Psychosocial function of driving as predictor of risk-taking behaviour

Møller, Mette; Gregersen, Nils Petter

doi:10.1016/j.aap.2007.05.007

Cited by 35 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the car can be an extension of the driver themselves, used as a form of self-expression by the young driver during their driving journeys (e.g., OECD, 2006). Consistent with this notion, quantitative and qualitative research alike repeatedly demonstrates that driving serves an important psychosocial function for the young person, such as facilitating time spent with friends (e.g., carrying them as passengers, travelling to their homes or other social outings) (e.g., Christmas, 2007;Moller & Gregersen, 2008;Moller & Sigurdardottir, 2009). More broadly, young driver lifestyle characteristics have also been found to relate to their driving style (e.g., see Gregersen & Berg, 1994;Moller, 2004;Moller & Haustein, 2013).…”

Section: The Purpose Of Drivingmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…For example, a Finnish study revealed that driving 'just for fun' accounted for approximately one quarter of driving by young males, and one fifth of driving by females aged 18-21 years, however it accounted for less than 10% of the driving of drivers aged 25-59 years old (Laapotti et al, 2006). Importantly, the psychosocial function of driving has been found to be related to self-reported risky driving behaviour, such that young drivers who used driving to gain social status and, relatedly, to spend time driving with their friends, reported engaging in more risky driving behaviours including speeding and tailgating (Moller & Gregersen, 2008). Presence of young passengers is particularly of interest in young driver road safety, as a New Zealand study concluded that the number of passengers was the most significant predictor of young driver crashes after controlling for gender, blood alcohol concentration, mileage, fatigue, and time of day (Keall, Frith, & Patterson, 2004).…”

Section: The Purpose Of Drivingmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In survey research the purpose of young driver journeys has been examined through individual items (e.g., Blows et al, 2005) and through various purpose-built scales (e.g., Moller & Gregersen, 2008) which can emerge after data reduction analyses such as factor analyses (e.g., Gregersen & Berg, 1994); however to date there is no valid and reliable purpose-of-driving scale available to researchers. As such, there is a need for a young novice driver-specific tool for measuring the psychosocial purpose of driving, and which can also be used to explore the relationship with risky driving, crashes and offences.…”

Section: The Purpose Of Drivingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The psychosocial purpose of driving and its relationship with the risky driving behaviour of young novice drivers

Scott‐Parker

King

Watson

2015

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviou

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Purpose Of Drivingmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: The Purpose Of Drivingmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: The Purpose Of Drivingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The psychosocial purpose of driving and its relationship with the risky driving behaviour of young novice drivers

Scott‐Parker

King

Watson

2015

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviou

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Violators, offenders and risk-takers are often characterised by impulsivity (e.g. Moller and Gregersen, 2008), and therefore one could envision a situation where impulsive offenders, when faced with the first questions (did you see a hazard? ), report "No".…”

Section: Situation Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

What happens when drivers face hazards on the road?

Ventsislavova

Gugliotta

Peña-Suárez

et al. 2016

Accident Analysis & Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study aims to obtain knowledge about the nature of the processes involved in Hazard Perception, using measurement techniques to separate and independently quantify these suspected subprocesses: Sensation, Situation Awareness (recognition, location and projection) and Decision-Making. It applies Signal Detection Theory analysis to Hazard Perception and Prediction Tasks. To enable the calculation of Signal Detection Theory parameters, video-recorded hazardous vs. quasi-hazardous situations were presented to the participants. In the hazardous situations it is necessary to perform an evasive action, for instance, braking or swerving abruptly, while the quasi-hazardous situations do not require the driver to make any evasive manoeuvre, merely to carry on driving at the same speed and following the same trajectory. A first Multiple Choice Hazard Perception and Prediction test was created to measure participants' performance in a What Happens Next? Task. The sample comprised 143 participants, 47 females and 94 males. Groups of non-offender drivers (learner, novice and experienced) and offender drivers (novice and experienced) were recruited. The Multiple Choice Hazard Perception and Prediction test succeeded in finding differences between drivers according to their driving experience.In fact, differences exist with regard to the level of hazard discrimination (d' prime) by drivers with different experience (learner, novice and experienced drivers) and profile (offenders and non-offenders) and these differences emerge from Signal Detection Theory analysis. In addition, it was found that experienced drivers show higher Situation Awareness than learner or novice drivers. On the other hand, although offenders do worse than non-offenders on the hazard identification question, they do just as well when their Situation Awareness is probed (in fact, they are as aware as non-offenders of what the obstacles on the road are, where they are and what will happen next). Nevertheless, when considering the answers participants provided about their degree of cautiousness, experienced drivers were more cautious than novice drivers, and non-offender drivers were more cautious than offender drivers. That is, a greater number of experienced and non-offender drivers chose the answer "I would make an evasive manoeuvre such as braking gradually".2

show abstract

“…In the health psychology literature, evidence is found that occupational stress predicts accidents related to drivers' fatigue (Strahan et al 2008). It is also found that risktaking and careless behaviour are associated with heightened injury susceptibility among young drivers (Møller and Gregersen 2008). Beyond the stress influence, these findings suggest that adoption of unhealthy or risky behaviours and poor recovery could play a role in the occurrence of sport-related injuries.…”

Section: Downloaded By [Lakehead University] At 13:42 08 December 2014mentioning

confidence: 96%

Athletes’ experiences of psychosocial risk factors preceding injury

Johnson

2011

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The risk of being injured while engaging in sport and exercise is statistically high. Therefore, it is important to understand the psychosocial mechanisms underlying susceptibility to injury in sport and exercise settings because of the potential to enhance well-being at the individual level and reduce economic costs for society. Existing theoretical models of injury risk point to psychosocial antecedents, such as personality factors, history of stressors, coping resources and peripheral narrowing, as precursors of susceptibility to injury. The aim of the study was to describe and structure athletes' experiences of psychosocial risk factors preceding injury based on existing theoretical models. Twenty competitive athletes (mean age 22.7 years) were interviewed about experiences of psychosocial risk factors and connections between psychosocial risk factors and occurrence of acute injury. Based on a thematic content analysis, four risk factors emerged: history of stressors, person factors, fatigue and ineffective coping. The findings revealed several parallels to existing theoretical models and findings in the previous literature. Three out of four core themes emerged that coincide with Williams and Andersen's stress-injury model. In addition, a not so often discussed finding, fatigue, was identified as a theme in athletes' responses. Several sub-themes are discussed in relation to Rogers and Landers' coping model and Wasserman' stress-vulnerability model. Recommendations are given for individual athletes and for others involved in preventing injury occurrence in sport and exercise settings.

show abstract

Psychosocial function of driving as predictor of risk-taking behaviour

Cited by 35 publications

References 26 publications

The psychosocial purpose of driving and its relationship with the risky driving behaviour of young novice drivers

The psychosocial purpose of driving and its relationship with the risky driving behaviour of young novice drivers

What happens when drivers face hazards on the road?

Athletes’ experiences of psychosocial risk factors preceding injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About