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

Lennon, Alexia J., Watson, Barry C., Arlidge, Caroline, & Fraine, Graham (2011) ‘You’re a bad driver but I just made a mistake’ : attribution differences between the ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’ of scenario-based aggressive driving incidents. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(3), pp. 209-221.

View at publisher


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.

Impact and interest:

14 citations in Scopus
10 citations in Web of Science®
Search Google Scholar™

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

Full-text downloads:

652 since deposited on 14 Feb 2011
60 in the past twelve months

Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.

ID Code: 39507
Item Type: Journal Article
Refereed: Yes
Additional URLs:
Keywords: Driver aggression, Actor–observer bias, Attributions, Driving scenarios
DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2011.01.001
ISSN: 1369-8478
Divisions: Current > Research Centres > Centre for Accident Research & Road Safety - Qld (CARRS-Q)
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health
Current > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Current > Schools > School of Psychology & Counselling
Copyright Owner: Copyright 2011 Elsevier Ltd.
Deposited On: 14 Feb 2011 22:12
Last Modified: 10 Aug 2011 13:04

Export: EndNote | Dublin Core | BibTeX

Repository Staff Only: item control page