Šeibokaitė Laura, Endriulaitienė Auksė, Sullman Mark J M, Markšaitytė Rasa, Žardeckaitė-Matulaitienė Kristina
a Psychology Department , Vytautas Magnus University , Kaunas , Lithuania.
b Department of Advanced Systems , Cranfield University , Cranfield , UK.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2017 Oct 3;18(7):688-693. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2017.1315109. Epub 2017 Apr 6.
Risky driving is a common cause of traffic accidents and injuries. However, there is no clear evidence of how difficulties in emotion regulation contribute to risky driving behavior, particularly in small post-Soviet countries. The present study aimed to investigate the relationship between difficulties in emotion regulation and self-reported risky driving behavior in a sample of Lithuanian drivers.
A total of 246 nonprofessional Lithuanian drivers participated in a cross-sectional survey. Difficulties in emotion regulation were assessed using the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz and Roemer 2004), and risky driving behavior was assessed using the Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ; Lajunen et al. 2004).
Males scored higher than females in aggressive violations and ordinary violations. Females scored higher for the nonacceptance of emotional responses, whereas males had more difficulties with emotional awareness than females. More difficulties in emotion regulation were positively correlated with driving errors, lapses, aggressive violations, and ordinary violations for both males and females. Structural equation modeling showed that difficulties in emotion regulation explained aggressive and ordinary violations more clearly than lapses and errors. When controlling for interactions among the distinct regulation difficulties, difficulties with impulse control and difficulties engaging in goal-directed behavior predicted risky driving. Furthermore, nonacceptance of emotional responses and limited access to emotion regulation strategies were related to less violations and more driving errors.
Emotion regulation difficulties were associated with the self-reported risky driving behaviors of Lithuanian drivers. This provides useful hints for improving driver training programs in order to prevent traffic injuries.
危险驾驶是交通事故和人员伤亡的常见原因。然而，目前尚无明确证据表明情绪调节困难如何导致危险驾驶行为，尤其是在苏联解体后的小国中。本研究旨在调查立陶宛驾驶员样本中情绪调节困难与自我报告的危险驾驶行为之间的关系。
共有246名非职业立陶宛驾驶员参与了一项横断面调查。使用情绪调节困难量表（DERS；Gratz和Roemer，2004年）评估情绪调节困难情况，使用曼彻斯特驾驶员行为问卷（DBQ；Lajunen等人，2004年）评估危险驾驶行为。
男性在攻击性违规和普通违规方面的得分高于女性。女性在对情绪反应的不接受方面得分更高，而男性在情绪意识方面比女性有更多困难。情绪调节方面的更多困难与男性和女性的驾驶失误、疏忽、攻击性违规和普通违规均呈正相关。结构方程模型表明，情绪调节困难比失误和错误更能清晰地解释攻击性和普通违规行为。在控制不同调节困难之间的相互作用时，冲动控制困难和从事目标导向行为的困难预测了危险驾驶。此外，对情绪反应的不接受以及情绪调节策略的有限使用与较少的违规行为和较多的驾驶失误有关。
情绪调节困难与立陶宛驾驶员自我报告的危险驾驶行为相关。这为改进驾驶员培训计划以预防交通伤害提供了有用的线索。
