Theories and models in traffic psychology have been based on the view that they are both desirable and necessary for the development of traffic psychology. This chapter adopts an alternative and even contrary position by questioning this view. The starting point for this was a consideration of two opposing statements on the standing of traffic safety. THe first is that of Gerald Wilde (1982), who quoted Klebelsberg approvingly in saying that traffic safety is "characterised by a sparsity of comprehensive and articulate conceptions relative to the available body of empirical findings". The second is Ezra Hauer (1987), who argued that the scarcity of quantitative knowledge about safety has brought about a "reign of ignorance". These statements are clearly at variance; one calls for more theory, the other for more data. The purpose of this chapter is to pose the question: which of these statements is the better prescription for the future? (A)
Abstract