TY - JOUR
T1 - Concerns, dispositions and behaviors of aggressive drivers
T2 - What do self-identified aggressive drivers believe about traffic safety?
AU - Beck, Kenneth H.
AU - Wang, Min Qi
AU - Mitchell, Mary Moser
N1 - Funding Information:
This investigation was funded by the Maryland Highway Safety Office of the State Highway Administration, Maryland Department of Transportation.
PY - 2006
Y1 - 2006
N2 - Introduction: The purpose of this investigation was to identify beliefs, driving personality dispositions, and behaviors that distinguish self-defined aggressive drivers from non-aggressive drivers. Method: Telephone surveys were used to identify self-reported aggressive drivers (n = 305) who were compared to non-aggressive drivers (n = 1,715) concerning their beliefs, driving behaviors, and self-described driving dispositions. Results: Aggressive drivers, compared to non-aggressive drivers, were less concerned about speeding, aggressive driving, and cell phone use while driving, yet were more likely to have had an encounter with another aggressive driver. They were also more likely to report that they had driven when they knew they had too much to drink, yet they felt less likely that they would be stopped by the police. Conclusion: Aggressive drivers display many dispositions that define them as high risk drivers and public information/motivational campaigns alone will likely be ineffective with this group of drivers. Strategies that combine visible enforcement with widespread publicity campaigns appear to be necessary.
AB - Introduction: The purpose of this investigation was to identify beliefs, driving personality dispositions, and behaviors that distinguish self-defined aggressive drivers from non-aggressive drivers. Method: Telephone surveys were used to identify self-reported aggressive drivers (n = 305) who were compared to non-aggressive drivers (n = 1,715) concerning their beliefs, driving behaviors, and self-described driving dispositions. Results: Aggressive drivers, compared to non-aggressive drivers, were less concerned about speeding, aggressive driving, and cell phone use while driving, yet were more likely to have had an encounter with another aggressive driver. They were also more likely to report that they had driven when they knew they had too much to drink, yet they felt less likely that they would be stopped by the police. Conclusion: Aggressive drivers display many dispositions that define them as high risk drivers and public information/motivational campaigns alone will likely be ineffective with this group of drivers. Strategies that combine visible enforcement with widespread publicity campaigns appear to be necessary.
KW - Aggressive drivers
KW - Alcohol beliefs
KW - Critical concerns
KW - Personality dispositions
KW - Self-reported behaviors
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33646703155&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33646703155&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jsr.2006.01.002
DO - 10.1016/j.jsr.2006.01.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 16650861
AN - SCOPUS:33646703155
SN - 0022-4375
VL - 37
SP - 159
EP - 165
JO - Journal of Safety Research
JF - Journal of Safety Research
IS - 2
ER -