Driving anger and other driving-related behaviors in high and low ADHD symptom college students

This study examined differences between college students with high and low symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Fifty-nine introductory psychology students completed ADHD diagnostic measures and were compared on measures of driving anger and driving anger expression; accident-related, aggressive, and risky driving behaviors; general anger; and general anger expression. Results indicated high ADHD symptom college students experience more driving anger, display such anger in more hostile/aggressive ways, are more aggressive and risky on the road, experience more crash-related outcomes, are more generally angry, and tend to display anger in socially unacceptable ways. Results are discussed in regard to the understanding and treatment of ADHD.     

“Don’t you know I own the road?” The link between narcissism and aggressive driving

Aggressive drivers can make driving dangerous. Over 50% of traffic fatalities are caused by aggressive driving. This research tests whether narcissists are more aggressive drivers than other individuals. Narcissists think they are special people who deserve special treatment. When they don’t get the special treatment they think they deserve, narcissists often lash out at others in an aggressive manner. Narcissists might think they “own the road” and can drive anyway they want, and that other drivers should get out of their way. In the article, we conduct three studies to test the link between narcissism and aggressive driving. In Studies 1 (N = 139) and 2 (N = 100), Luxembourgish motorists completed a measure of narcissism and a self-report measure of aggressive driving. In Study 3 (N = 60), American university students completed a measure of narcissism and then completed a driving simulation scenario that contained a number of frustrating elements. Several measures of aggressive driving and road rage were obtained. In all three studies, narcissism was positively related to aggressive driving. A meta-analysis found an average correlation of r = 0.35 across the three studies. This research replicates previous research linking narcissism to aggression, and extends it to a driving context.     

The influence of public self-consciousness and anger on aggressive driving

This study examined how anger interacted with public self-consciousness to influence aggressive driving. It was hypothesized that when people were angry, more aggressive driving behavior would occur when public self-consciousness was low than when public self-consciousness was high. To test this hypothesis the participants were required to complete measures of driving anger and public self-consciousness. Then participants gave a retrospective self-report of aggressive driving behavior. Further, participants were required to keep a log in which they recorded aggressive driving behavior. The results supported the prediction. Public self-consciousness interacted with anger to influence aggression while driving.     

Psychological characteristics of aggressive drivers with and without intermittent explosive disorder

We compared two groups of aggressive drivers, those who met criteria for Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED) (n=10) and comparable aggressive drivers who did not meet IED criteria (n=20), to a group of non-aggressive driving controls (n=20) on measures of psychological distress, anger, hostility, and Type A behavior as well as measures of aggressive driving and driving anger and their driving records. There were few differences between the aggressive drivers with IED and those without IED. The IED positive aggressive drivers endorsed more assaultiveness and resentment as well as more impatience and showed trends to have more hostility and angry temperament. When all aggressive drivers were compared to controls, differences emerged on anxiety, hostility, and anger as well as on measure specific to aggressive driving (competitiveness) and driving anger (at slow drivers and traffic obstructions).     

The displaced aggression questionnaire

Previous measures of aggressive personality have focused on direct aggression (i.e., retaliation toward the provoking agent). An original self-report measure of trait displaced aggression is presented. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses provided support for a 3-factor conceptualization of the construct. These analyses identified an affective dimension (angry rumination), a cognitive dimension (revenge planning), and a behavioral dimension (general tendency to engage in displaced aggression). The trait measure demonstrated good internal consistency and test-retest reliability as well as convergent and discriminant construct validity. Unlike other related personality measures, trait displaced aggression significantly predicted indirect indicators of real-world displaced aggression (i.e., self-reported domestic abuse and road rage) as well as laboratory displaced aggression in 2 experiments.     

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.     

Driving stimuli increases accessibility of aggression-related concepts in “angry” drivers

Stimuli present in aversive situations (even initially neutral stimuli) can become associated with aggressive feelings and thoughts become capable of acting as cues for aggressive thoughts. The present research examined whether driving stimuli can serve as triggers for aggression-related concepts for individuals predisposed to becoming angry while driving (i.e., high in self-reported trait driving anger). Using the General Aggression Model (Anderson & Bushman, 2002) as a guide, two studies demonstrated that participants high in trait driving anger responded more quickly to aggressive words when paired with driving than neutral stimuli. There were no differences in primes for nonaggressive words and nonwords. Study 2 also found that, for participants high in driving anger, increased accessibility of aggressive words following driving primes predicted self-reported anger in a provoking driving scenario.     

Development and Evaluation of a Measure of Dangerous,Aggressive, Negative Emotional,and Risky Driving1

The Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI) was created to measure drivers’ self‐reported likelihood to drive dangerously. Each DDDI scale (DDDI Total, Aggressive Driving, Negative Emotional Driving, and Risky Driving scales) had strong internal reliability and there was also evidence for the construct validity of the scales. The DDDI was used to examine the relation between dangerous and aggressive driving and dispositional aggression and anger among 119 college students. Males reported significantly more aggressive, risky, and angry driving than did females. Males and females reported similar levels of dangerous driving and negative emotions while driving. Dangerous driving was positively related to traffic citations and causing accidents. The DDDI will be useful as a research instrument to examine dangerous driving.     

Reducing Road Rage: An Application of the Dissonance‐Attribution Model of Interpersonal Forgiveness1

Recent research ( Takaku, 2001; Takaku, Weiner, & Ohbuchi, 2001 ) tested and supported the hypothesis that injured parties' motivation to forgive their wrongdoers could be enhanced through inducing hypocrisy‐dissonance by making the injured parties aware of their own past wrongdoing. The present study tested and supported the model's applicability to people's road‐rage experiences by showing that individuals who were aware of their own past reckless driving generated more hypocrisy‐induced dissonance, more positive attributions, and less negative emotional reactions than individuals who were not aware of their own past reckless driving. Implications for future research and possible applications of the model in reducing road rage are discussed.     

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.     

Drinking,drug use and road rage in Turkish drivers

Alcohol or drug use and road rage behaviors in drivers are threats to traffic safety. The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between alcohol or drug use and aggression in Turkish drivers, and to evaluate the mediating role of driving anger in this relationship. 270 amateur and professional Turkish drivers (170 male, 100 female) have filled up Driving Anger Scale (DAS), Driver Aggression Indicators Scale (DAIS), Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and the Questionnaire Form. 15.9% of the participants scored 8 and higher on the AUDIT scale (alcohol problem). The most prevalent substance is cannabis, used at least once in a lifetime (20%). The results of mediated regression analysis indicates that driving anger has an increasing mediating role in the relationship between alcohol use and driver aggression. Due to limitations in the data, we could not reveal the relationship between substance use and driver aggression. These findings have led us to think that drinking use may contribute to being a perpetrator and/or a victim of the road rage. Taking precautions against drinking driving and road rage and going over the current implementations is important in order to create a safer traffic environment. Scientific researches carried out in this field must aim to provide the desired efficiency on prevention and intervention programs that reduce the prevalance of such dangerous acts.     

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.     

Aggressive driving behaviors: are there psychological and attitudinal predictors?

Aggressive driving behaviors are extremely problematic in America, as well as in many other countries. This exploratory research study was designed to investigate whether researchers could identity personality characteristics as well as attitudes and beliefs of people who drive aggressively. Survey responses from a “known group” of drivers with multiple traffic citations were compared to a student sample. Underlying differences in driving behaviors, type-A behavior pattern, and attitudes and beliefs were supported in a series of t-test analyses. There were no significant differences regarding agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism. Areas of future research including investigations of trait anger, driving anger, and gender differences are suggested. We also argue that there may be a key distinction between aggressive driving and road rage, paralleling the distinction between instrumental and direct/hostile aggression.     

Aggressive thinking on the road. The mediation effect of aggressive thinking in the relationship between driving anger and aggression in Romanian drivers

Anger and aggression on the road have been pointed out as two of the main predictors of road accidents. However, while the emotional (anger) and behavioral (aggression) components of hostility have been deeply studied, the cognitive part has not received the same attention in this specific context. Thus, it is important to provide psychometric tools for assessing aggressive thoughts during driving, as the literature showed that cognitions play an important role in aggressive behavior. To this end, we asked Romanian drivers to answer three questionnaires: Driving Anger Thought Questionnaire (DATQ), the Driving Anger Scale (DAS) and the Driving Anger Expression Inventory (DAX), obtaining a total sample of 2133 answers. First, the psychometric properties of the DATQ were tested through a Confirmatory Factor Analysis, showing that the original 5-factor structure was maintained (Judgmental/Disbelieving Thinking, α = .93 both in men and women; Pejorative Labeling/Verbally Aggressive Thinking, α = .90 both in men and women; Physically Aggressive Thinking, α = .89 in men and α = .86 in women; Revenge/Retaliatory Thinking, α = .84 in men and α = .81 in women, and Adaptive/Constructive Expression, α = .84 in men and α = .82 in women). Then, we analyzed the mediation effect of angry thoughts between anger and aggression on the road, concluding that angry thoughts mediate this relationship. The main implications of the results are discussed.     

Driving anger: correlates and a test of state-trait theory

A survey and field study evaluated predictions from state-trait theory applied to driving anger. Trait driving anger, the propensity to become angry when driving, correlated positively with anger in frequently occurring driving situations and in day-to-day driving and with aggressive and risky behaviors while driving. Although not correlated with crash rates or moving violations, trait driving anger correlated with crash-related conditions such as loss concentration, loss of vehicular control, and close calls. Results generally supported predictions from state-trait theory and the construct validity of the Driving Anger Scale, as well as mapping correlates of the disposition to become angry while driving.     

Getting mad may not mean getting even: The influence of drivers’ ethical ideologies on driving anger and related behaviour

The current study explored the influence of moral values (measured by ethical ideology) on self-reported driving anger and aggressive driving responses. A convenience sample of drivers aged 17–73 years (n = 280) in Queensland, Australia, completed a self-report survey. Measures included sensation seeking, trait aggression, driving anger, endorsement of aggressive driving responses and ethical ideology (Ethical Position Questionnaire, EPQ). Scores on the two underlying dimensions of the EPQ idealism (highI/lowI) and relativism (highR/lowR) were used to categorise drivers into four ideological groups: Situationists (highI/highR); Absolutists (highI/lowR); Subjectivists (lowI/highR); and Exceptionists (lowI/lowR). Mean aggressive driving scores suggested that exceptionists were significantly more likely to endorse aggressive responses. After accounting for demographic variables, sensation seeking and driving anger, ethical ideological category added significantly, though modestly to the prediction of aggressive driving responses. Patterns in results suggest that those drivers in ideological groups characterised by greater concern to avoid affecting others negatively (i.e. highI, Situationists, Absolutists) may be less likely to endorse aggressive driving responses, even when angry. In contrast, Subjectivists (lowI, HighR), reported the lowest levels of driving anger yet were significantly more likely to endorse aggressive responses. This provides further insight into why high levels of driving anger may not always translate into more aggressive driving.     

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.     

Driving-induced stress in urban college students

Urban college student commuters (N = 407) were surveyed about their experiences with stress induced by driving. Of the participants 23.6% reported becoming angry at another driver more than once per day. They rated stress from other drivers as equal to the stress experienced during a college examination but gave slightly lower ratings to traffic congestion, road construction, and finding a parking place as sources of stress. Slow drivers, a child not restrained, and a vehicle following too closely were the highest rated annoying situations. Of participants, 21.6% had reported another driver to the police; nearly 22% said they carried a weapon for protection from other drivers (5.4% said a gun). Men were more than twice as likely as women to carry a weapon and three times as likely to carry a gun. Of the total sample, 19.1% feared being shot by another driver. Most participants (75.8%) said drivers were more aggressive and dangerous than they were five years ago.     

Anger,aggression, and risky behavior: a comparison of high and low anger drivers

This research tested hypotheses from state-trait anger theory applied to anger while driving. High and low anger drivers drove equally often and as many miles, but high anger drivers reported more frequent and intense anger and more aggression and risky behavior in daily driving, greater anger in frequently occurring situations, more frequent close calls and moving violations, and greater use of hostile/aggressive and less adaptive/constructive ways of expressing anger. In low impedance simulations, groups did not differ on state anger or aggression; however, high anger drivers reported greater state anger and verbal and physical aggression in high impedance simulations. High anger drivers drove at higher speeds in low impedance simulations and had shorter times and distances to collision and were twice as likely to crash in high impedance simulations. Additionally, high anger drivers were more generally angry. Hypotheses were generally supported, and few gender differences were noted for anger and aggression.     

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.