Anthropo-Lab, ETHICS EA7446, Lille Catholic University, France.
TS2-LESCOT, Univ Gustave Eiffel, IFSTTAR, Univ Lyon, F-69675 Lyon, France.
Accid Anal Prev. 2021 Sep;159:106299. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2021.106299. Epub 2021 Jul 14.
Perceived legitimacy associated with rules and authorities is an important element for understanding and encouraging compliance with rules in the field of road safety, often more so than with a deterrence approach. Despite a growing interest in legitimacy in recent decades and in the psychological field in particular, its definitions and measurements appear to be heterogeneous, subject to debate and in need of a common theoretical framework. Therefore, one can expect these limitations to also concern the definitions and measurements of legitimacy in the field of road safety. However, no literature review related to this issue is currently available. This contribution therefore aims to fill this void by proposing a scoping review investigating, in the field of road safety, how legitimacy is defined, measured, related to compliance and what are its main determinants.
A scoping review was conducted, based on research literature from eight databases and concerned with the perceived legitimacy of traffic rules or traffic enforcement and rule compliance or traffic violations. Twenty-six publications meeting inclusion criteria were retained. The characteristics and content of publications were analyzed to identify the relevant elements related to our research questions.
The main results revealed that perceived legitimacy in the field of road safety can be related to different objects (i.e., traffic rules, traffic violations, traffic enforcement, institutions) that should be better delineated and differentiated in future research. While perceived legitimacy is generally associated with compliance with traffic rules, its theoretical definitions and measures in the field of road safety are heterogeneous and present validity issues which limit the comparability of studies and so the accumulation of knowledge for both theoretical research and road safety applications. No empirical study investigating the outcomes of perceived legitimacy beyond compliance was identified. Few empirical studies have investigated the determinants of perceived legitimacy. Most identified empirical studies were cross-sectional, which is a limitation to establishing causality in investigated relationships. Theoretical implications and research perspectives to improve studies on legitimacy in the field of road safety and develop a multidimensional model of the perceived legitimacy of traffic rules are therefore proposed and discussed.
与规则和权威相关的感知合法性是理解和鼓励遵守道路安全规则的一个重要因素，其重要性通常超过威慑方法。尽管近几十年来，特别是在心理学领域，人们对合法性越来越感兴趣，但它的定义和衡量标准似乎存在异质性，存在争议，需要一个共同的理论框架。因此，可以预期这些限制也会涉及道路安全领域合法性的定义和衡量。然而，目前没有关于这个问题的文献综述。因此，本研究旨在通过提出一项范围界定审查来填补这一空白，该审查调查了在道路安全领域，合法性是如何被定义、衡量的，与合规性的关系以及其主要决定因素是什么。
进行了范围界定审查，该审查基于来自八个数据库的研究文献，涉及交通规则或交通执法的感知合法性以及规则遵守或交通违规行为。符合纳入标准的 26 篇出版物被保留。分析了出版物的特征和内容，以确定与我们研究问题相关的相关要素。
主要结果表明，道路安全领域的感知合法性可以与不同的对象（即交通规则、交通违规、交通执法、机构）相关，在未来的研究中应更好地划定和区分这些对象。虽然感知合法性通常与遵守交通规则相关，但它在道路安全领域的理论定义和衡量标准存在异质性，存在有效性问题，限制了研究的可比性，从而限制了理论研究和道路安全应用的知识积累。没有发现研究感知合法性超出合规性的结果的实证研究。很少有实证研究调查感知合法性的决定因素。大多数确定的实证研究都是横断面研究，这限制了在研究关系中建立因果关系的能力。因此，提出并讨论了在道路安全领域提高对合法性的研究和制定交通规则感知合法性的多维模型的理论意义和研究观点。
