An exploratory investigation into the self-regulatory processes influencing drug driving: Are young drivers more externally regulated?

An upward trend in drug driving has been observed in several countries around the world. Research suggests that younger drivers are more likely to engage in drug driving compared to older drivers. There is also evidence to suggest young drivers differ from older drivers in their capacity for self-regulation. Despite this, research has yet to explore the impact of age on the self-regulatory processes with regard to decisions to drug drive among drug users. A total of 507 Queensland drivers (72.8% female), who reported ever taking an illegal drug, were involved in the research. Participants completed an online questionnaire, which collected demographic and drug consumption information, as well as items assessing the self-regulatory processes influencing drug driving, and drug driving behaviour. Regardless of age, participants reported a tendency towards internalised regulation. However, results suggest that young drivers (aged 18–24 years) feel greater belongingness to people who promote safe transport decisions after taking drugs, compared to drivers aged 25 years and over. Interaction effects revealed that for young drug takers, feeling greater relatedness, along with perceiving competence and importance in planning alternative transport after taking drugs, can be protective against drug driving behaviours. Significant predictors of drug driving were lower relatedness, greater perceived pressure to drug drive, lower effort/importance to plan safe alternatives after taking drugs, being of older age, and greater drug abuse. Counterintuitively, perceiving more options (choice) to take alternative transport after taking drugs also predicted the offending behaviour. The results of this study suggest that enhancing drivers’ competency to make (and value) safe driving decisions is a critical step for road safety.     

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.     

Older drivers’ self-assessed driving skills,driving-related stress and self-regulation in traffic

Previous research on older drivers has indicated connections between self-rated driving ability, confidence in their own driving, driving-related stress, and self-regulatory behaviour. However, more systematic associations between older drivers’ perceptions on their own driving and self-regulation or driver stress and self-regulation behaviour, and possible gender differences in these, have not been obtained in previous studies. The aim of the present study was to gain a better understanding of older drivers’ self-regulatory driving and the motivators behind this behaviour, by placing this behaviour in the modern traffic psychological framework of the driving task. 888 drivers aged 75 or older completed a structured phone interview about their perceived changes in driving skills, driving-related discomfort, and avoidance of driving situations. The results showed that when reporting change, the participants were more likely to report improvement of higher level skills and decline of the lowest level skills. Women were less likely to report improvement and more likely to report decline of skills. Driving situations related to inner states or adverse conditions were more often associated with discomfort and avoidance than situations related to infrastructure, and women were more likely to report discomfort and avoidance of driving situations. The results suggest that older drivers generally show good self-judgement of changes in their driving skills and acknowledge the different types of skills comprised in the driving task. The results also provide a better understanding of older drivers’ self-regulation of driving and gender differences in this, thus providing a better understanding in particular of women drivers’ self-regulation and increased risk of premature driving cessation. These findings may be valuable when encouraging older drivers, especially women, to prolong their 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.     

“I would have lost the respect of my friends and family if they knew I had bent the road rules”: Parents,peers, and the perilous behaviour of young drivers

Young novice drivers are at considerable risk of injury on the road. Their behaviour appears vulnerable to the social influence of their parents and friends. The nature and mechanisms of parent and peer influence on young novice driver (16–25 years) behaviour was explored via small group interviews (n = 21) and two surveys (n1 = 1170, n2 = 390) to inform more effective young driver countermeasures. Parental and peer influence occurred in pre-Licence, Learner, and Provisional (intermediate) periods. Pre-Licence and unsupervised Learner drivers reported their parents were less likely to punish risky driving (e.g., speeding). These drivers were more likely to imitate their parents and reported their parents were also risky drivers. Young novice drivers who experienced or expected social punishments from peers, including ‘being told off’ for risky driving, reported less riskiness. Conversely drivers who experienced or expected social rewards such as being ‘cheered on’ by friends – who were also more risky drivers – reported more risky driving including crashes and offences. Interventions enhancing positive influence and curtailing negative influence may improve road safety outcomes not only for young novice drivers, but for all persons who share the road with them. Parent-specific interventions warrant further development and evaluation including: modelling safe driving behaviour by parents; active monitoring of driving during novice licensure; and sharing the family vehicle during the intermediate phase. Peer-targeted interventions including modelling of safe driving behaviour and attitudes; minimisation of social reinforcement and promotion of social sanctions for risky driving also need further development and evaluation.     

Transcultural validation and reliability of the Spanish version of the behaviour of young novice drivers scale (BYNDS) in a Colombian young driver population

The overrepresentation of young drivers in road crashes, and the fatalities and injuries arising from those crashes, is an intractable problem around the world. A plethora of research has led to the development and application of a range of research tools, including self-report survey instruments. One such instrument, the five-factor Behaviour of Young Novice Driver Scale (BYNDS), was developed in an Australian young driver population, and has recently been validated in a New Zealand young driver population. The current study aimed to validate the BYNDS in a Colombian young driver population, the first application of the instrument in a developing country. Translation from English to Spanish, and back translation from Spanish to English, in addition to culturally-appropriate modifications (such as changing ‘right hand side’ to ‘left hand side’) resulted in a Spanish version of the BYNDS (BYNDS-Sp). The BYNDS-Sp was administered to a sample of 392 young drivers aged 16–24 years (n = 353 aged 19–24 years) with a valid driver’s licence. An exploratory factor analysis revealed a six factor structure using 40 of the original 44 BYNDS-Sp items, accounting for 58.5% of the variance in self-reported risky driving behaviour. Ninety-three percent of participants reported having ready access to their own vehicle (42% owned their own vehicle), with Colombian young drivers most likely to report driving at night and on the weekend. The majority of participants reported driving in excess of posted speed limits (e.g., only one third of participants reported never driving 10–20 km/h over the speed limit), and driving in response to their mood (e.g., only one third of participants reported they never drove faster if in a bad mood). As such, the BYNDS-Sp can reveal patterns of problematic behaviours (such as risky driving exposure), in addition to specific behaviours of concern (such as carrying passengers at night, and driving when tired), guiding the development and implementation of interventions targeting the risky driving behaviour of young drivers in Colombia. In addition, the BYNDS-Sp can be used as a measure of intervention success if used as a baseline and as a follow-up tool. Further research can investigate the utility and applicability of the BYNDS-Sp in other Spanish-speaking countries, such as Spain and Mexico.     

How does emotional intelligence predict driving behaviors among non-commercial drivers?

Dangerous driving behaviors have been found to be a leading contributor to vehicle crashes and fatalities, with more than 2.7 million people injured and 36,560 people killed in the United States in 2018 (NHTSA, 2020). Drivers’ emotions have been found to be among the leading contributors to dangerous driving behaviors. Emotions can be measured and understood through one’s emotional intelligence (EI). Previous research has confirmed the relationship between EI and dangerous driving behaviors among general driving populations in limited scope. This study analyzed dangerous driving behaviors (e.g., aggressive driving) among non-commercial US drivers. 615 US drivers ages 18 to 65 (M = 31.14, SD = 11.15) with valid US driver’s licenses (non-commercial) participated in this study. Participants completed an online survey through Qualtrics that included the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue-SF) to measure different dimensions of EI and the Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI) and the Driving Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) to measure dangerous driving behaviors. Furthermore, participants reported their demographic information, including age, sex, and location. Correlation analysis revealed that significant associations exist between dangerous driving behaviors and EI. The emotionality component of EI was found to be the strongest predictor of dangerous driving behaviors. The findings concluded that participants with higher EI scores engaged in less dangerous driving behavior, resulting in fewer crashes and fatalities. Thus, promoting and improving EI may be useful in preventing risky driving among non-commercial drivers. Incorporating emotional intelligence education in driver’s education, workplace training, and licensing procedures can be helpful to develop safer drivers. Further research is needed to investigate commercial drivers’ behaviors in relation to EI.     

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.     

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

BackgroundThe overrepresentation of young drivers in road crashes, injuries and fatalities around the world has resulted in a breadth of injury prevention efforts including education, enforcement, engineering, and exposure control. Despite multifaceted intervention, the young driver problem remains a challenge for injury prevention researchers, practitioners and policy-makers. The intractable nature of young driver crash risks suggests that a deeper understanding of their car use – that is, the purpose of their driving – is required to inform the design of more effective young driver countermeasures.AimsThis research examined the driving purpose reported by young drivers, including the relationship with self-reported risky driving behaviours including offences.MethodsYoung drivers with a Learner or Provisional licence participated in three online surveys (N1 = 656, 17–20 years; N2 = 1051, 17–20 years; N3 = 351, 17–21 years) as part of a larger state-wide project in Queensland, Australia.ResultsA driving purpose scale was developed (the PsychoSocial Purpose Driving Scale, PSPDS), revealing that young drivers drove for psychosocial reasons such as for a sense of freedom and to feel independent. Drivers who reported the greatest psychosocial purpose for driving were more likely to be male and to report more risky driving behaviours such as speeding. Drivers who deliberately avoided on-road police presence and reported a prior driving-related offence had significantly greater PSPDS scores, and higher reporting of psychosocial driving purposes was found over time as drivers transitioned from the supervised Learner licence phase to the independent Provisional (intermediate) licence phase.Discussion and conclusionsThe psychosocial needs met by driving suggest that effective intervention to prevent young driver injury requires further consideration of their driving purpose. Enforcement, education, and engineering efforts which consider the psychosocial purpose of the driving are likely to be more efficacious than those which presently do not. Road safety countermeasures could reduce the young driver’s exposure to risk through such mechanisms as encouraging the use of public transport.     

Risky driving among young male drivers: The effects of mood and passengers

Young male drivers are at greater risk of automobile crashes than other drivers. Efforts to reduce risky driving in this population have met with mixed success. The present research was designed to examine the effects of induced mood and the presence or absence of passengers on risky driving in young male drivers. Male drivers (n = 204) aged 16–18 were tested in a driving simulator. This study employed a 2 (happy/sad mood) by 2 (passenger present/absent) between-subjects factorial design, and examined driving behavior in a simulator. Measures of risky driving were combined into two factors representing speed (e.g., exceeding the speed limit) and carelessness (e.g., crossing the center line). Findings indicated that driving with a passenger resulted in faster driving than driving alone. Although there was no significant main effect of induced mood on driving, results revealed a significant interaction of mood and passenger conditions: when in a happy mood, driving with a passenger significantly increased driving speed. There were no significant effects of passenger or mood on careless driving. In conclusion, both mood and passenger presence are important factors in fast driving among young male drivers. Results are discussed in the context of developing more effective countermeasures for this at-risk population.     

Validating an older adult driving behaviour model with structural equation modelling and confirmatory factor analysis

The Multilevel Older Persons Transportation and Road Safety (MOTRS) model postulates a role for demographic, functional, and psychosocial factors in driving self-regulation. This study formally tested the constructs of the MOTRS model, and its ability to account for variation in older adult’s driving self-regulation. Four exogenous constructs dealing with sociodemographic and driving-related variables (driving space, dependency on other drivers, health, and driving performance) and three endogenous constructs of psychosocial appraisals (driving confidence, attitudes and beliefs towards driving) were used to predict driving self-regulation. A sample of 277 Australian drivers, aged 65 years or over, completed standardised questionnaires to assess these variables. Structural equation modelling was used to evaluate one of the model’s assumptions. Findings established that sociodemographic and driving-related factors influence older adults’ driving self-regulation by impacting psychosocial variables. A re-specified model accounted for 75% of the variance in self-reported driving self-regulation. When other variables were considered, attitude towards driving was the strongest single predictor of driving self-regulation. These findings provide an initial partial validation of the MOTRS model. The results indicate that psychosocial variables are important determinants of driving self-regulation by older adults. This model could guide future research into older adults’ driving self-regulation.     

Reward versus punishment: Reinforcement sensitivity theory,young novice drivers’ perceived risk,and risky driving

One reason that young novice drivers remain statistically over-represented in road deaths is their rate of engagement in risky driving. Prominent contributing factors include driver’s age, sex, personality, risk perception, and their driving experience. This study applied reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST, specifically reward sensitivity and punishment sensitivity) to predict young novice drivers’ perceived risk and self-reported risky driving engagement, while accounting for potential influences of age, sex, and driving experience. Drivers (N = 643, 490 females, 17–25 years, M = 20.02, SD = 2.32) who held an Australian driver’s license (P1, P2, or Open) anonymously completed an online survey containing the Behaviour of Young Novice Drivers Scale, the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire, and a measure of perceived risk of driving-related behaviours. A path analytic model derived from RST showed that perceived risk had the strongest negative association with reported risky driving engagement, followed by reward sensitivity (positive association). Respondent’s age and reward sensitivity were associated with perceived risk. Age, reward sensitivity, and perceived risk were associated with reported engagement in risky driving behaviours. Driver sex only had direct paths with RST variables, and through reward sensitivity, indirect paths to perceived risk, and reported risky driving. Neither punishment sensitivity nor driving experience contributed significantly to the model. Implications and applications of the model, and the unique set of variables examined, are discussed in relation to road safety interventions and driver training.     

Self-regulatory driving behaviours amongst older drivers according to cognitive status

Self-regulation of older drivers was explored according to their cognitive status in this pilot study by examining situations commonly avoided by older drivers. In addition, the role of driver insight on self-regulation was examined via passenger reports. Telephone interviews were conducted comprising 49 drivers aged 65 years and above and 40 passengers who acted as informants. Self-regulation was found to be common, with the majority of drivers (71.4%) reporting sometimes or always avoiding one of seven driving situations. However, drivers with cognitive impairment reported self-regulating more often than drivers without cognitive impairment. The largest discrepancy between passenger and driver reports of self-regulation behaviours was found for the drivers with cognitive impairment. These results possibly reflect a decreased awareness of self-regulatory driving behaviours in this subgroup of older drivers and may suggest that other external factors are contributing to self-regulation in older drivers with cognitive impairment. A discussion of these factors is provided with the aim of maintaining mobility and enhancing quality of life in this growing segment of the driver population.     

Can emotion regulation explain the association between age and driving styles?

Numerous studies have sought to explain why young drivers tend to engage in maladaptive driving styles more than older drivers. The current study seeks to further this line of inquiry by examining the mediating role of emotion regulation in the association between age and driving style. The sample consisted of 287 drivers aged 18 to 72 who completed scales assessing their driving style and emotion regulation difficulties. Results show that the younger the drivers, the more they tended to report difficulties in regulating emotion, which, in turn, was positively related to the maladaptive driving styles: reckless and careless; angry and hostile; and anxious. Understanding the role of emotion regulation in the choice of driving style is crucial for promoting the substantial efforts invested in attempts to reduce traffic crashes.     

Modeling social rejection,physiological arousal,and peer influence on risky driving among adolescents and young adults

Peer passengers are a significant risk factor for young drivers to experience adverse driving outcomes. However, few studies have manipulated social evaluation contexts and individual susceptibilities to peer influence, such as physiological arousal, to measure effects on driving. The current study explored whether social evaluation affects driving outcomes and if the type of evaluation affects perception of peer norms. Young drivers (N = 75) were randomized to control, social acceptance, or social rejection conditions and observed risky or risk-averse driving norms. Results indicated that peer passengers and peer driving norms, regardless of the social-evaluative context, affected variability in driving outcomes, particularly in intersections. Physiological arousal and perceptions of social acceptance also predicted more variability in driving outcomes. These findings suggest that passengers increase irregular driving patterns, perhaps due to passengers distracting young drivers from road conditions. Further, social acceptance increases the strength of the relationship between the presence of peer passengers and inconsistent driving patterns, indicating that social rewards may precede risky behavior more often than social threats do.     

A scoping review of predictors of driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) in young drivers

BackgroundRecreational and medical legalization of cannabis or marijuana use in countries and states continues to increase. Young adults aged 16–24 years have the highest prevalence rates of cannabis use. Young driver cannabis use is an incompletely understood traffic safety issue.ObjectivesThe purposes of this scoping review were to characterize the predictors of driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) among healthy young drivers and to identify research gaps.Inclusion criteriaA self-reported measure of DUIC and a correlation (r, odds ratio, risk ratio) to demographic or behavioral variables such as age, gender and frequency of use was required for inclusionSources of evidenceAPA PsycInfo, SPORTDiscus, Academic Search Complete, Google Scholar, MEDLINE Complete, Scopus, Embase, ERIC, TRID and POPLINE databases were searched using an a priori protocol.MethodsThe PRISMA-ScR methods and checklist were used to conduct the scoping review. After the removal of duplicates, abstract screening (N = 999), and full-text review (N = 173), 19 primary studies met inclusion criteria. Predictors were coded and mapped into four primary thematic categories: social, individual, driving and substance use.ResultsOf the included studies, a total of 52,197 respondents were surveyed in-person or online and 51.8 percent were males. The predominant predictors of DUIC included being a male, high school senior, with lower grades, having a younger ‘age of first cannabis use’, a higher frequency of consumption, a reduced perception of danger, repeatedly binge drinking, a history of driving under the influence of alcohol and living with fewer parents.Research gapsIdentified research gaps include methods used to study young drivers, cannabis edibles, chronic user tolerance, driver adaptation, passengers of drivers who consumed cannabis, combined use with other legal and illicit drugs, and combined smartphone and cannabis use.ConclusionThe results of this scoping review can be used to develop and target general and specific predictors of DUIC in novice, teen and young drivers. Additional research designs will be required to gain a more complete evidence-based understanding of the effects of cannabis on young drivers.     

Cognitive function and young drivers: The relationship between driving,attitudes, personality and cognition

Young drivers (aged 17–25 years) are the highest risk age group for driving crashes and are over-represented in car crash statistics in Australia. A relationship between cognitive functioning and driving in older drivers (60 years and older) has been consistently supported in previous literature, however, this relationship has been neglected in research regarding younger drivers. The role of cognitive functioning in young people’s driving was investigated both independently and within a current model of younger peoples driving performance. With young drivers as participants, driving behaviour, attitudes, personality and cognitive functioning were tested and driving performance was operationalised through two measures on a driving simulator, speeding and lane deviations. Cognitive functioning was found to contribute to driving behaviour, along with driving attitudes and personality traits, in accounting for young people’s driving performance. The young drivers who performed better on cognitive functioning tasks engaged in less speeding behaviour and less lane deviation on the driving simulator than those who performed worse on these tasks. This result was found independent of the role of driving behaviour, driving attitudes and personality traits, accounting for unique variance in driving ability.     

Understanding the psychosocial factors influencing the risky behaviour of young drivers

Young people aged 17–24 years are at high risk of being killed in road crashes around the world. Road safety interventions consider some influences upon young driver behaviour; for example, imposing passenger restrictions on young novice drivers indirectly minimises the potential negative social influences of peers as passengers. To change young driver risky behaviour, the multitude of psychosocial influences upon its initiation and maintenance must be identified. A study questionnaire was developed to investigate the relationships between risky driving and Akers’ social learning theory, social identity theory, and thrill seeking variables. The questionnaire was completed by 165 participants (105 women, 60 men) residing in south-east Queensland, Australia. The sociodemographic variables of age, gender, and exposure explained 19% of the variance in self-reported risky driving behaviour, whilst Akers’ social learning variables explained an additional 42%. Thrill seeking and social identity variables did not explain any significant additional variance. Significant predictors of risky driving included imitation of the driving behaviours of, and anticipated rewards and punishments administered by, parents and peers. Road safety policy that directly considers and incorporates these factors in their design, implementation, and enforcement of young driver road safety interventions should prove more efficacious than current approaches.     

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.