Retaliatory aggressive driving: A justice perspective

Roseborough, James E.W.; Wickens, Christine M.; Wiesenthal, David L.

doi:10.1016/j.aap.2021.106393

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 143 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From the regression models, it was found that the likelihood of committing traffic violations is associated with driving behavior and attitude to abide by traffic laws. There was no strong association found with personality traits, which contradicts the findings reported by [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 97%

“…This corresponds to a sampling error of ±7% at a 95% confidence level. A similar sample size was used by Roseborough et al [ 36 ], and Moataz et al [ 38 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Personality traits, such as aggression, anxiety, and sensation seeking, are also possible predictors of risky driving behavior [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. A study by Ulleberg et al and Spano et al [ 33 , 34 ] showed that young adult drivers showed more difficulty in self-regulation in relation to personality traits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A study by Ulleberg et al and Spano et al [ 33 , 34 ] showed that young adult drivers showed more difficulty in self-regulation in relation to personality traits. In a separate study by the Society of Risk Analysis [ 35 ], it was found that an angry personality leads to aggressive driving behavior, as reported in Roseborough et al [ 36 ]; they developed a model that showed that drivers’ belief in an unjust world leads to driving injustice in the form of aggressive retaliatory driving. Such studies have demonstrated that personality traits are important factors to consider.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Understanding Traffic Accidents among Young Drivers in Qatar

Tarlochan

Ibrahim

Gaben

2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young drivers are generally associated with risky driving behaviors that can lead to crash involvement. Many self-report measurement scales are used to assess such risky behaviors. This study is aimed to understand the risky driving behaviors of young adults in Qatar and how such behaviors are associated with crash involvement. This was achieved through the usage of validated self-report measurement scales adopted for the Arabic context. A nationwide cross-sectional and exploratory study was conducted in Qatar from January to April 2021. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the survey was conducted online. Therefore, respondents were selected conveniently. Hence, the study adopted a non-probability sampling method in which convenience and snowball sampling were used. A total of 253 completed questionnaires were received, of which 57.3% were female, and 42.7% were male. Approximately 55.8% of these young drivers were involved in traffic accidents after obtaining their driving license. On average, most young drivers do have some risky driving behavior accompanied by a low tendency to violate traffic laws, and their driving style is not significantly controlled by their personality on the road. The older young drivers are more involved in traffic accidents than the younger drivers, i.e., around 1.5 times more likely. Moreover, a young male driver is 3.2 times less likely to be involved in traffic accidents than a female driver. In addition, males are only 0.309 times as likely as females to be involved in an accident and have approximately a 70% lower likelihood of having an accident versus females. The analysis is complemented with the association between young drivers’ demographic background and psychosocial-behavioral parameters (linking risky driving behavior, personality, and obligation effects on crash involvement). Some interventions are required to improve driving behavior, such as driving apps that are able to monitor and provide corrective feedback.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 97%

“…This corresponds to a sampling error of ±7% at a 95% confidence level. A similar sample size was used by Roseborough et al [ 36 ], and Moataz et al [ 38 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%