Aggressive Driving and Road Rage: A Driving Simulation Experiment.

October 30, 2023 updated by: Thomas Kerwin, Ohio State University

Driving Simulation Experiments of Aggressive Driving and Road Rage

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.

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Experimental studies are needed to draw inferences about the causes of aggressive driving. Only six driving simulation experiments have been conducted, and one of these experiment was conducted by the investigators (Bushman, Kerwin, Whitlock, & Weisenberger, 2017).

The proposed research will test the effects of seven situational risk factors: (1) racing video games (Experiment 2), (2) racial bumper stickers (i.e., "Black Lives Matter" bumper stickers for white motorists vs. "All Lives Matter" bumper stickers for black motorists; Experiment 3), (3) political bumper stickers (i.e., "Donald Trump for President 2016" for Democrat motorists vs. "Hillary Clinton for President 2016" for Republican motorists; Experiment 4), (4) alcohol-related cues (i.e., a case of beer vs. water on the passenger seat; Experiment 5), (5) music with violent lyrics (Experiment 6), (6) music with an upbeat tempo (Experiment 6), and (7) roadside trash (Experiment 7). The proposed research will also test the effects of five situational protective factors: (1) racial bumper stickers (i.e., "Black Lives Matter" for black motorists vs. "All Lives Matter" for white motorists; Experiment 3), (2) political bumper stickers (i.e., "Donald Trump for President 2016" for Republican motorists vs. "Hillary Clinton for President 2016" for Democrat motorists; Experiment 4), (3) music with prosocial lyrics (Experiment 6), (4) music with a calm tempo (Experiment 6), and (5) roadside vegetation (Experiment 7).

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

830

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Ohio
      • Columbus, Ohio, United States, 43212
        • Recruiting
        • The Ohio State University Driving Simulation Laboratory
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 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.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Participants who have motion sickness will be excluded.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Basic Science
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Factorial Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Experiment 1
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
Videos depicting various aggressive driving and road rage behaviors.
Experimental: Experiment 2
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
Participants will play a racing or neutral video game before driving in the simulator.
Experimental: Experiment 3
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
Bumper stickers hypothesized to increase or decrease aggressive driving.
Experimental: Experiment 4
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
Bumper stickers hypothesized to increase or decrease aggressive driving.
Experimental: Experiment 5
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
Case of beer or water on passenger seat.
Other Names:
  • beer water
Experimental: Experiment 6
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
Lyrics and tempo of music will be manipulated to increase or decrease aggressive driving.
Experimental: Experiment 7
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
The roadside will contain trash to increase aggressive driving, or vegetation to decrease aggressive driving. There is also a control group.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Aggressive driving behavior
Time Frame: Observed in driving scenario during the experimental session
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
Time Frame: Observed in driving scenario during the experimental session, up to one hour.
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 Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
State anger
Time Frame: Immediately after completing driving scenario, during the experimental session, up to one hour.
In the proposed research, state anger will be measured using the State Anger Scale (Spielberger, 1988), which contains 15 items (e.g., "I feel angry") that are rated on a 4-point scale (1 = Not at all; 2 = Somewhat; 3 = Moderately so; 4 = Very much so; Cronbach = .93).
Immediately after completing driving scenario, during the experimental session, up to one hour.
Hostile attributions
Time Frame: Immediately after completing driving scenario, during the experimental session, up to one hour.
Research has shown that the hostile attribution bias can influence appraisal and decision processes. The hostile attribution bias is the tendency to perceive ambiguous actions by others as aggressive. For example, if a driver cuts you off, a hostile attribution would be that the driver did it purposely (not accidentally). Research has shown that attributing causality to an offending driver predicts aggressive driving. In the proposed research, we will measure whether people assign blame to other drivers using a measure successfully used in previous research. For each provocative event, participants will be asked whether the actions of the other driver were intentional or accidental. For example, "Do you think the other driver deliberately cut you off?" vs. "I think the other driver cut me off by accident" (1=Not at all to 7=Very much so). In Experiments 2-4, 6-7, we expect hostile appraisals to be positively related to aggressive driving. This measure is not included in Experiment 5.
Immediately after completing driving scenario, during the experimental session, up to one hour.

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Trait anger
Time Frame: Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.
Trait anger is a personality dimension that reflects the person's chronic tendency to experience the emotion of state anger with greater frequency, intensity, and duration. Trait anger is an important antecedent of state anger and aggression. Trait anger will be measured using the Trait Anger Scale, which contains 10 items (e.g., "I have a fiery temper") that are rated on a 4-point scale (1 = Almost never; 2 = Sometimes; 3 = Often; 4 = Almost always)
Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.
Narcissism
Time Frame: Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.

Narcissism is characterized by excessive self-love and a selfish orientation. Previous research has shown that narcissism is a risk factor for aggressive driving.

Narcissism will be measured using the Single Item Narcissism Scale (SINS): "To what extent do you agree with this statement: 'I am a narcissist.' (Note: The word "narcissist" means egotistical, self-focused, vain, etc.)," which is scored using a 7-point scale (1 = Not very true of me to 7 = Very true of me).
Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.
Empathy
Time Frame: Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.
Empathy involves feeling compassion for others and imagining how they feel. We expect empathy to be negatively related to aggressive driving. Empathy will be measured using the Single Item Trait Empathy Scale (SITES): "To what extent does the following statement describe you: 'I am an empathetic person.' (Note: An empathetic person understands others' feelings, and experiences care and concern for them.)," which is scored using a 5-point scale (Not very true of me to 5 = Very true of me)
Completed after consent is signed, before the driving simulation experiment begins.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Ohio State University

Investigators

  • Study Director: Brad Bushman, PhD, Ohio State University

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

October 20, 2015

Primary Completion (Estimated)

April 1, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

November 1, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 23, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 8, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

February 13, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

November 1, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 30, 2023

Last Verified

October 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2018B0081

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

Data set and syntax will be posted to figshare.com

IPD Sharing Time Frame

After an experiment is accepted for publication, the data will be uploaded with no time limit.

IPD Sharing Access Criteria

The data will be posted on an open access webpage - figshare

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • ANALYTIC_CODE

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Aggression

Clinical Trials on Videos

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Indonesia

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

3
Subscribe