CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China; Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Beijing, China; Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Accid Anal Prev. 2022 Nov;177:106824. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2022.106824. Epub 2022 Sep 2.
Drivers with a high level of trait anger feel more intensity of anger on road, contributing to more risky driving behavior and further increasing the probability of collisions. It seems that trait anger directly correlates with risky driving behavior, but how it works in detail remains unknown and previous research indicated executive function and hazard cognition may play a mediation role in it. Our research aims to explore the relationship among these variables and test if there is a multiple mediation model. We sampled 302 valid participants and used online questionnaires, containing trait anger scale (TAS), executive function index (EFI), hazard cognition scale (HCS; representing attitudes towards risky driving behavior), driver behavior questionnaire (DBQ), and self-reported traffic violations (e.g., accidents, penalty points, fines). Hierarchical multiple linear regression of DBQ results show trait anger is a medium but statistically significant predictor of risky driving behavior and drivers' attitude towards risky situations can significantly predict risky driving behavior at medium effect. But risky driving behavior cannot be predicted by executive function. Interestingly, opposing to prior research, zero-inflated Poisson regression analysis of self-reported traffic violations suggests trait anger negatively predicts accidents and fines in the zero-inflation model, and hazard cognition negatively predicts penalty points. Notably, the executive function negatively predicts penalty points and fines in the count model, which confirms our hypothetical direction. They all represent a small effect size in this nonlinear regression model. Path analysis suggested that trait anger influences risky driving behavior through executive function, and hazard cognition both separately and jointly. This study provides a theoretical framework for the transaction model of aggressive driving behavior and offers some possible interventions toward the effect of trait anger on risky driving behavior.
具有高水平特质愤怒的驾驶员在道路上会感到更强烈的愤怒，从而导致更冒险的驾驶行为，并进一步增加碰撞的可能性。似乎特质愤怒与冒险驾驶行为直接相关，但具体的作用机制尚不清楚，之前的研究表明执行功能和危险认知可能在其中发挥中介作用。我们的研究旨在探讨这些变量之间的关系，并检验是否存在多重中介模型。我们采集了 302 名有效参与者的数据，使用在线问卷，包含特质愤怒量表（TAS）、执行功能指数（EFI）、危险认知量表（HCS；代表对冒险驾驶行为的态度）、驾驶员行为问卷（DBQ）和自我报告的交通违规（例如，事故、记分、罚款）。DBQ 结果的分层多元线性回归显示，特质愤怒是冒险驾驶行为的中等但具有统计学意义的预测因子，而驾驶员对冒险情况的态度可以显著预测冒险驾驶行为，具有中等效应。但执行功能不能预测冒险驾驶行为。有趣的是，与之前的研究相反，对自我报告的交通违规的零膨胀泊松回归分析表明，特质愤怒在零膨胀模型中对事故和罚款呈负向预测，而危险认知对记分呈负向预测。值得注意的是，在计数模型中，执行功能对记分和罚款呈负向预测，这证实了我们的假设方向。在这个非线性回归模型中，它们都代表着小的效应量。路径分析表明，特质愤怒通过执行功能和危险认知分别和共同影响冒险驾驶行为。这项研究为攻击性驾驶行为的交易模型提供了理论框架，并为特质愤怒对冒险驾驶行为的影响提供了一些可能的干预措施。
