Angry Drivers Take Risky Decisions: Evidence from Neurophysiological Assessment

Abstract

The present study investigated the risk-taking behaviors of angry drivers, which were coincidentally measured via behavioral and electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings. We manipulated a driving scenario that concerned a Go/No-Go decision at an intersection when the controlling traffic light was in its yellow phase. This protocol was based upon the underlying format of the Iowa gambling task. Variation in the anger level was induced through task frustration. The data of twenty-four drivers were analyzed via behavioral and neural recordings, and P300 was specifically extracted from EEG traces. In addition, the behavioral performance was indexed by the percentage of high-risk choices minus the number of the low-risk choices taken, which identified the risk-taking propensity. Results confirmed a significant main effect of anger on the decisions taken. The risk-taking propensity decreased across the sequence of trial blocks in baseline assessments. However, with anger, the risk-taking propensity increased across the trial regimen. Drivers in anger state also showed a higher mean amplitude of P300 than that in baseline state. Additionally, high-risk choices evoked larger P300 amplitude than low-risk choices during the anger state. Moreover, the P300 amplitude of high-risk choices was significantly larger in the anger state than the baseline state. The negative feedback induced larger P300 amplitude than that recorded in positive feedback trials. The results corroborated that the drivers exhibited higher risk-taking propensity when angry although they were sensitive to the inherent risk-reward evaluations within the scenario. To reduce this type of risk-taking, we proposed some effective/affective intervention methods.

P300 Measures and Drive-Related Risks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…A summary of the study characteristics is listed in Table 1 . The risk factors involved in the included articles can be summarized in five categories, including distracted driving ( N = 5) [ 12 , 27 , 32 , 33 , 34 ], reduced attention ( N = 5) [ 19 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], increased difficulty in driving ( N = 2) [ 27 , 28 ], alcohol ( N = 2) [ 32 , 39 ], and negative emotion ( N = 2) [ 40 , 41 ]. Distracted driving is a major cause of traffic accidents, which is related to driving behaviors such as using a cell phone and talking to passengers while driving.…”

“…A follow-up questionnaire, the Brief Mood Introspection Scale (BMIS), was completed to assess the subjects’ anger levels. The other study induced anger by means of an anger elicitation gambling task (AEGT) [ 41 ]. The researchers designed a two-choice task for 20 trials.…”

Understanding Aggressive Driving: The Role of Personality and Individual Differences

“…Utilizing a characteristic profile such as these, we suggest that tailored driver selection and training techniques be developed to ensure driver training fits trainees' unique characteristics. While tailored driver training can be useful, research has suggested that limitations exist in driver attitudes towards the usefulness of the training (Li et al, 2019).…”

Affective Automotive User Interfaces–Reviewing the State of Driver Affect Research and Emotion Regulation in the Car

“…Risk taking is distinguished from aggressive driving as potentially dangerous driving behavior without aggressive intentions toward oneself or other trac participants [24]. It is suggested to be inuenced by the emotional state of Anger, as Li et al found in a lab study with 24 Chinese university aliates [60]. Hu et al report increased risk taking for drivers in the negative emotional states of Anger and Sadness [46].…”