Social， Personality，and Affective Constructs in Driving
Dwight Hennessy
Buffalo State College, Buffalo, NY, USA
- INTRODUCTION
Driving is more than the mechanical operation of a vehicle, as a means of movement between destinations.Rather, it is a complex process involving individual factors expressed within a social exchange among drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, which is ultimately impacted by contextual and environmental stimuli found inside and outside the vehicle.Rotton,Gregory, and Van Rooy (2005) argued that, traditionally, the focal point of most traffic research has been the individual in this system, often at the expense of situational determinants.This is perhaps due to the fundamental attribution error,which is the tendency to explain the actions of others in terms of personal causes even when situational factors are evident. The driver is a central component of this system, but only one component, whose thoughts, feelings,and actions are shaped and directed by the micro and macro context.
In many respects, the traffic environment is a distinct and intriguing setting. There is a degree of speed and anonymity not found in other contexts, with huge discrepancies in history, experience, or skill level among drivers; subtle forms and means of communication that often have multiple interpretations; a unique blend of written and unwritten rules that can vary across locations;and ultimately a high degree of danger. This uniqueness, in addition to the widespread application potential and relevance to the general public, has made the traffic environment an attractive context for social research. This chapter focuses on the components of this person-situation system and how they have been shown,individually and in combination, to impact driving behavior (e.g., rule violations and collision), personal outcomes (e.g., health, mood, stress, and fatigue), and interpersonal interactions (e.g., aggression and judgments of others).
- PERSONAL FACTORS AND DRIVING OUTCOMES
Given that it is “people” who drive, it would seem rational that any discussion of factors that impact driving outcomes would include personal factors. It would also seem logical to assume that drivers are all ultimately unique, and that at any given moment on the roadway, there is immense variability in driving styles, learning experiences, collision history, and expectations/judgments. However, this does not preclude the search for patterns that identify categories of drivers who might be more or less at risk for negative outcomes on the roadway over time. Although there are numerous categories of individual differences that can impact driving, traffic psychology has often focused on personality variables. In fact, personality has been used to qualify many demographic and affective factors, such as gender (often associated with a masculinity trait) and driver anger (often examined as a trait disposition).
Although there are many definitions of personality,most share the notion that it involves the consistent pattern of thoughts, feelings, and actions that emerge with some level of stability across time and context. Traffic psychology has typically relied on the “trait” approach, in which the focus has been on individual characteristics that combine or cluster to determine the overall expression of personality. As a result, certain traits are believed to be inherently more dangerous than others in the traffic environment. Those who possess more of these or in a more dangerous balance are believed to be a greater risk to self and others. However, it is also a matter of “degree”in that each trait is identified along a continuum of its“strength,” where some characteristics may have a much stronger impact on the overall personality, and those that possess dangerous traits to a higher degree are most problematic.
- A Case for Personality in Understanding Negative Driving Outcomes
A number of researchers have attempted to link personality to negative driving outcomes, particularly collisions, with mixed results. One reason for such discrepancies may be the selection and number of personality factors used in prior traffic research. Personality and its behavioral outcomes may be most accurately reflected by combinations or clusters of traits rather than by individual components.In this respect, personality and its expression are multidimensional. Thus, selection of unitary constructs or perhaps the “wrong” blend of personality characteristics may give the impression that it is not predictive of an outcome as rare and complex as collisions.
Another reason may be that personality represents an indirect rather than direct link with collisions. Beirness(1993) argued that personality on its own is a poor predictor of collisions but instead interacts with more “proximal” factors that often involve current, state, or pressing driving-related factors. Siimer (2003) provided an excellent review of this research and proposed a model in which personality represents one of several possible distal factors (in addition to other enduring personal, cognitive, and situational factors, such as culture, vehicle condition, and attributions) that impact more immediate proximal factors composed of driving style and transitory factors (e.g., violations, errors,and safety skills) that then influence collisions. In this respect, personality is an important focal point in traffic research given its impact on the more macro, persistent, or ambient distal level (e.g., the approach to driving, personal tendencies, and beliefs about other drivers), as well as on the immediate and transitory proximal influences(e.g., altering state interpretations of actual driving behavior, state emotional experiences, and negative driving behaviors). The following sections provide a brief examination of personality factors that have been linked to negative driv
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
英语译文共 44 页，剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号：[464640]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
以上是毕业论文外文翻译，课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
