Towards a comprehensive model of driver aggression : a review of the literature and directions for the future

Driver aggression is a road safety issue of growing concern throughout most highly motorised countries, yet to date there is no comprehensive model that deals with this issue in the road safety area. This paper sets out to examine the current state of research and theory on aggressive driving with a view to incorporating useful developments in the area of human aggression from mainstream psychological research. As a first step, evidence regarding the prevalence and incidence of driver aggression, including the impact of the phenomenon on crash rates is reviewed. Inconsistencies in the definition and operationalisation of driver aggression that have hampered research in the area are noted. Existing models of driver aggression are then identified and the need to distinguish and address the role of intentionality as well as the purpose of perpetrating behaviours within both these and research efforts is highlighted. Drawing on recent findings from psychological research into general aggression, it is argued that progress in understanding driver aggression requires models that acknowledge not only the person-related and situational factors, but the cognitive and emotional appraisal processes involved in driver aggression. An effective model is expected to allow the explanation of not only the likelihood and severity of driver aggression behaviours, but also the escalation of incidents within the context of the road environment.

“Teaching them a lesson?” : a qualitative exploration of underlying motivations for driver aggression

Aggressive driving is increasingly a concern for drivers in highly motorised countries. However, the role of driver intent in this behaviour is problematic and there is little research on driver cognitions in relation to aggressive driving incidents. In addition, while drivers who admit to behaving aggressively on the road also frequently report being recipients of similar behaviours, little is known about the relationship between perpetration and victimisation or about how road incidents escalate into the more serious events that feature in capture media attention. The current study used qualitative interviews to explore driver cognitions and underlying motivations for aggressive behaviours on the road. A total of 30 drivers aged 18-49 years were interviewed about their experiences with aggressive driving. A key theme identified in responses was driver aggression as an attempt to manage or modify the behaviour of other road users. Two subthemes were identified and appeared related to separate motivations for aggressive responses: ‘teaching them a lesson’ referred to situations where respondents intended to convey criticism or disapproval, usually of unintended behaviours by the other driver, and thus encourage self-correction; and ‘justified retaliation’ which referred to situations where respondents perceived deliberate intent on the part of the other driver and responded aggressively in return. Mildly aggressive driver behaviour appears to be common. Moreover such behaviour has a sufficiently negative impact on other drivers that it may be worth addressing because of its potential for triggering retaliation in kind or escalation of aggression, thus compromising safety.

Advanced in-vehicle applications to mitigate driver aggression

Aggressive behavior at the steering wheel has been indicated as a contributing factor in a majority of crashes and anger has been compared to alcohol impairment in terms of probability to cause a crash. It has been shown that being in a state of anger or excitement while driving can decrease the drivers’ performances. . This paper reports the evaluation of 6 novel design alternatives of In-Vehicle Information Systems (IVIS) aimed at mitigating driver aggression. Each application presented was designed to tackle the following contributing factors to driver aggression: competitiveness, anonymity, territoriality, stress as well as social and emotional isolation. The 6 applications were simulated using computer vision algorithm to automatically overlay the real traffic conditions with ‘Head-Up Display’ visualizations. Two applications emerged over the others from participant’s evaluation: shared music combined the known calming effect of music with the sense of sympathy and intimacy caused by hearing other drivers’ music. The Shared Snapshot application provided an immediate gratification and was evaluated as a potential prevention of roadside quarrels. The paper presents Theoretical foundation, participant’s evaluations, implications and limitations of the study.

Can’t we all just get along? A qualitative investigation of the cognitive processes motivating driver aggression.

Although driver aggression has been identified as contributing to crashes, current understanding of the fundamental causes of the behaviour is poor. Two key reasons for this are evident. Firstly, existing research has been largely atheoretical, with no unifying conceptual framework guiding investigation. Secondly, emphasis on observable behaviours has resulted in limited knowledge of the underlying thought processes that motivate behaviour. Since driving is fundamentally a social situation, requiring drivers to interpret on-road events, insight regarding these perception and appraisal processes is paramount in advancing understanding of the underlying causes. Thus, the current study aimed to explore the cognitive appraisal processes involved in driver aggression, using a conceptual model founded on the General Aggression Model (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). The present results reflect the first of several studies testing this model. Participants completed 3 structured driving diaries to explore perceptions and cognitions. Thematic analysis of diaries identified several cognitive themes. The first, ‘driving etiquette’ concerned an implied code of awareness and consideration for other motorists, breaches of which were strongly associated with reports of anger and frustration. Such breaches were considered intentional; attributed to dispositional traits of another driver, and precipitated the second theme, ‘justified retaliation’. This theme showed that drivers view their aggressive behaviour as warranted, to convey criticism towards another motorist’s etiquette violation. However, the third theme, ‘superiority’ suggested that those refraining from an aggressive response were motivated by a desire to perceive themselves as ‘better’ than the offending motorists. Collectively, the themes indicate deep-seated and complex thought patterns underlying driver aggression, and suggest the behaviour will be challenging to modify. Implications of these themes in relation to the proposed model will be discussed, and continued research will explore these cognitive processes further, to examine their interaction with person-related factors.

Driver Aggression as a Function of Status Concurrence: An Analysis of Horn-Honking Responses

Various field experiments were conducted to examine the influence of social status on aggression in road traffic. Horn-honking response times of subjects blocked by an experimental car at traffic lights were considered to be an indicator of the degree of aggression. During an initial experiment, the status of the frustrator was varied and an inverse relation was observed between status and aggression towards the frustrator. On the other hand, in a more recent experiment higher status aggressors were found to behave more aggressively. In our study we combined the two designs, i.e., we varied the status of the frustrator and at the same time measured the status of the aggressor. Neither results of the former experiments could be replicated, but we observed a reduction in aggression when frustrator and aggressor were of similar social status.

‘You’re a bad driver but I just made a mistake’ : attribution differences between the ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’ of scenario-based aggressive driving incidents

Driver aggression is an increasing concern for motorists, with some research suggesting that drivers who behave aggressively perceive their actions as justified by the poor driving of others. Thus attributions may play an important role in understanding driver aggression. A convenience sample of 193 drivers (aged 17-36) randomly assigned to two separate roles (‘perpetrators’ and ‘victims’) responded to eight scenarios of driver aggression. Drivers also completed the Aggression Questionnaire and Driving Anger Scale. Consistent with the actor-observer bias, ‘victims’ (or recipients) in this study were significantly more likely than ‘perpetrators’ (or instigators) to endorse inadequacies in the instigator’s driving skills as the cause of driver aggression. Instigators were significantly more likely attribute the depicted behaviours to external but temporary causes (lapses in judgement or errors) rather than stable causes. This suggests that instigators recognised drivers as responsible for driving aggressively but downplayed this somewhat in comparison to ‘victims’/recipients. Recipients and instigators agreed that the behaviours were examples of aggressive driving but instigators appeared to focus on the degree of intentionality of the driver in making their assessments while recipients appeared to focus on the safety implications. Contrary to expectations, instigators gave mean ratings of the emotional impact of driving aggression on recipients that were higher in all cases than the mean ratings given by the recipients. Drivers appear to perceive aggressive behaviours as modifiable, with the implication that interventions could appeal to drivers’ sense of self-efficacy to suggest strategies for overcoming plausible and modifiable attributions (e.g. lapses in judgement; errors) underpinning behaviours perceived as aggressive.

Reducing aggression on our roads : testing a comprehensive model of aggressive driving

Background: Trauma resulting from traffic crashes poses a significant problem in highly motorised countries. Over a million people worldwide are killed annually and 50 million are critically injured as a result of traffic collisions. In Australia, road crashes cost an average of $17 billion annually in personal loss of income and quality of life, organisational losses in productivity and workplace quality, and health care costs. Driver aggression has been identified as a key factor contributing to crashes, and many motorists report experiencing mild forms of aggression (e.g., rude gestures, horn honking). However despite this concern, driver aggression has received relatively little attention in empirical research, and existing research has been hampered by a number of methodological and conceptual shortcomings. Specifically, there has been substantial disagreement regarding what constitutes aggressive driving and a failure to examine both the situational factors and the emotional and cognitive processes underlying driver aggression. To enhance current understanding of aggressive driving, a model of driver aggression that highlights the cognitive and emotional processes at play in aggressive driving incidents is proposed. Aims: The research aims to improve current understanding of the complex nature of driver aggression by testing and refining a model of aggressive driving that incorporates the person-related and situational factors and the cognitive and emotional appraisal processes fundamental to driver aggression. In doing so, the research will assist to provide a clear definition of what constitutes aggressive driving, assist to identify on-road incidents that trigger driver aggression, and identify the emotional and cognitive appraisal processes that underlie driver aggression. Methods: The research involves three studies. Firstly, to contextualise the model and explore the cognitive and emotional aspects of driver aggression, a diary-based study using self-reports of aggressive driving events will be conducted with a general population of drivers. This data will be supplemented by in-depth follow-up interviews with a sub-sample of participants. Secondly, to test generalisability of the model, a large sample of drivers will be asked to respond to video-based scenarios depicting driving contexts derived from incidents identified in Study 1 as inciting aggression. Finally, to further operationalise and test the model an advanced driving simulator will be used with sample of drivers. These drivers will be exposed to various driving scenarios that would be expected to trigger negative emotional responses. Results: Work on the project has commenced and progress on the first study will be reported.

Effect of mobile phone use and aggression on speed selection by young drivers : a driving simulator study

Aggressive driving has been associated with engagement in other risky driving behaviours, such as speeding; while drivers using their mobile phones have an increased crash risk, despite the tendency to reduce their speed. Research has amassed separately for mobile phone use and aggressive driving among younger drivers, however little is known about the extent to which these behaviours may function independently and in combination to influence speed selection behaviour. The main aim of the current study was to investigate the effect of driver aggression (measured by the Driving Anger Expression Inventory) and mobile phone use on speed selection by young drivers. The CARRS-Q advanced driving simulator was used to test the speed selection of drivers aged 18 to 26 years (N = 32) in a suburban (60kph zone) driving context. A 2 (level of driving anger expression: low, high) X 3 (mobile phone use condition: baseline, hands-free, hand-held) mixed factorial ANOVA was conducted with speed selection as the dependent variable. Results revealed a significant main effect for mobile phone use condition such that speed selection was lowest for the hand-held condition and highest for the baseline condition. Speed selection, however, was not significantly different across the levels of driving anger expression; nor was there a significant interaction effect between the mobile phone use and driving anger expression. As young drivers are over-represented in road crash statistics, future research should further investigate the combined impact of driver aggression and mobile phone use on speed selection.

Effect of mobile phone use and aggression on speed selection by young drivers : a driving simulator study

Aggressive driving has been associated with engagement in other risky driving behaviours, such as speeding; while drivers using their mobile phones have an increased crash risk, despite the tendency to reduce their speed. Research has amassed separately for mobile phone use and aggressive driving among younger drivers, however little is known about the extent to which these behaviours may function independently and in combination to influence speed selection behaviour. The main aim of the current study was to investigate the effect of driver aggression (measured by the Driving Anger Expression Inventory) and mobile phone use on speed selection by young drivers. The CARRS-Q advanced driving simulator was used to test the speed selection of drivers aged 18 to 26 years (N = 32) in a suburban (60kph zone) driving context. A 2 (level of driving anger expression: low, high) X 3 (mobile phone use condition: baseline, hands-free, hand-held) mixed factorial ANOVA was conducted with speed selection as the dependent variable. Results revealed a significant main effect for mobile phone use condition such that speed selection was lowest for the hand-held condition and highest for the baseline condition. Speed selection, however, was not significantly different across the levels of driving anger expression; nor was there a significant interaction effect between the mobile phone use and driving anger expression. As young drivers are over-represented in road crash statistics, future research should further investigate the combined impact of driver aggression and mobile phone use on speed selection.

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.

Motion planning of autonomous vehicles in a non-autonomous vehicle environment without speed lanes

Planning is one of the key problems for autonomous vehicles operating in road scenarios. Present planning algorithms operate with the assumption that traffic is organised in predefined speed lanes, which makes it impossible to allow autonomous vehicles in countries with unorganised traffic. Unorganised traffic is though capable of higher traffic bandwidths when constituting vehicles vary in their speed capabilities and sizes. Diverse vehicles in an unorganised exhibit unique driving behaviours which are analysed in this paper by a simulation study. The aim of the work reported here is to create a planning algorithm for mixed traffic consisting of both autonomous and non-autonomous vehicles without any inter-vehicle communication. The awareness (e.g. vision) of every vehicle is restricted to nearby vehicles only and a straight infinite road is assumed for decision making regarding navigation in the presence of multiple vehicles. Exhibited behaviours include obstacle avoidance, overtaking, giving way for vehicles to overtake from behind, vehicle following, adjusting the lateral lane position and so on. A conflict of plans is a major issue which will almost certainly arise in the absence of inter-vehicle communication. Hence each vehicle needs to continuously track other vehicles and rectify plans whenever a collision seems likely. Further it is observed here that driver aggression plays a vital role in overall traffic dynamics, hence this has also been factored in accordingly. This work is hence a step forward towards achieving autonomous vehicles in unorganised traffic, while similar effort would be required for planning problems such as intersections, mergers, diversions and other modules like localisation.

Coping with aggressive driving : driver accounts of how they manage themselves and others to reduce conflict on the road

Dealing with the aggression of other drivers on the road is an important skill given that driving is a common activity for adults in highly motorised countries. Even though incidents of extreme aggression on the road (such as assault) are reportedly rare, milder forms, some of them dangerous (such as tailgating or deliberately following too closely) are apparently common, and may be increasing. At the very least, this is likely to render the driving environment more stressful, and at worst elevates the risk of crashing by increasing both the level of risky driving behaviours and the likelihood of responses that escalate the situation. Thus the need for drivers to manage incidents of conflict is likely to become increasingly important. However, little research examines how drivers manage their own or others’ aggressive driving behaviour. Recently greater attention has been paid to driver cognitions, especially the attributions that drivers make about other drivers, that then might influence their own driving responses, particularly aggressive or risky ones. The study reported below was the first in a larger exploration of aggressive driving that focussed on driver cognitions, emotions and underlying motivations for aggressive behaviours on the road. Qualitative, in-depth interviews of drivers (n = 30, aged 18-49 years) were subjected to thematic analysis to investigate driver experiences with aggressive driving. Two main themes were identified from these accounts: driver management of self; and driver attempts to influence or manage other drivers. This paper describes the subthemes falling under the management of self main theme. These subthemes were labelled ‘being magnanimous’, ‘chilling out’, ‘slowing down’, and ‘apology/acknowledgment’. ‘Being magnanimous’ referred to situations where the respondent perceived him/herself to be a recipient of another’s aggressive driving and made a deliberate choice not to respond. However, a characteristic of this sub-theme was that this choice was underpinned by the adoption of morally superior stance, or sense of magnanimity. ‘Chilling out’ was a more general response to both the milder aggressive behaviours of other drivers and the general frustrations of driving. ‘Slowing down’ referred to reducing one’s speed in response to the perceived aggressive driving, often tailgating, of another. This subtheme appeared to consist of two separate underlying motivations. One of these was a genuine concern for one’s own safety while the other was more aimed at “getting back” at the other driver. ‘Apology’ referred to how drivers modified their more negative reactions and responses when another driver made gestures that acknowledged their having made a mistake, indicated an apology, or acknowledged the recipient driver. These sub-themes are discussed in relation to their implications for understanding aggressive driving and intervening to reduce it.

National survey of speeding and other unsafe driving actions. Volume II: driver attitudes and behavior.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Research and Traffic Records, Washington, D.C.

Strategies for aggressive driver enforcement.

Mode of access: Internet.