Zhai Chenzhao, Xi Wenhui
Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds LS2 9JT, The United Kingdom.
The Faculty of Mechanical and Transportation, Southwest Forestry University, Kunming, China.
Heliyon. 2023 Jun 1;9(6):e16900. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16900. eCollection 2023 Jun.
Drivers who exhibit dangerous driving behaviours, such as aggressive, risky, and negative emotion cognition driving, are more likely to be involved in road crashes. A key motivator behind unsafe driving behaviours is driving anger. However, it is unclear whether lifestyle, driving anger, and dangerous driving behaviours are related. A total of 344 Chinese drivers with a formal driving license were asked to complete the socio-demographic information, the Chinese lifestyle questionnaire (Self-designed), the 14 items Driving Anger Scale (DAS), and the Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI). The Chinese driver's lifestyles were analysed using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), revealing a four-factor structure ("Culture", "Workaholism", "Sports" and "Amusement"). The 14 items DAS factor structure was determined using a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), yielding a two-factor structure ("Safety Concern anger" and "Arrival Concern anger"). Based on Hierarchical Multiple Regression (HMR), only "Workaholism" was associated with aggressive, risky, and negative emotion cognition driving. The trait driving anger was examined as a mediator between the "Workaholism" and dangerous driving (aggressive, risky, and negative emotion cognition driving) through a Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) approach. "Workaholism" was shown to influence these dangerous driving behaviours through trait driving anger. Lastly, this article discussed the theoretical and practical implications and research limitations.
表现出危险驾驶行为的司机,如攻击性驾驶、冒险驾驶和负面情绪认知驾驶,更有可能卷入道路交通事故。不安全驾驶行为背后的一个关键诱因是驾驶愤怒。然而,生活方式、驾驶愤怒和危险驾驶行为之间是否存在关联尚不清楚。共有344名持有正式驾照的中国司机被要求填写社会人口统计学信息、中国生活方式问卷(自行设计)、14项驾驶愤怒量表(DAS)和杜拉危险驾驶指数(DDDI)。采用探索性因素分析(EFA)对中国司机的生活方式进行分析,揭示了一个四因素结构(“文化”、“工作狂”、“运动”和“娱乐”)。使用验证性因素分析(CFA)确定14项DAS的因素结构,得出一个两因素结构(“安全关注愤怒”和“到达关注愤怒”)。基于层次多元回归(HMR),只有“工作狂”与攻击性驾驶、冒险驾驶和负面情绪认知驾驶相关。通过结构方程模型(SEM)方法,将特质驾驶愤怒作为“工作狂”与危险驾驶(攻击性驾驶、冒险驾驶和负面情绪认知驾驶)之间的中介进行检验。结果表明,“工作狂”通过特质驾驶愤怒影响这些危险驾驶行为。最后,本文讨论了理论和实践意义以及研究局限性。