Sharing the road with trucks is associated with increased risk of serious injury and death for passenger vehicle drivers. However, the onus for minimising risk lies not just with truck drivers; other drivers must understand the unique performance limitations of trucks associated with stopping distances, blind spots, and turning manoeuverability, so they can suitably act and react around trucks. Given the paucity of research aimed at understanding the specific crash risk vulnerability of young drivers around trucks, the authors employ a narrative review methodology that brings together evidence from both truck and young driver road safety research domains, as well as data regarding known crash risks for each driving cohort, to gain a comprehensive understanding of what young drivers are likely to know about heavy vehicle performance limitations, where there may be gaps in their understanding, and how this could potentially increase crash risk. We then review literature regarding the human factors affecting young drivers to understand how perceptual immaturity and engagement in risky driving behaviours are likely to compound risk regarding both the frequency and severity of collision between trucks and young drivers. Finally, we review current targeted educational initiatives and suggest that simply raising awareness of truck limitations is insufficient. We propose that further research is needed to ensure initiatives aimed at increasing young driver awareness of trucks and truck safety are evidence-based, undergo rigorous evaluation, and are delivered in a way that aims to (i) increase young driver risk perception skills, and (ii) reduce risky driving behaviour around trucks.

Social and cultural barriers associated with inequitable access to driver licensing and associated road safety education, as well as socioeconomic issues that preclude ongoing vehicle maintenance and registration, result in unsafe in-car behaviours such as passenger overcrowding. This in turn is associated with improper seatbelt usage, noncompliance with child restraint mandates, and driver distraction. For example, in Australia, where seatbelt use is mandatory, Indigenous road users are three times less likely to wear seatbelts than non-Indigenous road users. This is associated with a disproportionately high fatality rate for Indigenous drivers and passengers; 21% of Indigenous motor-vehicle occupants killed on Australian roads were not wearing a seatbelt at the time of impact. In addition, inequitable access to driver licensing instruction due to financial and cultural barriers results in Indigenous learner drivers having limited access to qualified mentors and instructors. A consequent lack of road safety instruction results in a normalising of risky driving behaviours, perpetuated through successive generations of drivers. Moreover, culturally biased driver instruction manuals, which are contextualised within an English written-language learning framework, fail to accommodate the learning needs of Indigenous peoples who may encounter difficulties with English literacy. This results in difficulty understanding the fundamental road rules, which in turn makes it difficult for young drivers to develop and sustain safe in-car behaviours. This paper considers the literature regarding road safety for Indigenous road users and critically evaluates strategies and policies that have been advanced to protect Indigenous drivers. Novel solutions to increasing road safety rule compliance are proposed, particularly in relation to passenger safety, which are uniquely embedded within Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing. Safe driving practices have crucial health and social implications for Indigenous communities by allowing more Indigenous people to participate in work and education opportunities, access healthcare, maintain cultural commitments, and engage with families and friends, qualities which are essential for ongoing health and wellbeing.

Successful academic progression relies on a child’s ability to develop proficient reading skills. In Australia, the majority of children achieve this milestone during elementary schooling. Yet Australian Indigenous children, particularly those living in remote and rural regions of Australia, consistently struggle to meet national benchmarks for reading, as evidenced by national benchmark data. There has been extensive debate about whether sociocultural factors impinge on academic achievement for Indigenous Australians, but little discussion regarding the possible role of neurocognitive factors. In this review, we consider limited available research on neurocognitive mechanisms associated with reading for Indigenous populations and argue for an urgent need to consider the relationship between neurocognitive and sociocultural development when examining reading acquisition outcomes for this population. We also discuss the plausibility of targeting the potential neurocognitive strengths of certain Indigenous populations to scaffold reading acquisition and identify opportunities for furthering this line of research.

Standard Australian reading assessment tests are criticized for being culturally inappropriate for use with Australian Indigenous children, particularly for those living in remote and very remote regions, as these tests are culturally biased towards mainstream Australian culture and imperceptive to Indigenous knowledge, language, concepts, and contexts. Based on an established understanding of the relationship between reading acquisition and visual perceptual development, we sought to examine the visuospatial processing ability of Indigenous and non-Indigenous children to determine whether visuospatial tasks that measure dorsal and ventral processing – two key visual processes associated with reading – can provide an indicative measure of reading aptitude across cultures, independent of reading ability. Using a coherent motion task to test dorsal processing we found that dorsal processes develop similarly for age-matched Indigenous and non-Indigenous children (Study 1) and appear to facilitate early reading acquisition for both cultural groups, independent of age (Study 2 and subsequent analyses). Together, these results suggest that while dorsal processes may facilitate reading, reading is not necessary to facilitate dorsal development. Additionally, using a coherent form task to test ventral processing, we found an interactive association between ventral development and reading acquisition, particularly for non-Indigenous children. In interpreting these findings, we discuss possible cultural factors that may explain development of dorsal and ventral processes for Indigenous and non-Indigenous children, and why a relationship between ventral processing and reading acquisition was not evident for Indigenous children. We also consider the potential for scaffolding literacy learning for Indigenous children based on neurocognitive strengths.

Cognitive psychological research provides an evidence-based understanding of human cognition. For example, it can inform an understanding of how phonological awareness, visuospatial processing and working memory facilitate reading. However, the evidence base around reading acquisition is constructed from a Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich and Democratic (WEIRD) perspective, with little consideration for whether such evidence extends to Australian Indigenous populations. Given the recognised need to improve literacy outcomes for Indigenous children, there is an applied benefit in conducting cognitive research to better understand how language, culture or context might influence the development of neurocognitive processes underlying reading in remote Indigenous communities. However, it is essential that cultural cognitive research be conducted in a culturally fair and culturally safe manner. This requires critiquing and challenging standard cognitive research approaches and methodologies. Here I reflect on research that investigated neurocognitive factors associated with reading in an Indigenous context. I highlight the disjuncture between cognitive psychological research and Indigenous custom and practice and suggest that culturally safe cognitive research must embed Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. I assert that to work alongside Indigenous researchers as allies, non-Indigenous researchers must develop intercultural research skills. This includes building cultural competence and engaging in critical self-reflexivity.