For parents helping a teenager learn to drive, more preparation might seem like the clearest path to greater safety.
New Michigan State University research suggests another factor deserves just as much attention: when a young driver enters the licensing process.
A study led by MSU doctoral student Yuxi Shen and co-authored by Alyssa Ryan, assistant professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering , found that several forms of family support were associated with earlier licensure, while earlier licensure was associated with greater crash involvement. The researchers found that licensing timing accounted for more of that relationship than time spent in supervised or restricted driving stages.
Ryan said one of the most surprising findings involved families who faced obstacles to moving through the licensing process quickly.
“Family barriers, things like not having time to supervise practice or not being able to afford insurance, actually functioned as perhaps unintended protections,” Ryan said. “It’s not that barriers are good; it’s that the delay they cause appears to be what’s protective.”
The findings come during National Teen Driver Safety Week, Oct. 18-24.
“When we plotted our participants’ licensing timelines, a pattern emerged,” Shen said. “Those who reported a crash had, on average, obtained their permits earlier and spent less time between the permit and full license.”
Timing matters
Published in the Journal of Safety Research, the study analyzed survey responses from 469 licensed young adults about their licensing histories, family support, barriers and crash involvement.
Researchers examined factors including whether families provided supervised practice, paid for driver education or insurance, provided access to a vehicle or encouraged teenagers to get their licenses.
Several forms of support were associated with earlier entry into the licensing process, which in turn was associated with greater crash involvement. The pathway involving licensing timing was stronger than the one associated with time spent in supervised or restricted driving stages.
“What stood out to me was that helping teens move through the licensing process and preparing them for independent driving may not always happen on the same timeline,” Shen said. “That makes the timing of independent driving worth considering alongside practice and preparation.”
What parents can take away
The researchers emphasize that the findings do not mean supervised practice is unnecessary or harmful .
“Parents should keep providing supervised practice,” Shen said. “It builds skills and gives families opportunities to see where a teen still needs help.”
Instead, the researchers say families should consider developmental readiness alongside legal requirements and driving experience.
“Support your teen’s learning without making the earliest possible license date the goal,” Shen said. “Meeting the legal requirements is an important milestone, but families should also consider how their teen handles the attention, judgment and responsibility that independent driving requires.”
During supervised driving, Shen said parents can watch for whether teens consistently recognize hazards, manage distractions, accept feedback and make safe decisions without repeated reminders. They also can consider whether a teen recognizes their own limitations and knows when a driving situation may be beyond their current comfort or skill level.
The study found that male participants had higher baseline crash involvement and were more responsive to some forms of family support that accelerated licensing. The researchers cautioned that other gender differences in the relationship between delayed licensing and crash outcomes were more limited.
Looking ahead
The findings could eventually help shape conversations about graduated driver licensing systems and driver education.
“The findings suggest that licensing systems could pay closer attention to the age at which teens enter the licensing process, alongside practice requirements,” Shen said. “Directions worth exploring include extending GDL protections to older novice drivers and developing practical guidance on readiness for families and driving instructors.”
Ryan and Shen stressed that the study identifies associations, not cause and effect . The research relied on retrospective survey responses and did not directly measure factors such as driving mileage or frequency. Future studies could follow young drivers over time and incorporate more direct measures of driving exposure.
Read the full study: “The family support paradox: Mediating effects of licensure timing on crash risk,” which was published in the Journal of Safety Research.
Written by Austin J. Witt
MSU College of Engineering Media and Public Relations page