The role of trait emotional intelligence in driving anger: The mediating effect of emotion regulation

Emotions during driving have an essential impact on driving safety. This study aims to explore the relationships among emotional intelligence, emotional regulation, driving anger and related behaviour. A total of 304 drivers (aged 18–57) completed online questionnaires, including the trait emotional intelligence (TEI) scale, difficulties in emotional regulation scale (DERS), driving anger scale (DAS) and driver anger expression inventory (DAX). The results showed that the influence of TEI on maladaptive driving anger expression was negative, and individuals with higher emotional intelligence showed less maladaptive expressions of driving anger. Difficulties in emotion regulation played a mediating role between emotional intelligence and driving anger. These results suggest that drivers with high emotional intelligence and emotion regulation may face driving situations calmly and with a high level of driving safety.     

Cognitive biases in aggressive drivers: Does illusion of control drive us off the road?

Anger has been shown to be a motivating factor in aggression and it is widely accepted that driving anger may lead to aggressive driving. However, the link between anger and aggressive driving is likely to be mediated by drivers’ pre-existing cognitive biases and the subsequent situational evaluations made. This study investigated the extent to which optimism bias, illusion of control beliefs and driver anger predict self-reported hostile driving behaviours. A total of 220 licensed drivers (106 men; 114 women) completed a self-report questionnaire measuring trait driving anger, optimism bias, illusion of control and driving behaviour. Structural Equation Modelling showed that trait driving anger and illusion of control beliefs account for 37% of the variance in hostile driving behaviour scores. Optimism biases were unrelated to hostile driving behaviours. Thus, driving anger propensities and feelings of control over the situation, but not a general tendency to underestimate the likelihood of adverse outcomes, predict aggressive driving.     

Personality and demographic differences in the perceived risks of potentially timid driving behaviours

Timid driving behaviours can be described as overly cautious and hesitant driving behaviours. Little research has examined behaviours that potentially resemble timid driving and how these behaviours are perceived by other drivers. This is despite the potential for these behaviours to be perceived in a way that leads to angry and aggressive retaliatory behaviours in some drivers (e.g., in anger-prone drivers). We conducted an online survey examining the perceived road safety risks of several behaviours that could potentially result from timid driving and their relationships with driver personality (trait anxiety, trait driving anger), behaviour (anxious driving, angry driving), and demographic (age, gender, annual mileage) background. Drivers (N = 439, M_age = 49.41 ± 5.59 years, aged 18–89) perceived excessively cautious and unpredictable braking behaviours as posing moderate levels of risk. Multiple linear regression analyses also indicated higher perceived risks of slow and excessively cautious behaviours in older, male, and anger prone drivers. No meaningful associations were found between driver characteristics and the risks of unpredictable braking behaviours. These results suggest that safety campaigns to reduce aggressive behaviour may benefit from targeting the perceptions of other drivers’ behaviours.     

A matter of style? Driver attributional ‘style’ in accounting for the driving of others as protective or as predisposing drivers towards retaliatory aggressive driving

Driver cognitions about aggressive driving of others are potentially important to the development of evidence-based interventions. Previous research has suggested that perceptions that other drivers are intentionally aggressive may influence recipient driver anger and subsequent aggressive responses. Accordingly, recent research on aggressive driving has attempted to distinguish between intentional and unintentional motives in relation to problem driving behaviours. This study assessed driver cognitive responses to common potentially provocative hypothetical driving scenarios to explore the role of attributions in driver aggression. A convenience sample of 315 general drivers 16–64 yrs (M = 34) completed a survey measuring trait aggression (Aggression Questionnaire AQ), driving anger (Driving Anger Scale, DAS), and a proxy measure of aggressive driving behaviour (Australian Propensity for Angry Driving AusPADS). Purpose designed items asked for drivers’ ‘most likely’ thought in response to AusPADS scenarios. Response options were equivalent to causal attributions about the other driver. Patterns in endorsements of attribution responses to the scenarios suggested that drivers tended to adopt a particular perception of the driving of others regardless of the depicted circumstances: a driving attributional style. No gender or age differences were found for attributional style. Significant differences were detected between attributional styles for driving anger and endorsement of aggressive responses to driving situations. Drivers who attributed the on-road event to the other being an incompetent or dangerous driver had significantly higher driving anger scores and endorsed significantly more aggressive driving responses than those drivers who attributed other driver’s behaviour to mistakes. In contrast, drivers who gave others the ‘benefit of the doubt’ endorsed significantly less aggressive driving responses than either of these other two groups, suggesting that this style is protective.     

Distal predictors of trait driving anger. The influence of attachment styles through the mediation effect of general anger and self-esteem

Trait driving anger has been widely studied in recent years. However, whereas its proximal (personality) correlates have been well established, possible distal variables have not yet been explored. The aim of the current research study was to analyse the association of attachment styles with trait driving anger, by testing the hypothesis that both trait general anger and self-esteem would mediate this relationship. The results revealed positive and significant relationships between preoccupation, self-sufficiency, value of parental authority and parental interference, and trait driving anger. Furthermore, a SEM-based multiple mediation analysis showed that both trait general anger and self-esteem significantly mediated the relationship between preoccupation and trait driving anger, and self-sufficiency and trait driving anger, with a medium effect size (f² = 0.16). Finally, some aspects of the research in this new area are addressed, and both the clinical implications of these results and the limitations of the study are discussed.     

Situational specificity of trait influences on drivers’ evaluations and driving behaviour

This study explored the influence of anger and anxiety traits on driver evaluations and behaviour during a simulated drive. Forty-eight licensed drivers completed identical simulated driving tasks during which they rated levels of current anger, calmness and frustration or levels of danger, calmness and difficulty. Anxiety-prone drivers made higher difficultly evaluations and generally drove more cautiously. Anger-prone drivers gave higher ratings of anger and frustration, but their evaluations and anger tendencies were unrelated to their general driving behaviours. When driving behaviours in high and low anger-provoking situations were contrasted, in low anger-provoking situations, drivers higher in trait anger reported more anger and frustration and also drove faster and with more sideward movement. When driving situations were considered separately, although not overall, behaviour and evaluations were related: when forced to move sideward, drivers reported more frustration; when forced to drive more slowly, they reported more anger, and subsequently increased acceleration, throttle pressure and steering wheel use. These relationships were not moderated by trait anger. Irrespective of trait anger, drivers become angry when impeded, or in other anger-provoking situations, only drivers with high trait anger become angry and behaved aggressively in circumstances most would not consider provocative.     

Associations between self-reported mindfulness,driving anger and aggressive driving

Anger and aggression on the roads is associated with how drivers evaluate the driving situation and the behaviour of other drivers. Consequently, both can be exacerbated when these evaluations are made superficially and/or when drivers have pre-existing negative schemas regarding certain types of road situations or users. Mindfulness is likely to have negative associations with anger and aggression because it promotes opposing appraisals. That is, it encourages emotion-regulation and involves acceptance of, but not reaction to, the current situation. To examine these associations, a total of 309 drivers responded to an online questionnaire assessing mindfulness, driving anger and aggressive driving. The results showed that mindfulness shared negative relationships with driving anger and self-reported aggressive driving. However, when these relationships were examined simultaneously using Structural Equation Modelling, mindfulness was found to relate only to anger and this, in turn, predicted aggressive driving. Further analysis showed that driving anger mediates the relationship between mindfulness and aggressive driving. These results suggest that mindfulness training may provide a promising intervention for drivers prone to driving anger and subsequent aggression.     

Situational (state) anger and driving

Aggression and anger have been related to crash involvement, but the direct causal relation between situational anger and driving choices and abilities has not been examined empirically. In this study, 15 licensed drivers drove twice in a driving simulator, each time following one of two emotion inductions based on event recall: angry and neutral. Following anger induction, the drivers crossed more yellow traffic lights (p < .01) and tended to drive faster (non-significant). However, performance on emergency manoeuvres were unaffected by anger. In conclusion, it appears that state anger affects driving behaviour by increasing risk taking, without necessarily compromising the skilled driving behaviour, at least as far as these behaviours were evaluated in emergency situations in simulated driving.     

The different effects of personality on prosocial and aggressive driving behaviour in a Chinese sample

Dangerous driving behaviours, as a direct cause of accidents and death, are the focus of considerable research attention. However, unlike unsafe driving behaviours, few studies have explored safe driving behaviours and their effects on road traffic. This study aims to verify the Chinese version of the Prosocial and Aggressive Driving Inventory (PADI) and then investigate the relationship between personality and aggressive/prosocial driving behaviours. A total of 303 licensed drivers were recruited, and they voluntarily and anonymously completed the PADI, the Driving Behaviours Questionnaire (DBQ), and personality scales (anger, sensation-seeking and altruism). The results of this research confirmed the reliability and validity of the Chinese PADI. Most importantly, it was found that different relationships between different personalities and aggressive/prosocial driving behaviours. Specifically, individuals with high altruism exhibited more prosocial driving behaviours, while individuals with high sensation seeking presented more aggressive driving behaviours. The importance of these findings lies in two main potential implications: developing an effective measurement of prosocial driving behaviours in China and providing favourable evidence to guide drivers toward more prosocial driving behaviours.     

Risky driving and lapses on the road: An exploration on self-regulatory dysfunction in Australian drivers

Self-regulatory ability has been linked to a) the tendency to engage in risky behaviours, and b) the ability to focus attention. This study investigated the relationships between metacognitions, emotion regulation difficulties, risky driving behaviours, and attentional lapses on the road, among an online sample of Australian drivers (N = 255). Firstly, group comparisons showed that although females reported greater self-regulatory dysfunction, males reported a higher frequency of risky driving behaviours. Alternatively, older drivers reported being better self-regulators, and less-frequent risky driving behaviours and attentional lapses on the road. Secondly, correlations demonstrated that metacognitions were associated with difficulties in regulating emotions, the engagement of risky driving behaviours, and the quantity of attentional lapses experienced on the road. Emotion regulation difficulties and risky driving behaviours were also shown to be positively related to the frequency of attentional lapses. Structural equation modelling confirmed a hierarchical model in predicting attentional lapses, with self-regulatory components representing higher-order factors over risky behavioural components. Finally, metacognitions demonstrated mediative effects toward the relationship between prior speeding experiences and future intentions to speed. This study has provided preliminary evidence for the application of metacognitions in the engagement of risky driving behaviours, and therefore the potential for informing future interventions.     

Metacognition,rumination and road rage: An examination of driver anger progression and expression in Australia

Road rage is a serious issue impacting road safety on Australian roads. This study investigated the psychological antecedents involved in aggressive driver behaviours. Specifically, the study investigated the relationships between metacognitive beliefs, anger rumination, trait driver anger, and driver aggression; and examined the extent of aggressive behaviours in a sample of Australian drivers (N = 246). An inspection of cross-tabulations indicated that nearly all drivers engaged in verbal driver aggression (94%), approximately half of the drivers engaged in vehicle aggression (53%), and approximately a quarter of the drivers engaged in physical aggression (27%). Driver aggression was more commonly reported from males, open licensed, and middle-aged drivers. Structural path analysis indicated that there was a hierarchical series of relationships present, in that metacognitive beliefs influenced cognitive constructs such as anger rumination and constructive expression. Additionally, such factors were shown to more prominently influence trait driver anger, and the degree to which it was expressed. Bivariate correlations also demonstrated that the relationships carried forward to more specific dimensions of anger rumination and driver aggression styles. The findings of this study may assist to identify the origins of psychological mechanisms involved with anger progression and expression and inform potential interventions for aggressive driving behaviours.     

The mediation effect of mentalization in the relationship between attachment and aggression on the road

Studies regarding aggression on the road are getting more frequent, due to the close relationship of these variables with risky behaviour and crash-related events. Whereas most of research has focused on both contextual and personality (proximal) variables, the current research aimed to explore the relationship between attachment styles (distal variables) and aggressive behaviour on the road, hypothesizing the mediation effect of mentalization. Then, a sample of 469 drivers (M_age = 35.60, SD_age = 12.38; 66.1% female) taken from the general Spanish population completed a set of measures about their attachment styles (secure, anxious, avoidant, and disorganized), mentalization (alexithymia, mindful attention, empathy, and emotion recognition), and aggressive behaviour on the road (verbal, physical, vehicle-use related, displaced, and adaptive aggression). The results showed that driving aggression variables were significantly associated with self-sufficiency attachment style, as well as with empathy, alexithymia, and mindful attention. A further SEM analysis suggested that mentalization did not mediate in the relationship between self-sufficiency and driving aggression, but significant indirect effects were obtained in the case of the association between preoccupation attachment style and each one of the ways of aggression. Clinical implications of the results are discussed, in terms of the possible effectiveness of mentalization-based therapies to reduce aggression on the road, especially those which refer to alexithymia and mindful attention.     

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.     

Passion for Driving and Aggressive Driving Behavior: A Look at Their Relationship

The purpose of the present research was to investigate the relationship between passion for driving and aggressive driving behavior in 3 studies. Study 1 examined the association between passion and aggressive driving behavior in a sample of undergraduate students. Results showed that an obsessive passion for driving was associated with aggressive driving behavior, while harmonious passion was not. Study 2 replicated these results with an ecologically valid sample of community‐dwelling drivers. Finally, Study 3 replicated the results obtained in Studies 1 and 2 in a laboratory setting using a driving simulator under controlled frustrating driving situations with judges' assessment of aggressive driving behavior. Study 3 also showed that the emotion of anger mediated the obsessive‐passion/aggressive‐driving‐behavior relationship.     

Anger,aggression, risky behavior,and crash-related outcomes in three groups of drivers

High anger drivers who acknowledged problems with driving anger and were interested in treatment were compared to high and low anger drivers who did not acknowledge problems with driving anger or want treatment. Although high anger drivers who acknowledged problems reported greater anger on two measures than high anger drivers who did not acknowledge problems, both high anger groups tended not to differ from one another and were more frequently and intensely angered when driving, reported more aggressive and less adaptive/constructive forms of expressing anger while driving, engaged in more aggressive and risky behavior on the road, and experienced more of some accident-related outcomes than low anger drivers. High anger groups did not differ from each other, but reported more trait anxiety and anger and more outward negative and less controlled general anger expression than the low anger group. The two groups of high anger drivers, however, require different types of interventions given their state of readiness for driving anger reduction. Results were also interpreted as supportive of the state-trait model of anger and construct validity of the Driving Anger Scale.     

Intentionality,anger, coping,and ego defensiveness in reactive aggressive driving

A motivational sequence was used as a theoretical framework for studying reactive aggressive driving. Study 1 tested the validity of the sequence “perceived intentionality‐anger‐reactive aggressive driving” and assessed the impact of coping on anger and reactive aggressive driving. The ecological validity of the same sequence was verified in Study 2 with a large sample of adult drivers, while examining the role of ego defensiveness as a determinant of anger and aggressive driving. Study 1 showed the proposed sequence was supported and that coping strategies intervened at both anger and reaction levels, depending if the situation was perceived as intentional or not. Study 2 showed that anger mediated the impact of coping and ego defensiveness on driving aggression. Sobel tests confirmed the anger mediation effect in both studies.     

Evaluation of Two New Scales Assessing Driving Anger: The Driving Anger Expression Inventory and the Driver's Angry Thoughts Questionnaire

This study assessed the validity of the Driving Anger Expression Inventory (DAX) and Driver's Angry Thoughts Questionnaire (DATQ). Scales within the DAX and DATQ appeared to assess separate, correlated constructs. Aggressive forms of thinking and anger expression correlated positively with each other, trait driving anger, aggressive and risky behavior, some crash-related conditions, general trait anger, and general forms of anger expression. Positive, constructive forms of thinking and anger expression correlated positively with each other, but minimally or negatively with other variables. Specific aggressive forms of thinking and anger expression formed stronger links with each other than other forms of expression, supporting the discriminant validity of the DATQ and DAX. Hierarchical regressions with DATQ and DAX scales entered after other variables showed that they added explained variance above and beyond other measures, supporting the discriminant and incremental validity of these scales. It was concluded that the DAX and DATQ have utility for researchers and clinicians interested in angry drivers.     

Driving aggression in forensic and non‐forensic populations: Relationships to self‐reported levels of aggression,anger and impulsivity

A series of four questionnaires — the Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire (AQ), the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS‐11), the Driving Anger Scale (DAS) and a Driving Violence Inventory (DVI) — were administered to a sample of 473 British drivers consisting of undergraduates (N=185), members of the public (N=106) and offenders (N=182) serving sentences in closed prisons in England (violent=82, non‐violent=100). Offenders consistently rated acts of driving aggression as less severe compared with other drivers. Offender attributions of driving violence differed to other drivers in that they were equally likely to perceive obscene gesturing as high or low intensity responses; they also viewed assault as a high intensity response whereas members of the public rated it more severely. Trait levels of anger and aggression were the predictors of driving violence in all groups but previous aggressive behaviour was only a predictor for the offenders. Gender and age were found to be predictors of aggressive driving in non‐offenders. Even with the effects of age controlled, offenders (and violent offenders in particular) scored higher on measures of driving anger and aggression. These data suggest that offenders differ in their perceptions of aggressive behaviours experienced in everyday driving and as a consequence are more likely to commit acts that other drivers perceive as violent. As offenders are known to display similar perceptual biases in other domains, identified as precursors to their aggressive behaviour, it seems likely that experience effects (as reflected in the trait measures) underpin differences in driving aggression between offenders and non‐offenders.     

Childhood Sexual Abuse and Intimate Partner Violence in a Clinical Sample of Men: The Mediating Roles of Adult Attachment and Anger Management

This study examined the association between men’s experience of childhood sexual abuse and later perpetration of intimate partner violence, considering the roles of attachment insecurity and poor anger regulation. The sample was 302 Canadian men undergoing counseling for relationship difficulties or aggression. They completed questionnaires assessing childhood sexual abuse, the two dimensions of attachment insecurity (anxiety and avoidance), anger regulation processes, physical and psychological aggression, and social desirability bias. Path analyses showed that men who experienced childhood sexual abuse scored higher on attachment anxiety, which in turn was associated with aggressive behaviors directly and through four anger-related variables (trait anger, anger-in, anger-out, and low anger control). Attachment-related avoidance predicted psychological aggression, but not physical aggression, through men’s trait anger and anger-in.