Aggressive driving is not clearly and consistently defined in the literature, neither in terms of the specific behaviors chosen for inclusion nor the degree to which the emotional state of the driver is taken into account. Principally, the aim of this current research is to determine the extent to which aggressive driving and road rage overlap. This will be accomplished primarily by applying two well-supported dichotomies in aggression research: hostile/instrumental and impulsive/premeditated. Relevant personality traits will also be measured to help discern the aggressive driving- road rage overlap and to explore secondary areas of interest, such as sex and age differences in driver aggression.

Previous research has found that the content of thoughts and rumination influences driving anger and aggressive driving; however, no research to date has observed how the specific thoughts and process of rumination may directly or indirectly influence aggressive driving behaviors. The present research explores the potential roles of thought content and rumination on aggressive driving to improve our understanding of factors that influence aggressiveness in driving situations. The current study recruited 262 Southeastern University students, who completed a number of questionnaires measuring anger rumination, thought content, driving anger, and aggressive driving behaviors tendencies. Results demonstrated that trait driving anger imposed partial indirect effects on aggressive driving behaviors through specific angry thoughts. In addition, this partial indirect effect was conditional to the degree of coping thoughts. These findings may help advance the understanding of the roles content of thoughts and rumination play in aggressive driving behaviors.

Purpose: In the United States, motor-vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for individuals 18–24 years of age. Multiple factors place young drivers at an increased risk including risky and aggressive driving behaviors. Aggressive driving has been shown to account for more than half of the driving fatalities in the United States. Driving anger is predictive of aggressive driving and adverse driving outcomes. Research outside the context of driving has demonstrated associations between multiple dimensions of forgiveness and anger, aggressive behaviors, and health outcomes. A very small body of research suggests a modest relationship between forgiveness and both driving anger and aggressive driving. The current study expands on previous research to examine the impact of multiple dimensions of forgiveness on adverse driving outcomes. Methods: Undergraduate students (N = 446) completed, self-report measures of forgiveness, driving anger, driving anger expression, aggressive driving behaviors, and aversive driving outcomes. Results: Bivariate correlations indicated a significant negative relationship between each dimension of forgiveness and driving anger, driving anger expression, and aggressive driving. Forgiveness (of others and of uncontrollable situations) was found to have a significant indirect only effect on traffic violations through the mediators of driving anger and aggressive driving. Discussion: Current findings support and expand on previous research examining the association of forgiveness with adverse driving outcomes. Forgiveness of others and forgiveness of uncontrollable situations, but not forgiveness of self, were shown to indirectly impact traffic violations/warnings, but not crashes, within the past five years through reduced driving-related anger, anger expression, and/or aggression. Implications, limitations, and future research are discussed.

Past studies found many different types of factors can influence dangerous driving behaviors. Driver inattention, such as driving under the influence or using a cell phone while driving, was found to contribute to risky driving behaviors. Rumination is a cognitive process that may also contribute to risky driving behaviors due to its influence on attention and limited executive processes. The present study explores the potential role of rumination in dangerous driving behavior endorsement. It was hypothesized that trait rumination would be significantly related to dangerous driving behaviors and that this relationship would be conditional to the sex of the participant. Six-hundred and fifty-three Southeastern university students were recruited to participate and asked to complete multiple questionnaires measuring anger rumination, thought content, driving anger, and dangerous driving behaviors. It was demonstrated that self-reported risky driving behaviors significantly predicted dangerous driving behavior endorsement on the Dula Dangerous Driving Index. Trait rumination scores were found to predict self-reported dangerous driving, aggressive driving, and risky driving behaviors as well as trait driving anger scores. However, no conditional effects based on the sex of the participant were found. It appeared males and females were equally likely to report dangerous driving behaviors, driving anger thoughts, and trait anger rumination. Findings from the current study may assist in understanding how cognitive processes influence different driving behaviors and help develop methods to re-direct attention to safe driving behaviors, and conversely away from ruminative thoughts that increase the likelihood of dangerous driving.

Abgelenktes Fahren gehört zu den Hauptursachen von Verkehrsunfällen und kann auf visuelle, manuelle oder kognitive Ablenkungsquellen zurückgeführt werden. Jede dieser Ablenkungsquellen wurde bereits mit negativen Effekten auf die Fahrerleistung in Zusammenhang gebracht. Obschon ein weitgehender Konsens über negative Auswirkungen von visueller/visuell-manueller Ablenkung besteht, sind die Wirkungen kognitiver Ablenkung auf Fahrfehler und Unfälle noch immer umstritten. Viele experimentelle Studien haben negative Auswirkungen kognitiver Ablenkung auf die Fahrerleistung berichtet. Demgegenüber stehen jedoch die Ergebnisse der Mehrzahl vorliegender „naturalistic driving studies“, die kein erhöhtes Unfallrisiko oder sogar protektive Effekte in diesem Zusammenhang fanden. Die aktuelle Entwicklung hin zu Mensch-Fahrzeug-Schnittstellen, die die Bedienung diverser Anwendungen mittels Sprachsteuerung ermöglichen, führt zu einem Anstieg von kognitiver Beanspruchung beim Fahren. Es ist daher von entscheidender Bedeutung, die Auswirkungen kognitiver Ablenkung auf die Fahrerleistung zu erfassen, um den Verantwortungsträgern in der Gesellschaft, den Regierungen und der Industrie eine Risikoabschätzung dieser Funktionen zu ermöglichen und die Sicherheit von Mensch-Fahrzeug-Schnittstellen zu erhöhen. Das Hauptziel dieser Dissertation bestand darin, die Effekte von kognitiver Ablenkung auf die Fahrerleistung zu untersuchen. Verschiedene Arten kognitiver Ablenkung, die sich beim Fahren unter realen Bedingungen häufig auf die Fahrer auswirken, wurden in dieser Arbeit kodiert und analysiert: kognitiv ablenkende Nebenaufgaben (z.B. telefonieren, singen), Fahreremotionen (z.B. Freude, Wut/Frustration, Traurigkeit) und Kombinationen von Fahreremotionen und Nebenaufgaben (z.B. Streit mit dem Beifahrer oder am Telefon). Bei der Untersuchung von Effekten kognitiver Ablenkung auf das Fahren sind Umwelt-, Situations- und Personenfaktoren zu berücksichtigen, da sie Mediator- und Moderatorvariablen bei der Erfassung des relativen Risikos von Ablenkung beim Fahren im Straßenverkehr darstellen. Daher folgte diese Dissertation dem ganzheitlichen Ansatz, so viele relevante Variablen wie möglich zu betrachten, die mit der Ausführung kognitiv ablenkender Tätigkeiten interagieren. Zu diesem Zweck wurden Daten der derzeit umfangreichsten „naturalistic driving study“ (the second Strategic Highway Research Program, SHRP 2) kodiert und analysiert, um möglichst viele Situationen, in denen eine kognitive Beanspruchung die Fahrerleistung potenziell beeinflusste, umfassend zu bewerten. Gleichzeitig wurde eine große Zahl von Mediator- und Moderatorvariablen betrachtet, die beim Fahren im realen Straßenverkehr auftreten (z.B. Einfluss von Kreuzungen, Wetter, etc.). Dieser Ansatz sollte das Verständnis und die externe Validität der Ergebnisse erhöhen und stellt einen wichtigen Schritt hin zu einem vollständigen Modell jener Variablen dar, die entweder zu unangemessen Verhaltensweisen und Unfällen beitragen oder sie reduzieren. Im Rahmen der Dissertation wurden vier Studien durchgeführt, die auf der Grundlage von zwei SHRP 2 Datensätzen die Zusammenhänge zwischen kognitiven und anderen Ablenkungsquellen, Umwelt-, Situations- und Personenfaktoren und Fahrerleistung untersuchten. Weiterhin wurden Kausalfaktoren in 315 vom Fahrer verursachten Unfällen und Beinaheunfällen, die mit Fahrerablenkung, Fahrerbeeinträchtigung oder keinem dieser Faktoren assoziiert waren, analysiert. Die erste Studie untersuchte die Auswirkungen von Wut beim Fahren und Streit mit dem Beifahrer oder jemandem am Telefon auf die Fahrerleistung. Wut beim Fahren ging mit einer Häufung aggressiver Verhaltensweisen einher, jedoch nicht mit einer Erhöhung von Fahrfehlern. Streitgespräche mit dem Beifahrer oder einer Person am Telefon (das heißt, wenn mutmaßlich das höchste Maß an kognitiver Ablenkung vorlag), schienen darüber hinaus mit keiner Form von unangemessenen Verhaltensweisen im Zusammenhang zu stehen. Die zweite Studie untersuchte, wie sich kognitive, visuelle und manuelle Fahrerablenkung, emotionale Beeinträchtigung sowie Umwelt-, Situations- und Persönlichkeitsfaktoren auf die Fahrerleistung auswirken. Ein Zusammenhang zwischen kognitiver Ablenkung und einer Verschlechterung der Fahrerleistung konnte nicht festgestellt werden. Die dritte Studie replizierte und erweiterte Ergebnisse der zweiten Untersuchung auf der Grundlage eines größeren Datensatzes, bestehend aus Fahrsegmenten, die Unfällen, Beinaheunfällen und Baselines vorausgingen und weder emotionale noch andere Fahrerbeeinträchtigungen enthielten. In Übereinstimmung mit den Ergebnissen der ersten und zweiten Studie, wurde keine Assoziation zwischen kognitiver Ablenkung und einer verschlechterten Fahrerleistung festgestellt. Bei der vierten Studie handelte es sich um eine vergleichende Analyse von Risikofaktoren für Unfälle/ Beinaheunfälle, die mit verschiedenen Arten von Ablenkung, Beeinträchtigung oder keinem von beiden, assoziiert waren. Unfälle, denen eine kognitive Ablenkung vorausgegangen war, waren vor allem mit von Ablenkung unabhängigen Fahrfehlern verbunden - genau wie die Unfälle, denen keine beobachtbare Nebentätigkeit vorausgegangen war. Dieses Ergebnis lässt vermuten, dass in früheren „naturalistic driving studies“, das Unfallrisiko von kognitiv ablenkenden Nebentätigkeiten eventuell sogar überschätzt wurde. Zusammenfassend legen die Ergebnisse die Schlussfolgerung nahe, dass kognitive Ablenkung durch beobachtbare emotionale Beeinträchtigung, (überwiegend) kognitiv ablenkende Nebenaufgaben oder die Kombination dieser beiden Faktoren, nicht mit sichtbaren negativen Auswirkungen auf die Fahrerleistung im tatsächlichen Straßenverkehr assoziiert werden kann. Im Gegensatz dazu hatten ablenkende Tätigkeiten, die zu Blickabwendungen von der Straße führen, und solche, die mit einem besonders hohen Unfallrisiko assoziiert werden, die größte Wahrscheinlichkeit Fahrfehler und Unfälle zu verursachen. / Driver distractions are among the leading causes of motor vehicle accidents. Such distractions can stem from competing visual, manual, or cognitive resources, all of which have been associated with detrimental effects on driving performance. Although the negative impacts of visual/visual-manual distraction are widely agreed upon, the effects of cognitive load on driving errors and crash risk are still debated. On the one hand, numerous experimental studies have shown adverse effects of cognitive distraction on driving performance. In contrast, most existing naturalistic driving studies have either not revealed increased crash/near-crash risk due to cognitive distraction, or have even reported a safety benefit. The number of in-vehicle tasks placing cognitive load on the driver is increasing in recent years due to the development of auditory human–machine interfaces such as voice control for several functions. This has enhanced the need to assess how cognitive distraction affects driving performance. These results are necessary to provide society, government, and industry with valid risk estimates, which will affect decision making regarding how to enhance the safety of using in-vehicle human-machine interfaces while driving. Therefore, the main objective of this thesis was to investigate how cognitive distraction affects driving performance. Different types of cognitive distraction that commonly affect most drivers in naturalistic conditions were coded and analyzed in the present thesis, including: cognitively distracting secondary tasks (e.g., talking on the phone, singing), driver emotion (e.g., happiness, anger/frustration, sadness), and combinations of driver emotion and secondary task demand (e.g., arguing with a passenger or with someone on the phone). Environmental, situational, and individual factors cannot be ignored when investigating the effects of cognitive distraction on driving performance, as they are mediating and moderating variables for estimating distraction relative risk in naturalistic driving. Therefore, a holistic approach guided this thesis towards incorporating as many important variables as possible that interact with the engagement in cognitively distracting activities. Data from the largest naturalistic driving study ever conducted (the second Strategic Highway Research Program, SHRP 2) were coded and analyzed to comprehensively assess many situations in which cognitive load potentially affected driving performance. Further, the goal was to simultaneously consider many possible mediating and moderating variables existent in real-world traffic (such as intersection influences, weather, etc.). This approach should increase understanding and external validity of the results, as well as represent an important step towards building a complete model depicting variables that contribute to or mitigate aberrant driving behaviors and crash risk. Four different analyses focused on two SHRP 2 data subsets to assess the relationship between cognitive and other distraction sources, environmental, situational, and individual factors, as well as driving performance. In addition, contributing factors in 315 at-fault crash and near-crash events associated with driver distraction, driver impairment, or neither of the two were analyzed. The first study examined driving performance in relation to driving anger as well as arguing with a passenger or with someone on the phone. Results showed that driving anger was associated with more frequent aggressive driving behaviors without increasing driving error frequency. Furthermore, when a conflict arose with a passenger or with someone on the phone (i.e., when the level of cognitive distraction was expected to be highest), there did not appear to be a link to any type of aberrant driving behavior. The second study analyzed driving performance based on cognitive, visual, and manual driver distraction, emotional impairment, as well as environmental, situational, and individual factors. Cognitive distraction was not associated with any decline in driving performance. The purpose of the third analysis was to replicate and extend the second study’s effects based on a larger data sample of driving segments preceding crashes, near-crashes, and matched baselines, of drivers not exhibiting emotional or other impairment types. Corroborating the first and second study’s results, there was no association between cognitive distractions and impaired driving performance. Finally, the fourth study compared the risk factors of crashes/near-crashes associated with either different driver distraction types, impairment, or neither. Crashes preceded by cognitive distraction were mainly associated with driving errors unrelated to the secondary task demands, as were the crashes preceded by no observable secondary task. This finding suggests that previous studies analyzing naturalistic driving data may have even overestimated the crash risk of cognitively distracting secondary task engagement. In summary, this thesis provides compelling evidence that cognitive distraction, either through observable emotional impairment, (mainly) cognitively distracting secondary tasks, or the combination of both, has no apparent relation with poorer driving performance observable in real-world traffic. On the contrary, distracting activities requiring the driver’s gaze to move away from the forward roadway and those associated with a particularly high crash risk had the highest chances of causing driving errors and crashes.