The research programme described in this report involved two complex large-scale studies. In addition, a further smaller-scale study was carried out in order to probe further some interesting findings from one of the commissioned studies, as explained below. Each study took a great deal of time to set up and generated an enormous amount of data. In the interests of clarity and brevity, these three studies have been considered, in this report, in the order in which they were carried out. Within the write-up for each study the aims and objectives are specified first. Then the general methodology employed in each study is described. The results of Studies One and Three are presented as a series of special topics, each relating to one aspect of the findings. A discussion section is included in relation to each of the special topics. A subsequent section, entitled ‘Other Findings’ summarises other key findings in relation to each study. The reporting of Study Two follows a more conventional format. The final section contains a general discussion of all three studies, and overall conclusions and recommendations. Study Two represents extra work, outside the original remit, and may be justified as follows. There was evidence from factor analysis of the data collected in Study One, which was based on drivers in the 17-40 age range, that a distinction can be drawn within the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) violation scale between three aggressive violations and the five other violations. Furthermore, regression analyses suggested that scores on this three-item aggressiveness factor were more important in predicting the accidents of males than females. Moreover, when we considered the Theory of Planned Behaviour components measured in Study One, affective beliefs showed a strong relationship with intentions, while instrumental beliefs did not. This was an interesting and potentially important finding, and suggested that further research might be useful. The aim of the additional study, therefore, was to collect more data which would allow the further investigation of the distinction between aggressive and normal violations, and to assess the relationship between both types of violations and affective beliefs. We wanted to use a sample with full age range (17-70), so that it would be possible to evaluate the impact of the aggressive-normal violation distinction in relation to the general driving population. (Author/publisher)
Abstract