The effects of range versus nonrange driver training on the accident and conviction frequencies of young drivers

The sample consisted of 2,057 high school students from five California high schools who were assigned randomly either to a traditional driver training program (N = 918) or to an experimental program utilizing a driving range (N = 1,139). Aspects of their performance during driver training were measured, as well as performance on tests required for driver licensing and number of days between training and licensing. In addition, Department of Motor Vehicles files supplied information on their accident and conviction records within the year following the beginning of driver training. Results showed that nonrange students performed significantly better on the following training variables: knowledge posttest (p < 0.01), simulator score (p < 0.01), and driver course grade (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between range and nonrange students on driver licensing test scores or in the amount of time spent in becoming licensed. However, range students had fewer total accidents than nonrange students (p < 0.05) in the year following the beginning of training. Time spent on the range during training was not related to frequency of accidents or convictions for range students. Cost-benefit aspects of range training were discussed. Range training is operationally less expensive than traditional training, but costs of constructing a driving range may vary appreciably.