Measurement of Readiness to Reduce Driving Speed: A Pilot Study

Abstract

Speeding is a preventable risky behavior that contributes to risk of accident. Readiness to change reflects an individual's recognition of and desire to change behavior. No measure to identify readiness to change has yet been validated for speeding. The Readiness to Change Questionnaire appraises readiness to change drinking behavior. The questionnaire was adapted to speeding and its psychometric properties examined. Participants (N = 112) completed the questionnaire and reported their usual driving speed. A clear component structure and acceptable internal consistency and test-retest reliability were found. Convergent validity was indicated by an association between higher readiness to change and lower driving speed. Results support the questionnaire's potential as a measure of readiness to change speeding, and advance research into the role of motivation in speeding behavior.

Psychometrics of the Readiness to Change Questionnaire (Rcq): The Lithuanian Version

“…EFA of the 12 items indicated that three factors most meaningfully describe the data of our study; however, the CFA proved just approximate data-model fit. The explained variance of RCQ for alcohol consumption was similar to the original data of the RCQ (Rollnick et al, 1992), also replicated results of other studies (Defuentes-Merillas et al, 2002;Forsberg et al, 2003;Forsberg et al, 2004;Heather & Honekopp, 2008;Ouimet et al, 2010). Six items of twelve, according to factor loadings, did not relate to factors which match the original sample (Rollnick et al, 1992 EFA of the 12 items about smoking indicated that Factor Analysis is not suitable for indicating readiness to change smoking behavior; interestingly, the CFA proved that the model is a good fit of the data.…”

“…The results of the Dutch (Defuentes-Merillas et al, 2002), Swedish (Forsberg et al, 2003;Forsberg et al, 2004) and other (Heather & Honekopp, 2008;Ouimet et al, 2010) versions of the RCQ for alcohol consumption revealed that the three-factor solution models were best for their data. EFA of the 12 items indicated that three factors most meaningfully describe the data of our study; however, the CFA proved just approximate data-model fit.…”

“…Application of the stages of change and support for the varied aspects of the process of change represented by these stages have been demonstrated in many behavioral changes from cessation of smoking (Degen et al, 2014), alcohol, and drugs to mammography screening (Carney & Kivlahan, 1995in Miller & Rollnick, 2002, dietary modification (Pullen & Walker, 2002), gambling (Carney & Kivlahan, 1995in Miller & Rollnick, 2002, exercise adoption (Kheawwan et al, 2016), reducing driving speed (Ouimet et al, 2010), pain change (Nielson et al, 2003), condom use and pregnancy prevention (Carney & Kivlahan, 1995in Miller & Rollnick, 2002. Thus, although the targets of behavioral change differ, the structure of the change process appears to be the same (Miller & Rollnick, 2002) and researchers have found that the original three-factor solution describes data the best (Defuentes-Merillas et al, 2002;Forsberg et al, 2003;Forsberg et al, 2004;Heather & Honekopp, 2008;Ouimet et al, 2010). On the other hand, some studies have failed to replicate original factor solution proposed by Rollnick et al (1992) (Bombardier & Heinemann, 2000;Rodriguez-Martos et al, 2000;Hannover et al, 2002;Nielson et al, 2003;Kheawwan et al, 2016).…”