False Consensus and False Uniqueness in Estimating the Prevalence of Health-Protective Behaviors

The degree to which people perceive that their health-relevant behaviors are also performed by their peers may influence whether they continue these practices or are susceptible to change. The present paper examined estimates of social consensus for health-relevant behaviors. It was hypothesized that respondents would perceive their own behaviors to be relatively more common than do people not performing them, the so-called False Consensus Effect. However, in terms of the accuracy of consensus estimates, people who behave in undesirable ways will tend to overestimate the actual number of others who behave similarly. In contrast, people who behave in desirable ways will underestimate the actual number of people who behave like themselves (false uniqueness). A group of college-aged males were asked to report about their performance of a series of health-relevant behaviors and to estimate the frequency of each behavior among their peers. The findings strongly supported the first two hypotheses and provided some support for the third. One practical implication of the results is that persons with unhealthy practices may resist public health campaigns and other interventions by overestimating consensus for their own behaviors. Also, individuals who think their undesirable health behaviors are relatively common may believe that they involve few health risks for them. The research suggests the need for further research on social cognitions about health, illness, and health-protective behaviors.     

Drivers’ propensity to have different types of intelligent speed adaptation installed in their cars

The aim of the present study was to examine if there are differences in drivers’ propensity to have different types of intelligent speed adaptation installed in their cars depending on the sample of drivers (i.e. Swedish or Turkish), their aberrant driving behaviours (i.e. violations and errors), and/or the technical solution used (i.e. speed limit information, advisory, supportive and intervening systems). A sample of 224 Swedish and 316 Turkish drivers completed a questionnaire including questions based on the driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) as well as questions about the drivers’ propensity to have different types of intelligent speed adaptation installed in their cars. The results showed that the Swedish sample of drivers was less positive than the Turkish sample of drivers towards having the advisory, supportive and intervening systems installed. Furthermore, drivers who frequently commit violations were less positive towards having any of these systems installed than were drivers who commit violations less frequently, while drivers who frequently make errors were more positive towards having the systems installed than were drivers who make errors less frequently. Both the Swedish and the Turkish sample of drivers were most positive towards having the speed limit information system installed, followed by the advisory system on second place, the supportive system on third place and lastly the intervening system on fourth place.     

The time-saving bias, speed choices and driving behavior

When drivers are asked to estimate how much time can be saved by increasing speed, they generally underestimate the time saved when increasing from a relatively low speed and overestimate the time saved when increasing from a relatively high speed. This time-saving bias has been demonstrated to affect drivers’ estimations of driving speed as well as drivers’ personal choice of speed. Specifically, drivers with a high time-saving bias chose unduly high speeds, which sometimes results in speeding, more frequently than drivers with a lower degree of the bias. This study sought to determine whether this relationship would be mediated by individual differences in driving behavior – including drivers’ attitudes, norms and habits regarding speeding behavior as well as their level of aberrant driving behavior (committing aggressive or ordinary violations, errors or lapses in driving, measured by the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire). The results showed that the time-saving bias predicted estimations of required speed better than any of these factors, and also better than drivers’ age, gender, education and income, as well as the number of years they have had a license and their monthly driving kilometrage, their prior speeding violations and crash involvement. In predicting drivers’ personal speed choices, the time-saving bias was second only to the frequency of committing ordinary violations.     

Identifying the main factors contributing to driving errors and traffic violations – Results from naturalistic driving data

Researchers have identified various factors that likely affect aberrant driving behaviors and therefore crash risk. However, it remains unclear which of these factors poses the greatest risk for either errors or violations under naturalistic driving conditions. This study investigated important variables contributing to driving errors and traffic violations based on naturalistic driving data from the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2). In addition, this study identified factors determining the drivers’ willingness to perform common secondary tasks while driving, which have been associated with different degrees of crash risk. Results showed that anger, passenger presence, and persistent individual differences in driver behavior were the main factors associated with committed violations; surprise, high-risk visually distracting secondary tasks, and the driving task demand passing through an interchange were the main factors associated with errors. The willingness to engage in risky secondary tasks while driving appeared to be related to an overall tendency to engage in risky driving behaviors. However, drivers considered the driving context particularly when engaging in visually distracting secondary tasks. This study’s comprehensive approach should be a step towards generating a complete model of the variables that contribute to, or mitigate dangers in traffic.     

Can infrastructure improvements mitigate unsafe traffic safety culture: A driving simulator study exploring cross cultural differences

This paper presents the results of a cross-cultural study to investigate the influence of traffic safety culture and infrastructure improvements on driver behaviour. To achieve this, the driving style of UK drivers was compared with that of Nigerians with and without experience of driving in the UK. A driving simulator experiment compared the actual driving style of these three groups of drivers in different safety critical scenarios. The simulated road environment varied depending on how much infrastructure was provided (low or high infrastructure). In addition, the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire was used to collect self-reported data on violations, errors and lapses. It was hypothesised that Nigerian drivers with no experience of driving in a UK road system would report and engage in more unsafe driving behaviour compared to the other two groups, and that increasing infrastructure would have little positive benefit. Overall, the results supported these hypotheses, indicating that the behaviours of drivers are interpretable in relation to their traffic safety culture, compared to changes in their driving environment.     

Sexism Versus Partisanship: A New Look at the Question of Whether America is Ready for a Woman President

We question the validity of traditional polling about the likelihood of respondents to vote for a woman president and argue that the use of such polls may overestimate sexism and underestimate the role that party identification and individual characteristics play in deciding about whether to vote for a woman president. Our analysis of data collected in May–June 2004 show that many people who say they will not vote for a woman for president would do so if given realistic, specific, political scenarios via head-to-head match-ups with potential candidates. Although survey respondents preferred George W. Bush to Hillary Clinton, the margin between these candidates was close especially considering that Bush had been actively campaigning for months, whereas Clinton had not.     

The false consensus effect: A meta-analysis of 115 hypothesis tests

False consensus refers to an egocentric bias that occurs when people estimate consensus for their own behaviors. Specifically, the false consensus hypothesis holds that people who engage in a given behavior will estimate that behavior to be more common than it is estimated to be by people who engage in alternative behaviors. A meta-analysis was conducted upon 115 tests of this hypothesis. The combined effects of the tests of the false consensus hypothesis were highly statistically significant and of moderate magnitude. Further, the 115 tests of false consensus appear to be relatively heterogeneous in terms of significance levels and effect sizes. Correlational analyses and focused comparisons indicate that the false consensus effect does not appear to be influenced by the generality of the reference population, nor by the difference between alternative choices in actual consensus. However, the significance and magnitude of the false consensus effect was significantly predicted by the number of behavioral choices/estimates subjects had to make, and the sequence of measurement of choices and estimates. These patterns of results are interpreted as being inconsistent with the self-presentational, motivational explanation for the false consensus effect.     

Making our Measures Match Perceptions: Do Severity and Type Matter When Assessing Academic Misconduct Offenses?

Traditional approaches to measurement of violations of academic integrity may overestimate the magnitude and severity of cheating and confound panic with planned cheating. Differences in the severity and level of premeditation of academic integrity violations have largely been unexamined. Results of a study based on a combined sample of business students showed that students are more likely to commit minor cheating offenses and engage in panic-based cheating as compared to serious and planned cheating offenses. Results also indicated there is a significant interaction between severity and type (planned vs. panic) of cheating. We hypothesized serious and planned cheating offenses would be related to justifications and found the largest differences were between panic and planned. Finally, panic and minor cheating were associated with two self-control-related personality traits. Implications for cheating research are discussed.     

Ethical Predispositions to Violate or Obey Traffic Rules and the Mediating Role of Driving Styles

Traffic law violations are the most important determinants of traffic accidents. This study examined the influence of drivers' ethical perspective on their traffic violations and the mediating role of driving styles in these relationships. A sample of 313 drivers participated in the study. Contrary to expectations, high ethical relativism was found to be associated with fewer aggressive traffic violations. This suggests that the informal normative system that parallels the official traffic regulations is the more salient reference against which drivers usually assess the adequacy of their behaviors, highly relativistic drivers being more willing to also take into consideration the official traffic code in these appraisals. We also found significant interactions between idealism and relativism on both ordinary and aggressive violations. Idealism emerged as a predictor of these violations only in drivers low in relativism. In this group, one's concern about the harm that he/she might cause to other traffic participants induces higher traffic law abidingness. These influences of idealism were mediated by certain driving styles. Drivers' general ethical perspective fosters a specific pattern of driving styles and, consequently, the tendency to commit or to refrain from traffic violations.     

Cross-cultural differences in driver aggression,aberrant, and positive driver behaviors

The present study investigated differences in driver aggression for self and others within countries and cultural differences between driver aggression, aberrant, and positive driver behaviors across five countries (Estonia, Greece, Kosovo, Russia, and Turkey). It was predicted that drivers from these five countries differ significantly in terms of driver aggression for self and others, aberrant, and positive driver behaviors. In the study, 743 participants completed the questionnaire package, including the Driver Aggression Indicators Scale (DAIS), the short version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) with items from the Positive Driver Behavior Scale, and the Demographic Information Form. Paired samples T-tests were conducted to examine the differences in driving aggression between self and others in the five countries. The results indicated that, except for Russian drivers, drivers reported that other drivers had higher driver aggression than themselves. To examine the cross-cultural differences, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) tests were conducted for the two dimensions of the DAIS (hostile aggression and revenge, and aggressive warnings) and the three dimensions of the DBQ with items from the Positive Driver Behavior Scale (errors, violations, and positive driver behaviors). Cross-country item-based comparisons were then made for the DAIS and the DBQ. The ANCOVA results showed significant differences in both item-based and subscale comparisons. Russian drivers were significantly different from other drivers in terms of hostile aggression and the revenge subscales of the DAIS and positive driver behaviors. Turkish drivers were significantly different from other drivers in several items of the DBQ, including errors and violations. The findings suggest that culture-specific strategies might be conducted for traffic-related anger management. Furthermore, differences in errors and violations among the five countries may be due to cultural differences. Positive driver behaviors might be better promoted in countries by drawing on their distinct cultural road safety strategies.     

Driving violations,aggression and perceived consensus

A questionnaire survey of 171 English drivers investigated the relationships between trait aggressiveness, self-reported driving violations, and perceptions of the commission of driving violations by others, using the extended violation scale of the Manchester Driver behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ). Drivers who were relatively high on trait aggressiveness reported committing more traffic violations than those who had lower scores. Both aggressive and non aggressive drivers believed that others committed the driving offences more often than they did themselves, although those with a higher score for trait aggressiveness had a greater tendency to do so. The commission of both aggressive and Highway Code violations was predicted by trait anger. Those high on anger and hostility were also more likely to have been involved in a road traffic accident. The implications for road safety interventions are discussed.     

Claiming a large slice of a small pie: asymmetric disconfirmation in negotiation

Three studies show that negotiators consistently underestimate the size of the bargaining zone in distributive negotiations (the small-pie bias) and, by implication, overestimate the share of the surplus they claim (the large-slice bias). The authors explain the results by asymmetric disconfirmation: Negotiators with initial estimates of their counterpart's reservation price that are "inside" the bargaining zone tend to behave consistently with these estimates, which become self-fulfilling, whereas negotiators with initial "outside" estimates revise their perceptions in the face of strong disconfirming evidence. Asymmetric disconfirmation can produce a population-level bias, even when initial perceptions are accurate on average. The authors suggest that asymmetric disconfirmation has implications for confirmation bias and self-fulfilling-prophecy research in social perception.     

Tendency to commit traffic violations and presence of passengers in the car

The present study examined whether the tendency to commit traffic violations differed when drivers were with and without the presence of other persons in the car. One thousand and eight drivers were observed by the road side. The data registered by the observers included estimated age of the driver and the passengers, sex of the driver and number of passengers. Four dependent variables were registered for each driver, which are, wearing seatbelt, signaling, using hand-held cellular phone and keeping the distance from the vehicle in front. It has been found that for both males and females, old and young, a greater proportion of drivers who were alone committed traffic violations as compared to drivers who were not alone. These results are discussed in relation to social influences on drivers and allow insight into how the presence of passengers has an impact on driver behavior and traffic safety.     

Characteristics of college students who text while driving: Do their perceptions of a significant other influence their decisions?

IntroductionTexting while driving is a significant risk factor for automobile collisions. The use of cell phones is prevalent among young people and commonly reported when they drive.MethodA web-based survey of 861 college student drivers determined how texting was associated with other forms of risky driving, perceptions of risk, and their driving and texting interactions with a significant other.ResultsTexting drivers were more likely to engage in other risky driving behaviors, perceived less risk in texting and driving, felt more immune to traffic risks, and had friends who text and drive. Logistic regression analyses showed that even after adjusting for risky driving behaviors and perceived risk, texting drivers were significantly more likely to do so if they saw their significant other text and drive.ConclusionsTraffic safety campaigns need to address important social influences on this behavior.     

Unskilled, unaware, or both? The better-than-average heuristic and statistical regression predict errors in estimates of own performance

People who score low on a performance test overestimate their own performance relative to others, whereas high scorers slightly underestimate their own performance. J. Kruger and D. Dunning (1999) attributed these asymmetric errors to differences in metacognitive skill. A replication study showed no evidence for mediation effects for any of several candidate variables. Asymmetric errors were expected because of statistical regression and the general better-than-average (BTA) heuristic. Consistent with this parsimonious model, errors were no longer asymmetric when either regression or the BTA effect was statistically removed. In fact, high rather than low performers were more error prone in that they were more likely to neglect their own estimates of the performance of others when predicting how they themselves performed relative to the group.     

Self-esteem, self-serving cognitions, and health risk behavior

The current article reviews prospective and experimental research on the relation between self-esteem and perceptions of vulnerability. These studies demonstrate that individuals with high self-esteem who engage in risk behavior often utilize a variety of self-serving cognitive strategies that protect them from fully acknowledging their vulnerability to the potential negative consequences of their behavior; e.g., they minimize their estimates of personal risk and overestimate the prevalence of the risk behavior among their peers. The article also provides data on an additional self-serving cognitive strategy employed by adolescents with high self-esteem--alteration of perceptions of others' reactions to their own risk behavior. Finally, the article reviews the emerging literature on the relation between these cognitive strategies and maladaptive health behavior, and proposes that whether these strategies are maladaptive depends on the nature of the threat and the availability of opportunities to engage in compensatory self-enhancement.     

Identifying effects of driving and secondary task demands,passenger presence,and driver characteristics on driving errors and traffic violations – Using naturalistic driving data segments preceding both safety critical events and matched baselines

Researchers have identified various factors that likely affect aberrant driving behaviors and therefore crash risk. However, it remains unclear which of these factors poses the greatest risk for committing either errors or violations under naturalistic driving conditions. This study investigated important variables contributing to driving errors and traffic violations based on naturalistic driving data from the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2). The analyzed driving segments preceded both safety critical events and matched baselines. Results showed that intersection influence, high-risk visually distracting secondary tasks, and the severities of the safety critical events were the main factors associated with driving errors. The primary factors linked to violations were intersection influence, persistent individual differences in driver behavior, and the severities of the safety critical events. Furthermore, the number of aberrant driving behaviors in trip segments preceding crashes was higher than in the matched segments unrelated to safety critical events. However, the most common aberrant driving behavior types in the respective segment groups appeared to resemble each other. This suggests that crashes became more likely due to drivers committing more violations and errors overall as opposed to drivers making one certain type of error or violation.     

Bias and ignorance in demographic perception

When it comes to knowledge of demographic facts, misinformation appears to be the norm. Americans massively overestimate the proportions of their fellow citizens who are immigrants, Muslim, LGBTQ, and Latino, but underestimate those who are White or Christian. Previous explanations of these estimation errors have invoked topic-specific mechanisms such as xenophobia or media bias. We reconsidered this pattern of errors in the light of more than 30 years of research on the psychological processes involved in proportion estimation and decision-making under uncertainty. In two publicly available datasets featuring demographic estimates from 14 countries, we found that proportion estimates of national demographics correspond closely to what is found in laboratory studies of quantitative estimates more generally. Biases in demographic estimation, therefore, are part of a very general pattern of human psychology—independent of the particular topic or demographic under consideration—that explains most of the error in estimates of the size of politically salient populations. By situating demographic estimates within a broader understanding of general quantity estimation, these results demand reevaluation of both topic-specific misinformation about demographic facts and topic-specific explanations of demographic ignorance, such as media bias and xenophobia.     

The Effect of Race on Decisions by Judges and Other Officers of the Court1

This study examined the impact of the ethnic group of defendant and victim on perceptions of a simulated trial. The subjects were judges, prosecuting attorneys, defense attorneys, and probation officers. People of different racial groups are perceived and would be treated differently by the respondents. Most respondents perceived the White defendant as a more serious offender than a minority defendant. However, there was one very important exception—judges. Judges indicated that a minority defendant who victimized a White was more likely to commit future crimes. Minority respondents and different occupational groups responded in diverse ways. Chen's filtering model of case processing in the criminal justice system (1991) is used to explain these results.