No abstract

No abstract

Two studies tested the applicability of Weiner's (1995, 1996, 2001, 2006) attributional model of social conduct to roadway environments. This model highlights the role of inferences of responsibility after making causal judgments for social transgressions. Study 1 employed written scenarios where participants were asked to imagine themselves driving on a major highway. The degree of controllability and intentionality of the driving act was manipulated experimentally by altering the specific event-related details provided to the participants. Study 2 extended this research to life events by having participants complete online driving diaries every 2 days, identifying their most negative/upsetting encounter with another motorist. The most anger-provoking event was selected from among 4 diary entries and participants were asked to respond to a questionnaire similar to that used in Study 1. Path analyses in both studies generally supported predictions derived from Weiner's model; the association between perceived controllability, intentionality, and dispositional locus of causality of the negative driving event and subsequent anger was mediated by perceptions of responsibility. Additional results in Study 2 suggested that low perceived controllability, intentionality, and dispositional locus of causality were associated with reduced perceived responsibility, which, in turn, facilitated feelings of sympathy. Anger was associated with aggressive responses to the offending driver, whereas sympathy was associated with prosocial responses. Recommendations were offered for improved driver safety, including the development of attributional retraining programs to combat self-serving attributional biases, teaching novice drivers about both formal and informal roadway communication, and the promotion of forgiveness among drivers

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a worldwide pandemic. Countries introduced public health measures to contain and reduce its spread. These measures included closures of educational institutions, non-essential businesses, events and activities, as well as working from and staying at home requirements. These measures have led to an economic downturn of unprecedented proportions. Generally, as economic activity declines, travel decreases and drivers are exposed to a lower risk of collisions. However, research on previous economic downturns suggests economic downturns differentially affect driver behaviours and situations. COVID-19 pandemic effects on road safety are currently unknown. However, preliminary information on factors such as the increased stress and anxiety brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, more "free" (idle) time, increased consumption of alcohol and drugs, and greater opportunities for speeding and stunt driving, might well have the opposite effect on road safety. Using an interactionist model we identify research questions for researchers to consider on potential person and situation factors associated with COVID-19 that could affect road safety during and after the pandemic. Collaborative efforts by researchers, and public and private sectors will be needed to gather data and develop road safety strategies in relation to the new reality of COVID-19. Health Organization, 2020). By March 2020, the WHO had declared COVID-19 a worldwide pandemic with 216 countries, areas or territories showing 10,719,646 cases and 517,337 deaths combined as of July 2, 2020 (World Health Organization, 2020). This pandemic led to a series of worldwide public health measures to contain and reduce its spread. In many countries the measures included physical distancing measures, such as the "lockdown" of educational institutions, restaurants, bars, retail and other non-essential businesses, banning public events, such as sporting events, concerts, theatre shows and encouraging or requiring teleworking from home

The Driving Vengeance Questionnaire (DVQ) was developed and administered to assess drivers’ use of vengeance when faced with common driving situations. Subjects in the development of the scale were 266 male and female university students. The scale was then administered to 271 university students (both male and female) and 74 male inmates who were classified as either violent or nonviolent offenders on the basis of the amount of force used in committing the offence. A Cronbach alpha of .83 (M = 40.76, n = 310) indicated a high level of internal consistency for the DVQ. Younger drivers (18-23 years old) indicated higher levels of vengeance while driving than did older drivers (24-66 years old, M = 44.35 and 37.81, respectively). Those with less driving experience (0-6 years) expressed higher levels of vengeance while driving than more experienced drivers (6+ years, M = 42.95 and 38.81, respectively). Male drivers responded with greater vengeance to the questionnaire items than females (M = 42.07 and 39.62, respectively). The level of force used in commission of crime failed to correlate with the DVQ. A factor analysis was performed with a different sample of subjects using a slightly modified version of the DVQ to deal with the issue of whether horn honking constituted an appropriate measure of aggression. When the two relevant DVQ items were changed to read “leaning on horn” rather than mere honking, a strong, single factor of vengeance was found to characterize the scale. Suggestions were made for the use of DVQ in the screening of driving license applicants and in the study of problem drivers.