The determinants of driving aggression among Polish drivers (original) (raw)
Related papers
The relationship between self and other in aggressive driving and driver behaviors across countries
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2019
The main aim of the present study was to investigate the moderating role of aggressive driving of others on the relationship between self-reported aggressive driving behaviors committed by driver himself/herself and drivers' aberrant and positive driver behaviors (i.e. errors, violations, and positive driver behaviors) among drivers from Estonia, Greece, Kosovo, Russia, and Turkey as the total sample in order to understand the grand pattern. The other aim was to examine the same moderating role of aggressive driving for each country separately. It was hypothesized that the combination of self-reported of aggressive driving behaviors committed by the driver himself/herself and perceiving aggressive acts of other drivers against them associates with more errors and violations for each country and the total sample. On the other hand, this combination was expected to associate with less positive driver behaviors. Surveys were completed by 743 participants from five countries (i.e., Estonia, Greece, Kosovo, Russia, and Turkey). The Driver Anger Indicators Scale (DAIS) and the short version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) with items of Positive Driver Behavior Scale were used as measurement tools. Moderation analyses were conducted for the total sample and each country separately. The results of the moderation analyses indicated that there was a moderating role of perceiving other drivers as engaging in aggressive behaviors on the relationship between aggressive behaviors of the driver himself/herself and their errors or violations in the total sample and every country except for Russia. However, the significant interaction between aggressive behaviors committed by the driver himself/herself and other drivers' aggressive acts in traffic was related to more positive driver behaviors for Kosovar drivers and less positive driver behaviors for Russian drivers and the total sample. It could be discussed that the way of understanding
Driver Aggression: The role of personality, social characteristics, risk and motivation
1989
The report addresses the topic of aggression in driving, with a consideration of a number of subject areas: theories of aggression; the definition of aggressive behaviour in driving; measurements of aggression; extreme forms of driver aggression; less extreme forms of driver aggression. The report's conclusions focus on society's role in aggressive behaviour, strategies for coping with aggression, including driver education and screening, and directions for future research.
The association between personality and aggressive driving: A meta-analysis
2016
The aim of the present paper was to synthesize previous results on the relationship between personality (from the perspective of the Big Five Model and Alternative Five model) and aggressive driving. Secondly, we aimed at identifying the model of personality with the highest level of association to aggressive driving. The statistical analyses were conducted exclusively for those dimensions of personality that overlap (i.e., Neuroticism vs. Neuroticism-Anxiety, Extraversion vs. Sociability, Agreeableness vs. Aggression Hostility). We searched for empirical studies with (1) cross-sectional design, (2) all the data needed for the meta-analytical computations, and (3) written in English. Database searches revealed a sample of 78 articles out of which 16 were eligible. The total sample of participants was of 6,721. Using a random effects framework, regarding the Big Five Model, we found a weak effect size for the relationship between Neuroticism and aggressive driving (r = .26, p < .0...
Aggressive driving is not clearly and consistently defined in the literature, neither in terms of the specific behaviors chosen for inclusion nor the degree to which the emotional state of the driver is taken into account. Principally, the aim of this current research is to determine the extent to which aggressive driving and road rage overlap. This will be accomplished primarily by applying two well-supported dichotomies in aggression research: hostile/instrumental and impulsive/premeditated. Relevant personality traits will also be measured to help discern the aggressive driving-road rage overlap and to explore secondary areas of interest, such as sex and age differences in driver aggression.
Cross-cultural differences in driver aggression, aberrant, and positive driver behaviors
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2020
The present study investigated differences in driver aggression for self and others within countries and cultural differences between driver aggression, aberrant, and positive driver behaviors across five countries (Estonia, Greece, Kosovo, Russia, and Turkey). It was predicted that drivers from these five countries differ significantly in terms of driver aggression for self and others, aberrant, and positive driver behaviors. In the study, 743 participants completed the questionnaire package, including the Driver Aggression Indicators Scale (DAIS), the short version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) with items from the Positive Driver Behavior Scale, and the Demographic Information Form. Paired samples T-tests were conducted to examine the differences in driving aggression between self and others in the five countries. The results indicated that, except for Russian drivers, drivers reported that other drivers had higher driver aggression than themselves. To examine the cross-cultural differences, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) tests were conducted for the two dimensions of the DAIS (hostile aggression and revenge, and aggressive warnings) and the three dimensions of the DBQ with items from the Positive Driver Behavior Scale (errors, violations, and positive driver behaviors). Crosscountry item-based comparisons were then made for the DAIS and the DBQ. The ANCOVA results showed significant differences in both item-based and subscale comparisons. Russian drivers were significantly different from other drivers in terms of hostile aggression and the revenge subscales of the DAIS and positive driver behaviors. Turkish drivers were significantly different from other drivers in several items of the DBQ, including errors and violations. The findings suggest that culture-specific strategies might be conducted for traffic-related anger management. Furthermore, differences in errors and violations among the five countries may be due to cultural differences. Positive driver
The relation between personality traits and aggressive driving
2021
Aggressive driving is not only the result of simple lapses and errors while driving. The main goal of this study was to determine the ways in which personality traits was related to aggressive behaviour during driving; the research tools represented by DECAS inventory used to find out if there are correlations between personality traits and types of driving. In our analyses, we selected participants betwen 20 and 55 years of old and their driving experience; gender was not a significant factor and as such was not controlled for in the analyses. Regression analyses showed that the data fit well with our theoretical model. The relationship between openness and aggressive driving is mediated by the driver’s anger, whereas agreeableness and conscientiousness had both a direct and indirect relations with aggressive driving. Our research study accounts for a relatively high percentage of the aggressive driving variance, suggesting the usefulness of assessing global personality traits for ...
The Psychosocial Factors Influencing Aggressive Driving
2011
Many drivers in highly motorised countries believe that aggressive driving is increasing. While the prevalence of the behaviour is difficult to reliably identify, the consequences of on-road aggression can be severe, with extreme cases resulting in property damage, injury and even death. This research program was undertaken to explore the nature of aggressive driving from within the framework of relevant psychological theory in order to enhance our understanding of the behaviour and to inform the development of relevant interventions. To guide the research a provisional 'working' definition of aggressive driving was proposed encapsulating the recurrent characteristics of the behaviour cited in the literature. The definition was: "aggressive driving is any on-road behaviour adopted by a driver that is intended to cause physical or psychological harm to another road user and is associated with feelings of frustration, anger or threat". Two main theoretical perspectives informed the program of research. The first was Shinar's (1998) frustration-aggression model, which identifies both the person-related and situational characteristics that contribute to aggressive driving, as well as proposing that aggressive behaviours can serve either an 'instrumental' or 'hostile' function. The second main perspective was Anderson and Bushman's (2002) General Aggression Model. In contrast to Shinar's model, the General Aggression Model reflects a broader perspective on human aggression that facilitates a more comprehensive examination of the emotional and cognitive aspects of aggressive behaviour. Study One (n = 48) examined aggressive driving behaviour from the perspective of young drivers as an at-risk group and involved conducting six focus groups, with eight participants in each. Qualitative analyses identified multiple situational and person-related factors that contribute to on-road aggression. Consistent with human aggression theory, examination of self-reported experiences of aggressive driving identified key psychological elements and processes that are experienced during on-road aggression. Participants cited several emotions experienced during an on-road incident: annoyance, frustration, anger, threat and excitement. Findings also suggest that off-road generated stress may transfer to the on-road environment, at times having severe consequences including crash involvement. Young drivers also appeared quick to experience negative attributions iv about the other driver, some having additional thoughts of taking action. Additionally, the results showed little difference between males and females in the severity of behavioural responses they were prepared to adopt, although females appeared more likely to displace their negative emotions. Following the selfreported on-road incident, evidence was also found of a post-event influence, with females being more likely to experience ongoing emotional effects after the event. This finding was evidenced by ruminating thoughts or distraction from tasks. However, the impact of such a post-event influence on later behaviours or interpersonal interactions appears to be minimal. Study Two involved the quantitative analysis of n = 926 surveys completed by a wide age range of drivers from across Queensland. The study aimed to explore the relationships between the theoretical components of aggressive driving that were identified in the literature review, and refined based on the findings of Study One. Regression analyses were used to examine participant emotional, cognitive and behavioural responses to two differing on-road scenarios whilst exploring the proposed theoretical framework. A number of socio-demographic, state and trait person-related variables such as age, pre-study emotions, trait aggression and problem-solving style were found to predict the likelihood of a negative emotional response such as frustration, anger, perceived threat, negative attributions and the likelihood of adopting either an instrumental or hostile behaviour in response to Scenarios One and Two. Complex relationships were found to exist between the variables, however, they were interpretable based on the literature review findings. Factor analysis revealed evidence supporting Shinar's (1998) dichotomous description of on-road aggressive behaviours as being instrumental or hostile. The second stage of Study Two used logistic regression to examine the factors that predicted the potentially hostile aggressive drivers (n = 88) within the sample. These drivers were those who indicated a preparedness to engage in direct acts of interpersonal aggression on the road. Young, male drivers 17-24 years of age were more likely to be classified as potentially hostile aggressive drivers. Young drivers (17-24 years) also scored significantly higher than other drivers on all subscales of the Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992) and on the 'negative problem orientation' and 'impulsive careless style' subscales of the Social Problem Solving Inventory-Revised (D'Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002). The potentially hostile aggressive drivers were also significantly more likely to engage in v speeding and drink/drug driving behaviour. With regard to the emotional, cognitive and behavioural variables examined, the potentially hostile aggressive driver group also scored significantly higher than the 'other driver' group on most variables examined in the proposed theoretical framework. The variables contained in the framework of aggressive driving reliably distinguished potentially hostile aggressive drivers from other drivers (Nagalkerke R 2 = .39). Study Three used a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of the psychosocial characteristics of n = 10 (9 males and 1 female) self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers. The self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers were aged 24-55 years of age. A large proportion of these drivers reported a Year 10 education or better and average-above average incomes. As a group, the drivers reported committing a number of speeding and unlicensed driving offences in the past three years and extensive histories of violations outside of this period. Considerable evidence was also found of exposure to a range of developmental risk factors for aggression that may have contributed to the driver's on-road expression of aggression. These drivers scored significantly higher on the Aggression Questionnaire subscales and Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised subscales, 'negative problem orientation' and 'impulsive/careless style', than the general sample of drivers included in Study Two. The hostile aggressive driver also scored significantly higher on the Barrett Impulsivity Scale-11 (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995) measure of impulsivity than a male 'inmate', or female 'general psychiatric' comparison group. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey (Carlson, 1982), the self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers scored equal or higher scores than the comparison group of incarcerated individuals on the subscale measures of chemical abuse, thought disturbance, antisocial tendencies and self-depreciation. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey personality profiles, seven participants were profiled 'markedly anti-social', two were profiled 'negative-explosive' and one was profiled as 'self-centred'. Qualitative analysis of the ten case study self-reports of on-road hostile aggression revealed a similar range of on-road situational factors to those identified in the literature review and Study One. Six of the case studies reported off-road generated stress that they believed contributed to the episodes of aggressive driving they recalled. Intense 'anger' or 'rage' were most frequently used to describe the emotions experienced in response to the perceived provocation. Less frequently
Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2018
Anger and aggression on the road have been pointed out as two of the main predictors of road accidents. However, while the emotional (anger) and behavioral (aggression) components of hostility have been deeply studied, the cognitive part has not received the same attention in this specific context. Thus, it is important to provide psychometric tools for assessing aggressive thoughts during driving, as the literature showed that cognitions play an important role in aggressive behavior. To this end, we asked Romanian drivers to answer three questionnaires: Driving Anger Thought Questionnaire (DATQ), the Driving Anger Scale (DAS) and the Driving Anger Expression Inventory (DAX), obtaining a total sample of 2133 answers. First, the psychometric properties of the DATQ were tested through a Confirmatory Factor Analysis, showing that the original 5-factor structure was maintained (Judgmental/Disbelieving Thinking, a = .93 both in men and women; Pejorative Labeling/Verbally Aggressive Thinking, a = .90 both in men and women; Physically Aggressive Thinking, a = .89 in men and a = .86 in women; Revenge/ Retaliatory Thinking, a = .84 in men and a = .81 in women, and Adaptive/Constructive Expression, a = .84 in men and a = .82 in women). Then, we analyzed the mediation effect of angry thoughts between anger and aggression on the road, concluding that angry thoughts mediate this relationship. The main implications of the results are discussed.