Crash statistics demonstrate that newly licensed teenage drivers face a high risk of crashing. Research efforts have been made to identify the underlying reasons. The literature reveals that novice drivers exhibit poor hazard anticipation skills. Hazard anticipation is not the only skill that is important when a hazardous situation arises; it is also important that the driver mitigate the potential hazard. For example, if a pedestrian steps off the crosswalk and stops after taking just one step, a driver might respond by placing his or her foot over the brake. Yet, if the pedestrian keeps walking and a collision appears imminent, the response necessary to avoid the crash might be to brake or steer sharply. In either situation, the ultimate goal is to reduce the probability of a crash by anticipating and mitigating the hazard. Currently it is not known what hazard mitigation strategies novice drivers have in their repertoire, or whether their hazard mitigation strategies actually reduce their likelihood of crashing. This dissertation will seek to address these gaps in our understanding. In two experiments, two groups of drivers were evaluated in potential hazard scenarios (no crash could occur) and crash scenarios (a crash could potentially occur). An understanding of behavior in potential hazard (no-crash) scenarios is important to identify the hazard mitigation strategies of drivers when they are not hypersensitive to crashes. In this study, drivers were exposed to infrequent potential hazards, which could develop into an immediate near-crash or crash situation. Near-crash events were infrequent to keep the drivers from becoming hypersensitive in crash scenarios and changing their hazard mitigation strategies. The two experiments were completed using a driving simulator. The use of a driving simulator allows for the examination of riskier scenarios that might otherwise be impossible in the field. An example of one such scenario is referred to in the literature as the truck midblock crosswalk scenario (Pradhan et al., 2006; Fisher, 2008). Drivers approached a marked, midblock crosswalk with a truck in the parking lane stopped immediately before the crosswalk and obscuring pedestrians that might be entering the crosswalk. Hazard anticipation and hazard mitigation behaviors can be analyzed here. For example, as drivers anticipate the hazard and glance towards the front corner of the truck, a hazard might appear as they approach the truck from behind, and then as they pass the truck (before entering the crosswalk). Drivers mitigate the hazard when they slow, take their foot off the accelerator and/or position their foot over the brake. Mitigation would also include simply choosing a slower speed when approaching the stopped truck. Altogether, there were a total of 18 scenarios on which participants’ hazard anticipation and hazard mitigation were evaluated in Experiments 1 and 2. Experiment 1. In Experiment 1, the hazard mitigation strategies of novice and experienced drivers were compared. In the current experiment, there was an equal number of experienced and novice drivers which allows for a simple measure of hazard mitigation. The hazard mitigation strategy to be evaluated in this study with respect to the above scenario was based on whether a driver slows as he or she approaches within six seconds of the truck. Suppose, as was the situation in Experiment 1 that 78 percent of experienced drivers and 43 percent of novice drivers respond by slowing. It would appear that experienced drivers are 1.8 times as likely to mitigate a hazard as novice drivers. However, hazard mitigation can only occur if the driver is aware of the hazard,