Timo Lajunen

Can we trust self-reports of driving? Effects of impression management on driver behaviour questionnaire responses

Driver behaviour is often studied by using self-reports and questionnaires. Despite their obvious advantages, questionnaires are vulnerable to socially desirable response tendencies. In this study, the effects of socially desirable responding on self-reports of driving were studied by recording self-reports of driving in both public and private settings. In public settings, 47 applicants for a driving instructor training course completed the driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) and balanced inventory for socially desirable responding as a part of the entrance examination. In a private setting, 54 students of that training course completed the same questionnaires anonymously in the classroom. ANOVA results showed a difference between the two settings in six DBQ item scores, such that aberrant behaviours were reported less frequently in public than in private settings. The results indicated that bias caused by socially desirable responding is relatively small in DBQ responses.

The Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire: a cross-cultural study

The aim of the present study was to investigate if the original factorial structure of the Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) was replicated in Finland and The Netherlands. A postal questionnaire survey of drivers was carried out in Britain, Finland and The Netherlands. Exploratory factor analysis together with target (Procrustes) rotation and factorial agreement indexes were calculated to investigate the applicability of Finnish and Dutch versions of DBQ. Results of the factor comparisons showed that the DBQ four-factor structures found in Finland and The Netherlands were congruent but not perfect with the target structure found in Britain. Reliabilities of the scales were around the same level as in the British data. In addition to the four first-order factors, two second-order factors (deliberate violations and unintentional errors) were found in all three countries which supports the original structure by Reason et al. Issues related to cross-cultural use of traffic behaviour questionnaires are discussed.

Are aggressive people aggressive drivers? A study of the relationship between self-reported general aggressiveness, driver anger and aggressive driving.

In this study the relationships among self-reported general aggressiveness, impulsiveness, driver anger, and aggressive responses to anger-provoking situations on the road were studied. The British version of a driver anger scale (UK DAS), aggression questionnaire (AQ), and an impulsiveness questionnaire (I7) together with background questions (gender, age, annual mileage) were administered to a sample of 270 British drivers. Variation in strength of correlations between anger and aggressive reactions in the 21 UK DAS items showed that the relationship between driver anger and aggression depends in part on the characteristics of the situation. In addition, three path models for describing the relationships among the measures were constructed separately for women and men. The models suggested that the effects of verbal aggressiveness on self-reported driver aggression were mediated by driver anger whereas physical aggressiveness was directly related to aggressive behaviour. Age was negatively related to both driver anger and aggression among men whereas annual mileage was negatively related to aggression among women. The models constructed indicate that aggressive driver behaviour is a complex phenomenon with a range of psychological causes.

INTERPERSONAL VIOLATIONS, SPEEDING VIOLATIONS AND THEIR RELATION TO ACCIDENT INVOLVEMENT IN FINLAND

The aim of the present study was to replicate the distinction between errors, lapses and violations, and to identify aggressive violations from normal or highway code violations. Furthermore, the relationship of these behaviours with road traffic accidents was examined. A total number of 1126 Finnish drivers completed a questionnaire containing the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) with extended violations scale, and questions regarding background information, such as age, gender and mileage. Also, questions about previous accidents and fines were asked. Factor analysis showed that a four-factor structure seemed more appropriate than the earlier established three-factor structure. The four factors were errors, lapses, speeding violations and interpersonal violations. The two types of violations result from different motives, and seem to be associated with different kinds of affect. Both interpersonal and speeding violations were reported most by young males, which was consistent with earlier findings. Logistic regression analyses indicated that errors predicted active accident involvement after partialling out the effects of demographic variables, whereas interpersonal violations were positively related to involvement in passive accidents. This was presumably due to different reporting tendencies of respondents. Speeding tickets were predicted by speeding and interpersonal violations and lapses and penalties for speeding by both kinds of violations and errors. Penalties for speeding, parking and other offences were predicted by interpersonal violations. The implications of these results are discussed.

Personality and accident liability: Are extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism related to traffic and occupational fatalities?

The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism, and road traffic fatalities in a data set of 34 nations. In addition to traffic fatalities per 100,000 vehicles, work-related fatalities were included in the study. Results showed that extraversion had a positive relation to the number of traffic fatalities whereas neuroticism correlated negatively with road fatalities. Occupational fatalities were strongly related to deaths on the roads but not to personality dimensions. Countries with high extraversion scores had more traffic fatalities than countries with moderate or low extraversion scores. The need for well-designed studies investigating the link between personality factors and traffic accident liability via driver behaviour was expressed.

The Driver Behaviour Questionnaire in Arab Gulf countries: Qatar and United Arab Emirates

Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) is one of the most widely used instruments for measuring self-reported driving style and investigating the relationship between driving behaviour and accident involvement. In spite of the fact that Arab Gulf countries have a higher road accident fatality rate compared to European countries and USA, the DBQ has not been used in Arab countries so far. The aim of the present study was to investigate the factor structure of the DBQ, then to examine the relationships between the factors of the DBQ and accident involvement, and finally to compare DBQ scores between the two gulf countries: Qatar and United Arab Emirates (UAE). In this study, 1110 Qatari (263 females and 847 males) and 1286 UAE drivers (294 females and 992 males) filled a survey questionnaire including the DBQ and background information. The results showed that UAE drivers scored higher on almost all DBQ items than Qatari drivers. Surprisingly, only very small differences between men and women on the DBQ item scores were found in UAE. Factor analysis resulted in four factors, which were named as errors, pushing-speeding violations, lapses, and aggression-speeding violations. However, there were a number of differences in the factor structure of the DBQ in UAE and Qatar when compared to the theoretical four-factor structure of the DBQ. Reliabilities of some subscales were also questionably lower than in the original British data. Logistic regression analyses showed that errors, lapses, and aggression-speeding violations predicted accident involvement in Qatar but not in UAE after controlling the effect of the demographic variables (age, sex, and annual mileage).

Influence of traffic enforcement on the attitudes and behavior of drivers

Traditionally, traffic enforcement has been an important means of improving traffic safety. Many studies have provided evidence of connections between the level of police enforcement and both driving behavior and the number of traffic accidents. In Northern Kosovo, there has been little, if any, traffic enforcement during the last 13 years. This situation has created a very rare research opportunity - it is now possible to directly study the influence of traffic enforcement on the attitudes and behavior of drivers by comparing two regions, one with traffic enforcement and one without it (Serbia vs. Northern Kosovo). The sample in the present study consisted of 424 drivers (204 from Serbia and 220 from Northern Kosovo). Questionnaires included items about the behaviors of the drivers (e.g., speeding, seat belt, drunk driving) and their attitudes. We also conducted field observations of driving behavior. The results indicated that the lack of enforcement affects almost every type of behavior that we examined. Compared with drivers in Serbia, drivers in Northern Kosovo drive faster, exceed speed limits more frequently, use seat belts less frequently, drive after exceeding the legal limit for alcohol more often, commit aggressive and ordinary violations more frequently and are generally involved in more risky situations.

Chapter 4 – Self-Report Instruments and Methods

Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the possible problems in using survey methods in traffic research. For that it concentrates on questionnaires as self-reports. Most of the examples are from driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) literature because the DBQ is one of the most widely used instruments for measuring driver behaviors and, thus, provides good demonstration material. Self-reports include a great variety of different methods, including questionnaires and inventories, interviews, focus groups, and driving diaries. Common features in all these diverse self-report measures are that participants are aware that they are participating in a study; they are asked to actively reply to more or less structured questions; and their responses are taken as “face valid”—that is, answers are scored and analyzed based on the responses and not, for example, according to response time or other behavioral or physiological measurement. Self-report methodology has been used for a wide variety of research, including attitudes, opinions, beliefs, emotions, cognitive processes, behaviors, and basically any aspect of driving. Although self-reports can offer a rich source of information, they also have some serious shortcomings and limitation that have to be taken into account. Review of studies using self-report methodology shows that traffic researchers pay far too little attention to the psychometric characteristics and validity of the tests.

Speed and Acceleration as Measures of Driving Style in Young Male Drivers

This study investigated different measures of speed and acceleration as indicators of safe driving style. 58 young males drove a 7.1-km test route twice in an instrumented car. Drivers were instructed to drive as they usually do. Driving style was measured by both site-specific measures (speed on a crest and speed and lateral acceleration in a sharp and a gentle curve) and general measures (maximum speed and lateral and longitudinal accelerations over the route). Analysis of variance (accident involvement × mileage) showed that drivers who had had prior accidents drove at higher speed and higher accelerations on a sharp curve than accident-free drivers. Drivers involved with accidents drove at higher maximum speed, left accelerations (at right-hand curves), and Equivalent Vector Acceleration, a mean parameter of accelerations, than accident-free drivers. However, multiple regression analysis indicated that only maximum speed predicted the number of accidents significantly. In conclusion, maximum speed seemed to be a convenient and robust measure of a safe driving style.

Why Turks do not use seat belts? An interview study

Despite the effectiveness of seat belt use and legislation, seat belt use rate is low in Turkey. The aim of this study was to investigate the motives to use and not to use a seat belt in different traveling conditions in a sample of car drivers and passengers. Interviews were made face to face with 221 interviewees from different age and occupation groups. Frequently reported reasons for using a seat belt were traveling conditions, safety, situational conditions, habit of using a seat belt, and avoiding punishment. Frequently reported reasons for not using a seat belt were situational conditions, not believing in the effectiveness, discomfort and having no habit. Safety was the strongest predictor of reported seat belt use in both low and high risk traveling conditions. Findings suggest that seat belt campaigns should mainly emphasize seat belts safety impact and aim at habit formation.