on police accident reporting forms. Furthermore, the purpose of this research was not to
estimate the prevalence of fatigue-related injury accidents or incidents; we rather described the application of the law that forbids
fatigued driving, and determined the circumstances of fatigue driving offenses. Another limitation, as pointed out by one of the
reviewers, relates to the possibility of prosecution or conviction
bias given the overrepresentation of young male drivers in our
sample. It is well known that (young) men are more likely to
receive a ticket after being stopped by a police officer (e.g., Homel,
1983). However, it is also well documented that young male drivers
are at high risk of having fatigue-related traffic incidents. Studies from different parts of the world using various types of data
(police accident databases, multidisciplinary investigation teams
decisions, drivers’ self-reports, etc.) confirm that. Therefore, it is not
surprising that young male drivers committed the most of fatiguerelated offenses in our data. Despite these limitations, the strength
of the present data regarding the evaluation of the contribution of
fatigue to accident causation remains. This relatively large sample
of a new type of data allowed us to present several new findings
and confirm some of the well-known characteristics of fatigued
driving.
4.2. Conclusion
In conclusion, the present data shows that even without a reliable fatigue detector and unambiguous criteria for recognizing the
contribution of fatigue to accident causation, Finnish police and the
courts punish a significant number of drivers every year on the basis
of fatigue. Some drivers are even punished due to “only” the act of
drifting on a road. Although Finnish traffic law explicitly forbids
driving while tired only on a general level regarding a driver’s fitness to drive, it allows a wide interpretation of the evidence in a
concrete case. However, it seems that in the case of a serious traffic
offense (e.g., an accident or drifting into an opposite lane), a charge
of fatigued driving does not bring a significantly higher penalty,
usually only in terms of day-fines. Therefore, it is clear why the
charges and convictions of fatigued driving in the cases covered in
the present study have gone smoothly through without too many
objections from the defendants. The struggle to incorporate fatigue
into traffic or criminal law and adequately recognize and punish
fatigued drivers continues.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to Anu Ylä-Pietilä and Johanna RokkaEkebom from AKE, Pertti Mäkeläinen and Jussi Pohjonen from the
National Traffic Police, Harri Kukkola and Heikki Pietilä from the
Ministry of Interior, and Marjatta Syväterä from the Legal Register
Centre for their help in data collection. We also thank Jussi Ohisalo
and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments. This
study was supported in part by a grant from the Finnish Cultural
Foundation.
Appendix A.
Endangering Traffic Safety—causing a traffic hazard (RTA Art.
98, PC Ch. 23, Sec. 1): A road user who deliberately or negligently breaches the Road Traffic Act (267/1981) or the Vehicle
Act (1090/2002) or the regulations or orders issued on the basis
thereof, in a manner conducive to causing a hazard to others, shall
be sentenced for endangering the traffic safety to a fine or to imprisonment for at most six months.
Grossly Endangering Traffic Safety—causing a serious traffic hazard (RTA Art. 99, PC Ch. 23, Sec. 2): If in the causing of a traffic hazard,
the driver of a motor-driven vehicle or tram deliberately or grossly
negligently (1) significantly exceeds the maximum speed limit; (2)
starts to overtake while the visibility is insufficient for safe overtaking or while overtaking is otherwise not allowed; (3) fails to
heed the duty to stop or give way required by traffic safety; or (4) in
another comparable manner breaches the traffic regulations, so that
the act is conducive to causing serious danger to another’s health
or safety, the offender shall be sentenced for gross endangering the
traffic safety to at least 30 day-fines or to imprisonment for at most
two years.
References
Anund, A., Kecklund, G., Larsson, J., 2002. Trötthet I focus (No. VTI rapport 933-2002).
Linköping: Statens Väg och Transportforskningsinstitut.
Banks, S., Catcheside, P., Lack, L., Grunstein, R.R., McEvoy, R.D., 2004. Low levels of
alcohol impair driving simulator performance and reduce perception of crash
risk in partially sleep deprived subjects. Sleep 27, 1063–1067.
Bonnet, M.H., Moore, S.E., 1982. The threshold of sleep—perception of sleep as a
function of time asleep and auditory threshold. Sleep 5, 267–276.
Carskadon, M., 1990. Adolescent Sleepiness: increased risk in a high-risk population.
Alcohol, Drugs and Driving 5–6, 317–328.
Corfitsen, M.T., 1999. ’Fatigue’ among young male night-time car drivers: is there a
risk-taking group? Safety Science 33 (1–2), 47–57.
Corfitsen, M.T., 2003. Tiredness! a natural explanation to The Grand Rapid “DIP”.
Accident Analysis and Prevention 35, 401–406.
I. Radun, J.E. Radun / Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009) 869–875
Desai, A.V., Ellis, E., Wheatley, J.R., Grunstein, R.R., 2003. Fatal distraction: a case
series of fatal fall-asleep road accidents and their medicolegal outcomes. Medical
Journal of Australia 178, 396–399.
Häkkänen, H., Summala, H., 2000. Driver sleepiness-related problems, health status,
and prolonged driving among professional heavy-vehicle drivers. Transportation
Human Factors 2, 151–171.
Homel, R., 1983. Young men in the arms of the law—an Australian perspective on
policing and punishing the drinking driver. Accident Analysis and Prevention
15, 499–512.
Horne, J., Reyner, L., 1999. Vehicle accidents related to sleep: a review. Occupational
and Environmental Medicine 56, 289–294.
Horne, J., Reyner, L., 1995. Sleep-related vehicle accidents. British Medical Journal
310, 565–567.
House of Commons, Transport Committee, 2006. Roads policing and technology:
getting the right balance. Tenth Report of Session 2005–06. The Stationery Office
Limited, London.
Joutsen, M., Lahti, R., Pölönen, P., 2001. Criminal justice systems in Europe and North
America. European Institute for Crime Prevention and Controlaffiliated with the
United Nations, Helsinki, Finland.
Knipling, R. R., Wang, J. S., 1994. Research note: Crashes and Fatalities Related
to Driver Drowsiness/Fatigue. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
Washington, D.C.
Langlois, P.H., Smolensky, M.H., Hsi, B.P., Weir, F.W., 1985. Temporal patterns of
reported single-vehicle car and truck accidents in Texas, U.S.A. during 1980-1983.
Chronobiology International 2, 131–140.
Laube, I., Seeger, R., Russi, E.W., Bloch, K.E., 1998. Accidents related to sleepiness:
review of medical causes and prevention with special reference to Switzerland
Schweizerische Medizinische Wochenschrift. Journal Suisse de Medecine 128,
1487–1499.
Murray, J.B., 1998. Psychophysiological aspects of amphetamine-methamphetamine
abuse. Journal of Psychology 132, 227–237.
Ogden, E.J., Moskowitz, H., 2004. Effects of alcohol and other drugs on driver performance. Traffic Injury Prevention 5, 185–198.
Ojaniemi, K.K., Lintonen, T.P., Impinen, A.O., Lillsunde, P.M., Ostamo, A.I., 2009. Trends
in driving under the influence of drugs: a register-based study of DUID suspects
during 1977–2007. Accident Analysis and Prevention 41, 191–196.
Pack, A.I., Pack, A.M., Rodgman, E., Cucchiara, A., Dinges, D.F., Schwab, C.W., 1995.
Characteristics of crashes attributed to the driver having fallen asleep. Accident
Analysis and Prevention 27, 769–775.
Partinen, M., 1982. Suomalaisten miesten nukkumistottumukset ja unihäiriöt ennen
varusmiespalvelusta, varusmiespalveluksen aikana ja sen jälkeen (Sleeping
875
habits and sleep disorders in Finnish conscripts before, during and after military
service). Sotilaslääket Aikakauslehti 57 (Suppl 1), 1–96.
Partinen, M., 2004. Väsymys ja nukahtaminen kuolemaan johtaneissa liikenneonnettomuuksissa (Fatigue and falling-asleep in fatal traffic accidents). VALT,
Helsinki.
Radun, I., Ohisalo, J., Radun, J.E., Summala, H., Tolvanen, M., 2009. Fell asleep and
caused a fatal head-on crash? A case study of multidisciplinary in-depth analysis
vs. the court. Traffic Injury Prevention 10, 76–83.
Radun, I., Summala, H., 2004. Sleep-related fatal vehicle accidents: characteristics of
decisions made by multidisciplinary investigation teams. Sleep 27, 224–227.
Radun, I., Radun, J.E., 2006. Seasonal variation of falling asleep while driving: an
examination of fatal road accidents. Chronobiology International 23, 1053–1064.
Radun, I., Radun, J.E., 2008. Väsyneena ajaminen. Mikä on tilanne Suomessa? (Fatigue
and driving: the situation in Finland). Liikenneturva, Helsinki.
Radun, I., Radun, J.E., Summala, H., Sallinen, M., 2007. Fatal road accidents among
Finnish military conscripts: fatigue-impaired driving. Military Medicine 172,
1204–1210.
Rajaratnam, S.M.W., Jones, C.B., 2004. Lessons about sleepiness and driving from
the Selby rail disaster case: R v Gary Neil Hart. Chronobiology International 21,
1073–1077.
Reyner, L.A., Horne, J.A., 1998. Falling asleep whilst driving: are drivers aware of prior
sleepiness? International Journal of Legal Medicine 111, 120–123.
Roads and Traffic Authority, NSW, 2001. Road Traffic Accidents in New South
Wales 2000, Available from http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/
accident statistics dl4.html.
Roehrs, T., Roth, T., 2001. Sleep, sleepiness, sleep disorders and alcohol use and abuse.
Sleep Medicine Reviews 5, 287–297.
Sipinen, L., 1990. Varusmiehet kuolemankolareissa (Conscripts in fatal accidents).
Liikenneturva, Helsinki.
Statistics Finland, 2007. Statistical Yearbook of Finland 2007. Statistics Finland,
Helsinki.
Summala, H., Karola, J., Radun, I., Couyoumdjian, A., 2003. Kohtaamisonnettomuudet
päätieverkolla – kehitys ja syyt (Head-on crashes on main road network—trends
and causation). Finnish Road Administration, Helsinki.
Summala, H., Mikkola, T., 1994. Fatal accidents among car and truck drivers—effects
of fatigue, age, and alcohol-consumption. Human Factors 36, 315–326.
Tasmania Law Reform Institute, 2007. Criminal liability of drivers who fall asleep
causing motor vehicle crashes resulting in death or other serious injury: Issues
Paper No.12.
Victorian Government, Department of Justice, 2004. Culpable and Dangerous Driving
Laws: Discussion Paper.