No abstract

Emotion regulation difficulties were associated with the self-reported risky driving behaviors of Lithuanian drivers. This provides useful hints for improving driver training programs in order to prevent traffic injuries.

Social distance from people with mental illness decreases through the study years; however, results of professional psychologists and social workers illustrate different trajectories in social distance through the professional career. The results of this study support the need for anti-stigma programmes and initiatives orientated towards mental health professionals.

No abstract

No abstract

Negative stereotypes of people with mental illness may lead to stigma of those with mental illness, impacting their self-confidence and willingness to seek mental health treatment. Few studies have looked at the health professional’s role and the impact they may have on the stigmatization process of people with mental illness. The purpose of this article was to better understand the concept of social distance among individuals in the helping professions of counseling, social work, and psychology. A total of 305 students and 95 professionals from counseling, social work and psychology participated in this study. Results revealed that counseling, social work, and psychology students, and helping professionals do not differ in their need for social distance from people with mental illness. Helping professionals reported significantly more social distance from people with mental health problems in close personal relationships, compared to their social relationships. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in social distance observed as a function of professional experience.

Mokslininkai sutinka, kad rizikingas vairavimas yra vienas svarbiausių veiksnių, nulemiančių avaringumą keliuose, o asmenybės bruožai gali padėti tokį vairavimą numatyti. Vis dėlto asmenybės bruožų svarba rizikingam skirtingų grupių vairuotojų vairavimui yra nevienoda. Šio tyrimo tikslas – nustatyti penkių didžiųjų asmenybės bruožų ir savižina vertinamo rizikingo vairavimo sąsajas skirtingose vairuotojų grupėse. Tyrime dalyvavo 143 pradedantys vairuoti asmenys, 231 jaunas vairuotojas, 239 patyrę vairuotojai ir 165 profesionalūs vairuotojai. Visi jie pildė Vairuotojų elgesio klausimyną bei Penkių didžiųjų asmenybės bruožų klausimyną. Pradedančių vairuoti asmenų grupėje sąsajų tarp asmenybės bruožų ir rizikingo vairavimo nenustatyta. Ekstraversijos ir sąmoningumo bruožų svarba beveik nepriklauso nuo vairuotojų imties, jie paaiškina jaunų vairuotojų vyrų, patyrusių vairuotojų ir profesionalių vairuotojų subjektyviai vertinamą rizikingą vairavimą. Neurotiškumo, sutariamumo bei atvirumo patirčiai bruožų ir polinkio rizikingai vairuoti sąsajos skiriasi jaunų, patyrusių bei profesionalių vairuotojų grupėse. Tyrimo rezultatai atskleidė, jog subjektyviai vertinamo polinkio rizikingai vairuoti ir asmenybės bruožų sąsajoms svarbios sociodemografinės vairuotojo charakteristikos, nurodančios, kad skirtingų grupių vairuotojai rizikingai vairuoja dėl skirtingų priežasčių.Pagrindiniai žodžiai: penki didieji asmenybės bruožai, subjektyviai vertinamas rizikingas vairavimas, pradedantieji, jauni, patyrę ir profesionalūs vairuotojai.THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-REPORTED RISKY DRIVING AND PERSONALITY TRAITS IN DIFFERENT SAMPLES OF DRIVERSEndriulaitienė A., Šeibokaitė L., Markšaitytė R., Žardeckaitė-Matulaitienė K., Pranckevičienė A., Stelmokienė A.    SummaryResearchers agree that risky driving is one of the most important contributors to traffic accidents, and it is influenced by personality traits. While the past research has revealed contradictory findings as to the value of personality in different driving contexts, the prediction of self-reported risky driving using personality traits is complicated. The lack of consistent findings might be due to the underestimation of the drivers’ sample, type or driving context. The present study aimed to analyse the relationships between Big Five personality traits and self-reported risky driving in four different samples of drivers.The volunteer participants of the study were 143 novice drivers (with the driving experience no longer than one year, 67 males and 76 females); 231 young drivers (130 males, 104 females); 239 experienced drivers (134 males, 149 females); 165 professional drivers (males). They completed the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ, Parker et al., 1995) that assessed two self-reported risky driving factors (driving errors and intentional violations) and the Big Five Inventory (BFI, Benet-Martinez and John, 1998) that measured the drivers’ extraversion, conscientiousness, neuroticism, agreeableness, and openness to experience. Also, data about age, gender, driving experience and exposure were gathered.The results indicated that young drivers were most prone to risky driving (both errors and violations), whereas professional drivers might be described by the safest self-reported driving style.The structural equation modeling revealed different relations between personality traits and risky driving taking into account a driver’s gender and group (novice, young, experienced or professional). It was found that in all tested drivers’ samples personality traits might be the proximal predictors of driving errors or distal predictors of driving errors with the mediation of intentional violations. More frequent self-reported intentional violations significantly predicted more frequent driving errors (β ranged from 0.18 to 0.53).The results of the study revealed no significant associations between personality traits and risky driving among novice drivers. SEM revealed a consistent predictive power of extraversion (β ranged from 0.16 to 0.37) and conscientiousness (β ranged from 0.17 to 0.31) for different drivers’ risky driving. These traits predicted self-reported risky driving of young male drivers, experienced drivers, and professional drivers. The predictive power of neuroticism, agreeableness, and openness was inconsistent in different samples. The higher neuroticism of young drivers (β = 0.22; 0.28) and experienced female drivers (β = 0.27) predicted more frequent self-reported driving errors, but did not predict the risky driving of experienced male drivers and professional drivers. Higher openness predicted less frequent violations among young male drivers (β = –0.18), but more frequent errors in professional drivers (β = 0.16). Higher agreeableness predicted significantly less frequent self-reported violations of young male drivers (β = –0.32) and less frequent errors of professional drivers (β = –0.29).The findings suggest that personality traits might be useful predictors of risky driving, but the driving context and multiple aspects of a driver’s personality simultaneously should be taken into account.Key words: Big Five personality traits, self-reported risky driving, novice, young, experienced and professional drivers.

No abstract