Aggressive Driving and Road Rage: A Driving Simulation Experiment.

NCT03430973 | Terminated

• 1 other identifier: 2018B0081
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 85
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Driving a car is the most dangerous behavior most people engage in every day. According to the World Health Organization, about 1.25 million people die each year as a result of road traffic crashes, and they are the leading cause of death among 15 to 29 year olds. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 37,461 Americans were killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2016 - about 103 per day. Although there are several causes of traffic crashes (e.g., texting, alcohol consumption, inclement weather), the leading cause is aggressive driving. In the United States, aggressive driving accounts for more than half of all traffic fatalities. Thus, aggressive driving is an important applied health topic, especially for young drivers.

Conditions

Aggression

Keywords

aggressive driving; road rage

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Aggressive driving behavior

  The two primary measures of aggressive driving will be tailgating and speeding. Tailgating measures are based on the number of seconds between the participant's car and the car in front of them: (1) 4-second rule (recommended for speeds above 30 MPH, in heavy traffic, or when there are many obstacles, as in the present driving scenario), (2) 3-second rule (dangerous), and (3) 2-second rule (extremely dangerous). Average speed is a poor measure of speeding because it depends heavily on random influences. Instead, a relatively high-speed cutoff (e.g., 50 MPH) will be used before averaging because it removes the variability due to traffic. Other measures of aggressive driving include off-road driving (e.g., crossing the double solid yellow lines into oncoming traffic, driving on the shoulder), horn honking, verbal aggression, and aggressive gestures (e.g., giving another driver the middle finger). Measures of aggressive driving will be combined to reduce Type I errors.

  Observed in driving scenario during the experimental session

• Road rage

  The four primary measures of road rage will be colliding into other vehicles, motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Acts of road rage are expected to occur far less frequently than acts of aggressive driving. Acts of road rage will be combined to reduce Type I errors.

  Observed in driving scenario during the experimental session, up to one hour.

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• State anger

  Immediately after completing driving scenario, during the experimental session, up to one hour.

• Hostile attributions

  Immediately after completing driving scenario, during the experimental session, up to one hour.

Other Outcomes (3)

• Trait anger

  Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.

• Narcissism

  Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.

• Empathy

  Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.

Study Arms (7)

Experiment 1

EXPERIMENTAL

The purpose of Experiment 1 is to develop a standardized measure of aggressive driving for driver simulation experiments. After giving their consent, participants (N=200) will complete several personal variables (i.e., gender, age, driving experience, driving frequency, trait anger, self-reported aggressive and prosocial driving). Next, participants will watch several short videos of aggressive driving (e.g., speeding, tailgating, driving on shoulder), and road rage (e.g., hitting another vehicle or pedestrian). Participants will indicate whether the driver's behavior was aggressive (yes, no), and will rate how aggressive it was on an 11-point scale (0=not at all aggressive to 10=extremely aggressive). A debriefing will follow.

Behavioral: Videos

Experiment 2

EXPERIMENTAL

Experiment 2 tests whether participants actually drive more aggressively after a playing a violent or nonviolent racing video game. After giving their consent, participants (N=60, n=30 each group) will complete the same personal variables as in Experiment 1, and will report the video games they play. Next, participants will be randomly assigned to play one of two types of video games for 20 minutes: (1) violent racing video game, (2) nonviolent racing game, or (3) a neutral game. After participants complete the driving scenario, participants will complete measures of state and hostile appraisals. A debriefing will follow.

Behavioral: Video game

Experiment 3

EXPERIMENTAL

Experiment 3 tests the effects of racial bumper stickers on black and white participants. After giving their consent, participants (N=120; n=60 black, n=60 white) will complete the personal variables (see Experiment 1), the race IAT, and report their political party. Some cars in the driving scenario will contain bumper stickers. Experiment 3 contains four conditions: (1) white participants / "All Lives Matter" stickers, (2) black participants / "All Lives Matter" stickers, (3) white participants / "Black Lives Matter" stickers, (4) black participants / "Black Lives Matter" stickers. After participants complete the driving scenario, they will complete measures of state and hostile appraisals, and will report their attitudes toward the #BLM and #ALM movements. A debriefing will follow.

Behavioral: Bumper stickers

Experiment 4

EXPERIMENTAL

Experiment 4 tests the effects of political bumper stickers on aggressive driving in Republicans versus Democrats. After giving their consent, participants (N=120; n=60 Republicans, n=60 Democrats) will complete the personal variables (see Experiment 1). Some cars in the driving scenario will contain bumper stickers. Experiment 4 has four conditions: (1) Republicans / "Donald Trump for President 2016" stickers, (2) Republicans / "Hillary Clinton for President 2016" stickers, (3) Democrats / "Donald Trump for President 2016" stickers, (4) Democrats / "Hillary Clinton for President 2016" stickers. After participants complete the driving scenario, they will complete measures of state and hostile appraisals, and will report their attitudes toward Trump and Clinton. A debriefing will follow.

Behavioral: Bumper stickers

Experiment 5

EXPERIMENTAL

Experiment 5 tests whether alcohol-related cues can increase aggressive driving. After giving their consent, participants (N=40) will complete the personal variables (see Experiment 1). Next, participants will be randomly assigned to one of two conditions: (1) 12-pack of beer on passenger seat, or (2) 12-pack of sparkling water on passenger seat. Participants will be told that the object on the seat is part of a different experiment that the other experimenter forgot to clean up, which they should ignore it. After participants complete the driving scenario, they will complete measures of state and hostile appraisals, and will be debriefed.

Behavioral: Alcohol-related cues

Experiment 6

EXPERIMENTAL

Experiment 6 will test the effects of music with aggressive versus prosocial lyrics on aggressive driving. The tempo of the music will also be manipulated because it might influence arousal levels. After giving their consent, participants (N=150, n=30 per group) will complete the personal variables (see Experiment 1). Music will be played over the car's sound system. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of five conditions: (1) violent lyrics / upbeat tempo, (2) violent lyrics / calm tempo, (3) prosocial lyrics / upbeat tempo, (4) prosocial lyrics / calm tempo, or (5) no music control. After participants complete the driving scenario, they will complete measures of state and hostile appraisals, and will be debriefed.

Behavioral: Music

Experiment 7

EXPERIMENTAL

Experiment 7 tests whether roadside vegetation can reduce aggression in frustrated drivers. After giving their consent, participants (N=90, n=30 per group) will complete the personality variables (see Experiment 1). Next, they will complete the Enjoyment of Nature Scale (Cheng \& Moore, 2012), which contains 7 items (e.g., "I like to see wild flowers in nature" and "Being in the natural environment makes me feel peaceful"; 1=strongly disagree to 5= strongly disagree; Cronbach =.87). Next, participants will be randomly assigned to one of three driving scenarios: (1) roadside vegetation, (2) trash, or (3) control (no roadside vegetation / no trash). After participants complete the driving scenario, they will complete measures of state and hostile appraisals, and will be debriefed.

Behavioral: Roadside vegetation

Interventions

Music BEHAVIORAL

Lyrics and tempo of music will be manipulated to increase or decrease aggressive driving.

Experiment 6

Roadside vegetation BEHAVIORAL

The roadside will contain trash to increase aggressive driving, or vegetation to decrease aggressive driving. There is also a control group.

Experiment 7

Video game BEHAVIORAL

Participants will play a racing or neutral video game before driving in the simulator.

Experiment 2

Videos BEHAVIORAL

Videos depicting various aggressive driving and road rage behaviors.

Experiment 1

Bumper stickers BEHAVIORAL

Bumper stickers hypothesized to increase or decrease aggressive driving.

Experiment 3; Experiment 4

Alcohol-related cues BEHAVIORAL

Case of beer or water on passenger seat.

Also known as: beer water

Experiment 5

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years+
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Participants will be adults recruited from Central Ohio (Franklin County) through advertisements (e.g., newspaper, Internet).
• Participants' ages will vary depending on the experiment. 18 and older for Experiment 1; 18-21 for Experiments 2-4 and 6-7; 21+ for Experiment 5
• All participants must have a current driver license.

You may not qualify if:

• Participants who have motion sickness will be excluded.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Ohio State University: lead

Study Sites (1)

The Ohio State University Driving Simulation Laboratory

Columbus, Ohio, 43212, United States

Location

Related Publications (4)

• Bushman, B. J., Kerwin, T., Whitlock, T., & Weisenberger, J. M. (2017). The weapons effect on wheels: Motorists drive more aggressively when there is a gun in the vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 82-85. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.007

  BACKGROUND

• Cheng, J. C., & Monroe, M. C. (2012). Connection to nature: Children's affective attitude toward nature. Environment and Behavior, 44(1), 31-49. doi:10.1177/0013916510385082

  BACKGROUND

• Spielberger, C. D. (1988). State-trait anger expression inventory: STAXI professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

  BACKGROUND

• Wickens CM, Wiesenthal DL, Flora DB, Flett GL. Understanding driver anger and aggression: attributional theory in the driving environment. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2011 Dec;17(4):354-70. doi: 10.1037/a0025815. Epub 2011 Oct 10.

  PMID: 21988326 BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Aggression; Road Rage

Interventions

Videotape Recording; Ethanol; Music Therapy

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Aberrant Motor Behavior in Dementia; Behavioral Symptoms; Behavior; Social Behavior; Dangerous Behavior

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Tape Recording; Audiovisual Aids; Educational Technology; Technology; Technology, Industry, and Agriculture; Television; Alcohols; Organic Chemicals; Sensory Art Therapies; Complementary Therapies; Therapeutics; Rehabilitation; Aftercare; Continuity of Patient Care; Patient Care; Psychotherapy; Behavioral Disciplines and Activities

Study Officials

• Brad Bushman, PhD

  Ohio State University

  STUDY DIRECTOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: BASIC SCIENCE
• Intervention Model: FACTORIAL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Director of Operations OSU Driving Simulation Lab

Model Details: Seven driving simulation experiments on aggressive driving and road rage (see descriptions above).

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: January 23, 2018
• First Posted: February 13, 2018
• Study Start: October 20, 2015
• Primary Completion: December 1, 2025
• Study Completion: December 1, 2025
• Last Updated: December 19, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-12

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will share
• Shared Documents: ANALYTIC CODE
• Time Frame: After an experiment is accepted for publication, the data will be uploaded with no time limit.
• Access Criteria: The data will be posted on an open access webpage - figshare

Locations

US (1)