Why Highways are Good Laboratories

• High traffic volumes facilitate the study of infrequently displayed behaviour

• Drivers may feel deindividuated• Low probability of future encounters with same drivers• Multiple stressors present in highway driving• Automobile is a weapon as well as a means of escape• Certain behaviours (e.g., vengeance) may not be seen

off the road• Highways are ubiquitous

Behaviours that could be studied on roadways:

• Prosocial behaviours (helping, courtesy, cooperation, etc.

• Anti-social behaviours (aggression, violence,vengeance)

• Social influence processes (conformity, modelling, norm formation, etc.)

• Deindividuation

• Cognitive processes

• Wayfinding and route learning

• Stress and coping

Why not more research on driving behaviour?

• Funding difficulties: too applied for psychological funding agencies and too academic for road safety professionals

• Road safety professionals are mostly engineers and tend to view problems as attributable to technical reasons and see engineering solutions to problems

• The problem driver has traditionally been viewed as the alcohol consuming driver, so attempts to control this problem has dominated the international agenda

• Difficulties in securing cooperation to study behaviour on roadways

• Laboratory research is easier and more convenient to perform

Aggressive Driving and Public Concern

• Traffic Injury Research Foundation Survey (Ottawa): 1200 telephone interviews across Canada

– 65% indicated aggressive driving constituted a serious problem and felt it was a greater danger than sleepy drivers, road conditions, or vehicle defects

– 74% viewed red light running a serious problem– 2/3 considered speeding a serious risk– Women felt more threatened than men– Ontario drivers reported more encounters with aggressive

drivers than those in other provinces

Aggressive Driving and Public Concern

• Toljagic (2000) indicated that 38% of Ontario drivers reported some abusive behaviour over the past year

• Goehring (2000) reported 90% of AAA members witnessed an aggressive driving incident over a year

• Wald (1997) estimated 28,000 highway fatalities in the USA were attributable to aggressive driving

• Rasmussen, Knapp & Garner (2000): 22% of drivers in Las Vegas reported other drivers to the police. Major sources of annoyance: slow drivers, children not in child seats, tailgating, tourists uncertain of route, cars weaving in and out of lanes. They perceived an increase (76%) in aggressive driving over a 5 year period and felt Las Vegas drivers were worse than elsewhere (58%).

Aggressive Driving: TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

• Opinion Search conducted a 75 item telephone survey in September 2006

• 6,075 household contacted, but 73% refused to participate

• 7.5% were not eligible for the survey (the respondent had to have driven in the past 30 days

• 1,201drivers completed the survey• Sample accuracy = 2.9% 19 times out of 20

Aggressive Driving: TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

• 88% of Canadians believe aggressive driving has increased over the last 5 years

• 2.7 million admit to exceeding the speed limit• 2 million admit to speeding to get through a

traffic light• 670,000 admit they take driving risks for “fun”

Aggressive Driving: TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

Characteristics of Aggressive Drivers:• Twice as many male aggressive drivers than

females• Drivers 16-24 are more likely to use their horn• Drivers 16-44 were more likely to behave

aggressively in traffic• Aggressive drivers reported at least one traffic

ticket

Aggressive Driving:

TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

Aggressive Driving: TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

Aggressive Driving: TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

Aggressive Driving: TIRF 2006 Road Safety Monitor Survey

Support for Measures to Control Aggressive Drivers:

• 63% agree that aggressive driving should receive greater attention from police

• 51% believe penalties for aggressive driving should equal those for intoxicated driving

• 43% agree that vehicles should have speed limiting devices

Suggestions for Reducing Highway Aggression

• Tension reduction strategies:– Use cell phones to inform others of delays

– Listen to traffic reports and use alternative routes where possible

– Listen to music, books-on-tape in cars while driving

• Anger management– Screen all drivers

– When a given demerit point level is reached, provide anger management workshops

• Enforcement of highway traffic act– Tailgating

– Signalling of lane changes

– Use of left lane as passing lane

Suggestions for Reducing Highway Aggression

• Promotion of mass transportation

• Deindividuation reduction:– Paint driver’s names/towns on doors and backs of vehicles– Ban deep tints– Promote vanity licence plates

Main Findings

• Trait X State stress interaction: congestion does not affect everyone the same since high trait stress drivers reacted more strongly to high congestion situations

• No gender differences• No difference in coping responses across congestion

conditions• Drivers prefered direct coping responses, but used both

direct and indirect behaviours equally• Compared to other responses, aggressive behaviours

dramatically increased as traffic congestion increased

Frequency of Individual Violent Driving Behaviours(Hennessy, Ph. D dissertation)

Behaviour Frequency

Chasing another driver/vehicle 40% (58)

Verbal roadside confrontation 23% (33)

Vandalizing another vehicle 14% (20)

Throwing objects at another vehicle 11% (16)

Physical roadside confrontation 7% (10)

Purposeful contact with another vehicle 4% (6)

Drive-by shootings 1% (2)

Some National Road Safety Initiatives

• Canada

• Finland

• Holland

• Great Britain

• Switzerland

These nations have reported a decrease in collisions and an improvement in driver safety

Interpreting Driving Safety Statistics

• Governments attribute safety improvement to their initiatives and/or technical improvements in vehicle and highway design, road maintenance, driver training, graduated licencing, and enforcement strategies.

• These statistics need to be interpreted in relation to the demographic situation of the specific population in question.

• How can we explain drunk driving, risky driving, driver aggression and roadway violence?

Evolutionary Psychology Principles

• Males, more than females, vie for status, economic resources and engage in physical conflict when status and resources are involved The greatest potential gain from risk occurs during the stage when mate competition begins.

• Environmental stability/instability and social learning plays a role, so it is not a case of simple biological determinism.

Caption: “TEACH CABBIES SOME RESPECT”

Evolutionary Psychology (continued)• Evolutionary psychology would predict that violent

behaviours, driver aggression, and alcohol consumption would be the greatest for young males.

• The proportion of young males in a population will influence the prevalence of violent crime, risk-taking and driving while intoxicated.

• As the proportion of young males in a population increase, the level of aggression and risk taking will increase.

• As the proportion of young males in a population decrease, the level of aggression and risk taking will decrease.

Do the ideas of evolutionary psychology influence driver safety research?

• Web of Science searches on some key journal articles reveal little impact.

• Wilson & Daly’s (1985) conceptual argument has been cited in 125 publications, but none dealt with any aspect of driver behavior.

See animation

Murder rate% of the population aged 15-29

Annual estimates of the murder rate and the % of population ages 15-29, U.S., 1946-84, with projections of the latter to 2001

Population of Canada and Proportion of Males 15-29 yrs.

Canadian Fatality Rates and Number of Motor Vehicles

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

2.2

2.4

Year 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Year

Fat

alit

y R

ate

per

10,

000

Veh

icle

s

16

16.2

16.4

16.6

16.8

17

17.2

17.4

17.6

17.8

18

18.2

18.4

18.6

18.8

To

tal

Nu

mb

er o

f M

oto

r V

ehic

les

(mil

lio

ns)

Fatal Rate

Vehicle

Data source: North American Transportation Statistics//Note that a gap exists in x-axis

Canadian Motor Vehicle Traffic Collision Statistics, 2003

• Males (16-34 yrs.) represent 30.1% of male drivers and 16% of all Canadian drivers

• Males (15-34 yrs.) represent 39.5% of traffic fatalities and 43.6% of injuries

Source: Transport Canada

Fatal Collisions/Personal Injuries in Canada 1985-2004

2400

2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

3000

3100

3200

3300

3400

3500

3600

3700

3800

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2002

Year

Fat

alit

ies

148000

153000

158000

163000

168000

173000

178000

183000

188000

193000

Per

son

al I

nju

ries

Fatal CollisionsPersonal Injury

Driver Fatalities by Gender: Canada 1987-2003

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

fata

liti

es

Male

Female

Driver Fatalities (16-29 Year-olds) by Gender: Canada 1987-2003

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

fata

liti

es

Male

Female

Alcohol-involved (BAC>0) Driver Fatalities (16-29 Year-olds) by Gender: Canada 1987-2003

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Year

Nu

mb

er

of

fata

liti

es

Male

Female

Conclusions• Demographic variables need

to be examined before safety claims are attributed to policy implementations, engineering advances or highway improvements.

• Evolutionary psychology offers a theoretical basis for driver safety research and needs to be introduced to sharpen scholarly work in the area.

Acknowledgements

• Rob Finlayson• Walter Giesbrecht• Paul Gutoskie• Yueh-Chin Ma• Chris Mesquida