RESEARCHARTICLE Driving anger and its relationships with type A behavior patterns and trait anger: Differences between professional and non-professional drivers ZhongxiangFeng1*,MiaomiaoYang1,ChangxiMa2,KangJiang1,YeweiLei1, WenjuanHuang1,ZhipengHuang1,JingjingZhan1,MuxiongZhou3 a1111111111 1 SchoolofAutomobileandTrafficEngineering,HefeiUniversityofTechnology,Hefei,Anhui,PRChina, 2 SchoolofTrafficandTransportation,LanzhouJiaotongUniversity,Lanzhou,Gansu,PRChina,3 Traffic a1111111111 ManagementResearchInstituteoftheMinistryofPublicSecurity,Wuxi,Jiangsu,PRChina a1111111111 a1111111111 *fzx@hfut.edu.cn a1111111111 Abstract ThepresentstudyexaminedthetypesofsituationsthatcausedChineseprofessionaland OPENACCESS non-professionaldriverstobecomeangryandinvestigatedthedifferencesindriving-elicited Citation:FengZ,YangM,MaC,JiangK,LeiY, anger,consideringtheinfluencesoftypeAbehaviorpatternandtraitangerbetweenthetwo HuangW,etal.(2017)Drivingangerandits groups.The20-itemrevisedDrivingAngerScale(DAS)wasusedtoassessasampleof relationshipswithtypeAbehaviorpatternsandtrait anger:Differencesbetweenprofessionalandnon- 232drivers(57%professional,43%non-professional).Thenon-professionaldrivers professionaldrivers.PLoSONE12(12):e0189793. reportedsignificantlyhigherlevelsofangerthantheprofessionaldriversontheoverallDriv- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 ingAngerScale(DAS)andthetrafficobstructionsanddiscourtesysubscales.Inboth Editor:XiaoleiMa,BeihangUniversity,CHINA groups,thepreferreddrivingspeedswerepositivelyrelatedtodrivinganger.Furthermore, Received:July1,2017 driverswithatypeApersonalityexhibitedhigheroveralldrivingangerscoresandhigher angerscoresinresponsetotrafficobstructionsandslowdrivingthandriverswithatypeB Accepted:December2,2017 personality.Traitangerwassignificantlyrelatedtodrivingangerinbothgroups.Inthenon- Published:December18,2017 professionalgroup,typeAbehaviorpatterns(TABPs)andtimehurry(TH)werepositively Copyright:©2017Fengetal.Thisisanopen correlatedwithangerevokedbyslowdriving.Intheprofessionalgroup,TABPs,THand accessarticledistributedunderthetermsofthe competitivehostility(CH)werepositivelyrelatedtodrivinganger,andtheTABPsexertedan CreativeCommonsAttributionLicense,which permitsunrestricteduse,distribution,and indirecteffectondrivingangerbymediatingtheinfluenceoftraitanger.Overall,thesefind- reproductioninanymedium,providedtheoriginal ingsprovideatheoreticalbasisforimplementingtargetedinterventionsfordrivingangerin authorandsourcearecredited. bothprofessionalandnon-professionaldrivers. DataAvailabilityStatement:Allrelevantdataare withinthepaperanditsSupportingInformation files. Funding:Thispaperissupportedbythe"National Introduction NaturalScienceFoundationofChina"(NO. 51578207,51678211),the"FundamentalResearch Duetotherapiddevelopmentoftheeconomyandtheincreasingnumberofcars,travelling FundsfortheCentralUniversities"(NO. hasbecomemoreconvenient.However,therearenumeroustrafficaccidents.Humanfactors JZ2017HGTB0209)and"AnhuiScienceand playanimportantrolein92–94%ofroadtrafficaccidents[1].Somestudieshaveshownthat TechnologyProject-Sci-techPolice"(NO. thedrivers’psychologicalandphysiologicalconditionscontributetotheirdrivingbehaviors 1704d0802189).Thefundershadnoroleinstudy [2,3].Inparticular,psychologicalconditions,suchasthedrivers’characteristics,personalities, design,datacollectionandanalysis,decisionto publish,orpreparationofthemanuscript. personalhabits,andtemporaryemotions,andpressureandfatigueinducedbytheexternal PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 1/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger Competinginterests:Theauthorshavedeclared environmentsignificantlyinfluencedrivingbehaviors.Duetotheincreasinglyrapidpaceof thatnocompetinginterestsexist. modernurbanlife,peopleaccumulatestressandnegativeemotionsfromtheirdailylivesor work.Roadrage,whichisanegativeemotionthatoccurswhiledriving,hasbecomeacommon occurrenceworldwide[4].Sincethemid-1990s,thisphenomenonhasbeguntodrawmedia attention.Forexample,in1994,psychologistsfromColoradoStateUniversitydefineddriving angerasthepropensitytobecomeangrywhiledriving[5].However,drivingangerislikely morecommonthancurrentlybelievedandislikelyexperiencedregularlybynormaldrivers.A previousstudyfoundthat89%of270driversadmittedtooccasionallycommittingaggressive violations,suchaschasingothercars,displayinghostilitytowardotherdriversorsoundingthe horntoindicatetheirannoyancewiththeotherdrivers[6].Similarly,astudyconductedwith adiaryapproachtorecorddrivinganger[7]indicatedthat85%of100driversexperienced angerwhiledrivingovera2-weekperiod.Furthermoreastronglinkhasbeenfoundbetween angerwhiledrivingandsubsequentnearaccidents.Additionalstudieshaveindicatedthat drivingangercouldeasilycausedriverstoengageinaggressiveandriskydrivingbehaviors, suchasspeeding,tailgating,andtheforcibleovertakingofanothervehicle[8–10].Basedon thesestudies,angerwhiledrivinglikelyinterfereswiththedrivers’attention,perception,infor- mationprocessinganddrivingperformance;drivingangeriscorrelatedwithcrash-related conditions,suchasthelossofconcentration,lossofvehicularcontrol,andnearaccidents,and directlyorindirectlyincreasesthelikelihoodofriskybehaviorsandaccidentsand,accordingly, affectsroadtrafficsafety[5,6,9]. Previously,Deffenbacheretal.establishedtraffic-relatedscenariostoinducedrivinganger anddevelopedtheDrivingAngerScale(DAS),whichisaneffectivemeasurementtoolusing clusteranalysisthathasestablishedthefoundationforsubsequentstudies[5].Sincethedevel- opmentoftheoriginalDAS,Britain,NewZealand,Spainandothercountrieshaverevisedpar- tialitemsandfactorstructuresoftheDrivingAngerScale(DAS)basedonnationaland culturaldifferencesandusedtherevisedscalestoconductsubsequentrelatedstudies[11–16]. InChina,astudyidentifieddifferencesintheperceptionofdrivingangerbetweenChinese andGermandrivers.However,theGermandriversexhibitedasimilarperceptionofdriving angertothatofWesterners[17].Theinconsistentfindingsinthesestudiesraiseddoubtsasto whetherall33oftheoriginalsituationsorfactorstructuresintheDAScouldadequatelycap- turedrivingangerinChinesedrivers.InChina,urbantrafficischaracterizedbyamixtureof motorvehicles,non-motorvehiclesandpedestriansontheroad.Thus,trafficscenariosthat areconsistentwiththeactualtrafficcharacteristicsinChinamaybemoreappropriatefor revealingdrivingangerinChinesedrivers. Drivingangerisconceptualizedasapersonalitytraitthatiscorrelatedwithtraitanger[18]. InJapan,highlevelsofworkstressarisingfromaneffort-rewardimbalanceatworkexertan indirecteffectondrivingangerbymediatingtheinfluenceoftraitanger[19].InMalaysia, totaltraitangerscoreswerepositivelycorrelatedwitheachdrivingangersubscale[20].Trait anger,whichhasstableandenduringcharacteristicsandoccasionallyplaysamediatingrole, wasdirectlycorrelatedwithdrivinganger. Researchershaveassociatedpersonalitytypeswithtrafficsafetyanddrivingbehaviors. DriverswithatypeApersonalityhavereceivedincreasingattention[21].Friedmanand Rosenman[22],whoareAmericancardiologists,werethefirsttoidentifythetypeApersonal- ityinapatientwithcoronaryarterydisease.ThetypicalbehavioralcharacteristicsofatypeA personalityincludeintenseambition,aggressiveness,acompetitivedrive,aconstantpreoccu- pationwithoccupationaldeadlines,andasenseoftimehurry(TH).Therelativeabsenceof thesecharacteristicsisdefinedasatypeBpersonalitybehavioralpattern.DriverswithatypeA personalitytendtobeimpatient,areinvolvedinmoreaccidents,andreceivemoreticket[23]. TypeAdriverswereinvolvedinmoreaccidentsandaggressivebehaviorswhiledrivingonthe PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 2/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger roadthantypeBdrivers[24,25].Furthermore,busdriverswithatypeApersonalityperformed moreerrorsandviolationswhiledrivingthanthosewithatypeBpersonality[26].AtypeA personalityistypicallyanaggressivepersonalitythatisformedbytheinteractionbetweenthe personalitytraitsandtheenvironmentandhasanegativeeffectontrafficsafety.Although moststudiesexploringtypeApersonalityindrivershavefocusedonitscorrelationwithacci- dents,todate,nostudieshaveinvestigateditseffectondrivinganger.Thus,itisnecessaryto determinetheeffectsoftypeAbehaviorpatterns(TABPs)onangerbehindthewheel. Mostresearchersexploringtheinfluencesofdemographicvariablesondrivingangerhave focusedongenderoragedifferences.However,thereexistsadifferencebetweenprofessional andnon-professionaldrivers.Naturally,thisdifferencehasdrawntheattentionofotherresearch- ersexaminingnon-drivingangerandhasbeenshowntobesignificantlyimportant.Forexample, differencesinsafetyattitudes,behaviors,anxietyandperceivedcontrolwereobservedbetween professionalandnon-professionaldrivers[27].InIsrael,maletaxidriversandnon-professional maledrivershaddifferentattitudestowardstrafficviolationpenalties[28].Electroencephalogram (EEG)changesduringfatiguedifferedbetweenprofessionalandnon-professionaldrivers[29]. Professionalandnon-professionaldriversdiffersignificantlyintheirskills,training,driving experiences,etc.Comparedwithnon-professionaldrivers,professionaldrivershavehigherwork- loadsandconductmostoftheirdrivingwithintighttimeschedules[30].Furthermore,pro- fessionaldrivershavemoreexposuretohighertrafficvolumesontheroadandreceivemore frequentgrouptrainings.However,non-professionalsdriversmaybefreertochoosetheirmode ofdrivingandtheirtargetspeedwhiledriving[27].Becausedrivingangerinbothgroupshasa greateffectonroadsafety,itisreasonabletoexplorethedifferencesindrivingangerbetween professionalandnon-professionaldrivers.Inaddition,therearenodifferencesintheeducational andinterventionmethodsusedtoaddressdrivingangerbetweenthesetwogroups.Inparticular, thetrafficscenariosthatevokedrivingangerdifferentlybetweenprofessionalandnon-profes- sionaldriversinChinaareunknown.Furthermore,itisunclearwhetherthereisasignificant differenceindrivingangerbetweenthetwogroups.Anin-depthexplorationisneededtodeter- minethebestapproachtoapplypracticaldrivingsafetyeducation.Therefore,investigatingthe levelsofdrivingangerandthedifferencesbetweenthesetwogroupshasstrongsubstantial impactsondriverselectionanddrivereducation. Overall,thepresentstudywasundertakentoinvestigatethedifferenceinthelevelsofdriv- ingangerbetweenprofessionalandnon-professionaldriversinChinaandtoexaminewhether thedifferencesindrivingangerbetweenthetwogroupsareinfluencedbypersonalitytraits, namely,typeAbehaviorpatternandtraitanger.Finally,thisstudyaimedtoexaminewhether traitangerisamediatorthatinfluencestherelationshipbetweendrivingangerandtypeA behaviorpatterns.Inlightofthis,wehypothesizethat; H1.Thereisasignificantdifferenceinthedrivingangerexperiencedbyprofessionalandnon- professionaldrivers,andprofessionaldriversexperiencelessangeroverall. H2.TraitangerandtypeAbehaviorpatternsaresignificantlyrelatedtodrivingangerinboth groups. H3.TABPsexertanindirecteffectondrivingangerbymediatingtheinfluenceoftraitanger. Methods Participantsandprocedures Datafromnon-professionaldriverswerecollectedbyrandomlydistributing200question- nairesingasstations,parkinglots,largecommercialcenters,etc.inHefei,AnhuiProvince;in PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 3/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger addition,150professionaldrivers(allmales)wererandomlyselectedfromtheHefeiPassenger TransportationCo.Ltd.andaskedtocompletethequestionnaires.Theprofessionaldrivers wereinter-citybusdrivers,someofwhichdrovemediumdistancesbetweencitieswithinAnhui Provinceandsomeofwhichdrovelong-distancesoninter-provinceroutes.Alldriversdroveat least150kmone-waywhileonduty.Theparticipantswerefirstcontactedbyaresearcherwho explainedthepurposeofthestudy,theparticipantrequirements,andthecompensation.With thepermissionofthedrivers,theinterviewersdistributedthequestionnairestotheparticipants. Thequestionnaireswereintheformofaself-report;thus,theparticipantswererequiredto completethequestionnairebyfollowingtheinstructions.Driverswereinvitedtoparticipatein thesurveywiththeassuranceofanonymityandconfidentiality,andthedriverswerepaid30 yuanasarewarduponcompletingthequestionnaire.Questionnaireswithincorrectresponses, lackofauthenticity,ormissingpageswereconsideredinvalid.Participantscompletedtheques- tionnairesimmediatelyuponreceipttoensuretheauthenticityoftheresponses. Intotal,approximately126(63%ofallquestionnaires)completedquestionnaireswere returnedfromthenon-professionaldrivers,and150(100%)completedquestionnaireswere returnedfromtheprofessionaldrivers.Intotal,232questionnaireswerevalid(almostallmales). Thestudyincluded132professionaldrivers(57%)and100non-professionaldrivers(43%).The participantshadanaverageageof38.72years(SD=8.37)withanagerangefrom21to57.All participantshadtheirdrivinglicensesformorethanoneyear(average=12.96±9.06yr). Materials TherevisedDrivingAngerScale:TherevisedversionoftheDAScontainedthemostrepresenta- tiveitemsfromeachsubscaleoftheoriginal33-itemDAS[5].Thetranslationoftheoriginal scalewasconductedbythreenativeChinesespeakerswhowerefromtheEnglishdepartment, andthesetranslationswerethenbacktranslatedintoEnglishbyanativeEnglishspeaker.No majorissueswereidentifiedduringthetranslationprocess.Then,severalrepresentativetraffic scenariosthatinduceddrivingangerinChinesedrivers,whichwereidentifiedbyinterviewing 20drivers,wereaddedtotherevisedDAS.Thisprocessresultedintheadditionofsixnew items,specifically,“someonechangeslaneswithoutturningonsignallights”,“someonechanges laneswhilecrossingthesolidwhitelineatanintersection”,“someoneparksparkhiscarillegally ontheroad”,“non-motorvehiclesoccupylanesdesignedformotorvehicles”,“someoneparks parkhiscarillegallyatanintersectionentranceorexit”,and“novicedriversdrivetooslowlyon theroad”.Then,apre-testwascarriedouton10experienceddriverstoidentifyambiguous questionsandquestionsthatwereirrelevanttotheChinesedrivingexperience.Therespondents wereinstructedtoimaginethedescribedtrafficsituationandassesstheirpotentialangerusing afive-pointLikertscalerangingfrom“1=notatall”to“5=verymuch”. Overall,39itemswereselectedbasedonthisrationale(e.g.,significanceandsuitabilityto thecharacteristicsofthesubscaleconcerned)andempiricalcriteria(e.g.,discriminantcoeffi- cientoritem-totalcorrelation,reliabilityandvaliditytestandexploratoryfactoranalysis).A PrincipalComponentAnalysis(PCA)wasperformedtodeterminethefactorstructure,andall itemsweresubjectedtoafactoranalysisthroughvarimaxrotation. Amongtheremainingitemswereambiguousquestionsandquestionsthatwereirrelevant totheChinesedrivingexperience,namely,“someonemakesanobscenegesturetowardsyou”, “someonebeepsatyou”and“thepolicedrivecloseby.”The“policepresence”and“hostileges- tures”factorsfromtheoriginalDASwereeliminatedbecauseangerinducedbyrelateditems waslow.Therefore,inadditiontothethoselistedabove,theitems“apoliceofficerpullsyou over”,“apolicedrivingcloseby”and“apolicecariswatchingtrafficfromahiddenposition” wereeliminated.Thus,therevisedversionoftheDASconsistedof20itemsthatweregrouped PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 4/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger intothefollowingfoursubscales:trafficobstructions,discourtesy,illegaldrivingandslowdriv- ing.AfterconductingthePCA,theKaiser-Meyer-Olkin(KMO)measurementofsamplingade- quacywas0.89,andtheBartlettTestofSphericitywassignificant(p<0.01).Allfactorloadings weregreaterthan0.45.ThereliabilityanalysisgeneratedaCronbach’salphacoefficientofinter- nalconsistencyof0.90forthetotalscale,andallsubscalesexhibitedacceptableself-consistency, withCronbach’salphavaluesrangingfrom0.75to0.81.TheCronbach’alphavaluewasgreater than0.7forthetotalscaleandforeachitem,thusindicatinganacceptabledegreeofreliability [31].Thecorrelationsbetweeneachfactorandthetotalscalereachedstatisticalsignificance. Anadditionalvalidityanalysisoftherevised20-itemscalewasperformed.Thestrengthofcor- relationsbetweenthefourfactorsrangedfromlowtolow-medium(from0.31to0.58),which indicatedthatthescaleexhibitedgooddifferentialvalidity.Therewasalsoahighdegreeofcon- sistencybetweenthecontenttestedinthetotalscaleandthatforeachfactor(rangingfrom0.64 to0.84),whichindicatedthattherevisedscalehadgoodcriterion-relatedvalidity. TypeABehaviorPatternScale:TheChineseversionoftheTypeAbehaviorpatternscaleis aself-reportedscalethatwasadaptedfromtheJenkinsSecuritySurvey[32]byZhang[33]. TABPshavebeencharacterizedashard-drivingcompetitivebehaviors,hostility,timeurgency andavigorousspeechstyle.Underrepeatedtesting,thecorrelationcoefficientofthetotal scalescoreonthetwotestswasgreaterthan0.5,revealingahightest-retestreliability.The totalquestionnairecontains60itemsandthefollowingthreesubscales:timehurry(TH), whichincludes25itemsandemphasizesTH;competitionhostility(CH),whichincludes25 itemsthathighlightfeatures,suchascompetitiveness,warinessandhostility;anda10-item sectionforlie(L)detection.Therespondentswereaskedtomarkeachitemwithatickmark for“Agree”andacrossfor“disagree”todeterminewhichitemsfittheparticularindividual. First,theLscalescorewascalculated.Ifthescorewas7pointsorgreater,therespondentswere eliminatedduetothelackofauthenticity.Theevaluationcriteriaforthetypesofpersonality dependedonthetotalscoresofTHandCH[26,33].Wedefinethetypesasfollows:typeA:37 to50points;typeA-:30to36points;mid-type:27to29points;typeB-:20to26points;and typeB:1to19points. Trait AngerScale(TAS):TheTASwasselectedasameasureofgeneralandenduringfeel- ingsofanger.TheChineseversionoftheTASwastranslatedandrevisedfromtheoriginal EnglishversionoftheState-TraitAngerExpressionInventory-2[34]byTao[35].According totheCronbach’salphacoefficient,theinternalconsistencyofthetotalscalewas0.80.The TASisa10-itemscaledesignedtomeasurepeople’straitpropensitiesforangerindailylife (forexample,“Iamahot-headedperson”).Ratingsaremadeonafour-pointLikertScalerang- ingfrom“1=almostnever”to“4=almostalways”. Drivingbehavior:Thequestionnairealsocontainedasurveyregardingdrivingbehaviors. Thedriverswererequiredtoreporttheirpreferreddrivingspeedsonthreetypesofspeed- limitroads(anexpresswaywithaspeedlimitof120km/h,ahighwaywithaspeedlimitof80 km/h,andanurbanroadwithaspeedlimitof60km/h). Demographicinformation:Demographicdetails,includinggender,age,professionalor non-professionaldrivingstatusanddriverinformation,suchasdrivingexperience,mileagein thepastyear,etc.,wereobtainedfromallparticipants. Results Demographicsandpreferreddrivingspeeds Table1showsthebasicdemographicsoftheprofessionalandnon-professionaldriverswho participatedinthisstudy.Thedifferencesinthedemographiccompositionofage,driving experienceandmilesdrivenoverthepreviousyearwereinvestigatedbetweenthenon- PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 5/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger Table1. Demographicsandpreferreddrivingspeedsofthetwogroups. Variable Mean(SD) t-value Professional Non-professional Age 42.94(5.04) 33.15(8.64) 10.10**** Drivingexperience 18.81(6.61) 5.23(5.26) 17.42**** Mileageinthepastyear 148681(54,500) 12962(14,916) 27.29**** Preferredspeedonexpressway(120km/h) 99.77(8.32) 108.67(11.13) -6.69**** Preferredspeedonhighway(80km/h) 69.94(8.15) 71.45(9.05) -1.33 Preferredspeedonurbanroad(60km/h) 51.92(9.77) 51.93(8.08) -0.005 *p<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0.005 ****p<0.001 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793.t001 professionalandprofessionaldrivergroups.AsillustratedinTable1,thereweredifferencesin theagecomposition(F=33.89,p<0.001),drivingexperience(F=11.02,p<0.001),andmile- ageinthepastyear(F=75.13,p<0.001)betweenthetwodrivergroups.Professionaldrivers reportedahigheraverageage,moredrivingexperienceandmoremileagedriveninthepast yearthanthenon-professionaldrivers,indicatingthattheprofessionaldrivershadahigher exposuretoroadtrafficvehiclesthanthenon-professionaldrivers,whichisconsistentwiththe resultspresentedbyNordfjærnetal.[27]. Participantsreportedtheirpreferreddrivingspeedsonthefollowingthreedifferenttypesof roads:expressways,highwaysandurbanroads(Table1).Asexpected,theaveragespeedof expresswaydrivingwasthehighestinbothgroupswithanaverageof108.67km/hinthenon- professionaldrivergroupand99.77km/hintheprofessionaldrivergroup,whichwasconsis- tentwiththespeedlimitof120km/h.Furthermore,anindependentsamplest-test(two-tailed) indicatedthatonexpressways,thenon-professionaldriverspreferredsignificanthigherdriv- ingspeedsthantheprofessionaldrivers(F=16.15,p<0.001).Incontrast,boththenon-profes- sionalandprofessionaldriverspreferredsimilardrivingspeedsonhighwaysandurbanroads. Drivingangeranddifferencesbetweenthetwogroups Themeansandstandarddeviationsoftheprofessionaldriversandnon-professionaldrivers’ scoresontherevised20-itemDASarepresentedinTable2.Illegaldrivingwasconsidereda factorthatinducesdrivingangerandhadthehighestscoreofthefourdrivingangersubscales intheprofessionaldrivergroupwithanaveragesubscalescoreof2.74(SD=0.96).Further- more,inthissubscale,theitem“someoneparkshiscaratanintersectionentranceorexit”was rated3.23(SD=1.48),whichwasthehighestscoringitemofall20itemswithrespecttopro- vokingprofessionaldrivers’anger.Trafficobstructionswerethesecondmajorfactortoinduce professionaldrivers’anger,inwhichtheitem“theremindingflagisnotsetwhentheroadis underreconstruction”wasanotherhighanger-inducingscenariowitharatingof3.23(SD= 1.35).Theleastanger-inducingsituationfortheprofessionaldriverswasslowdriving,which hadthelowestaverageangerratings(M=1.88;SD=0.69)ofthefoursubscales.However,for thenon-professionaldrivers,trafficobstructionsweretheprimaryinducingfactorsofdriving angerandhadthehighestscoreofthefourfactorswithasubscalescoreof2.87(SD=0.92). Theitemonthetrafficobstructionsubscale“youhitanunmarkeddeeppotholewhendriving” hadascoreof3.39(SD=1.35),whichwasthehighestscoringanger-inducingitemamong non-professionaldrivers.Theslowdrivingsubscalehadthelowestaverageangerratingsinthe PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 6/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger Table2. DifferencesintheDASscoresbetweentheprofessionalandnon-professionaldrivergroups. Item ProfessionalN=132,M Non-professionalN=100,M F-value (SD) (SD) Trafficobstructions(α=0.79) 2.67(0.84) 2.87(0.92) 4.47* Othercarsblocktrafficintheparkingprocess. 2.00(1.17) 2.18(1.11) Youhitanunmarkeddeeppotholewhendriving. 2.94(1.31) 3.39(1.35) Youdrivebehindabadlysmokingvehicleandthesmokeblocksyoursight. 2.48(1.27) 2.72(1.26) Youdrivebehindalargetruckwhichoccupiesthelane. 2.59(1.19) 2.83(1.30) Theremindingflagisnotsetwhentheroadisunderreconstruction. 3.23(1.35) 3.11(1.30) Atruckiskickingupgravelatyourcar. 2.77(1.33) 3.02(1.24) Discourtesy(α=0.80) 1.94(0.88) 2.34(0.85) 4.98* Someonecutsrightinfrontofyouonthefreeway. 1.79(1.17) 1.99(1.23) Someonecutsinandtakestheparkingspotyouhavebeenwaitingfor. 2.30(1.31) 2.95(1.31) Someonetriestospeeduptodriveinfrontofyou. 1.65(0.92) 1.71(0.92) Someonechangeslanesinfrontofyouwhenthere 2.08(1.09) 2.57(1.24) isnoonebehindyou. Whenyoudrivenormally,someonehonksatyou. 1.89(1.12) 2.51(1.89) Illegaldriving(α=0.81) 2.74(0.94) 2.62(0.94) 1.93 Othervehiclesrunaredlight. 3.18(1.55) 2.63(1.47) Someoneparkshiscarinanintersectionofentranceorexit. 3.23(1.48) 3.16(1.32) Someonechangeslaneswithoutturningonsignallights. 2.67(1.17) 2.97(1.25) Someoneisspeedingonaspeed-limitroad. 2.34(1.22) 2.07(1.23) Someoneparkshiscarillegallyontheroad. 2.08(1.27) 2.55(1.31) Someonechangeslaneswhilecrossingthesolidwhitelineinanintersection. 2.25(1.13) 2.36(1.36) anintersection. Slowdriving(α=0.75) 1.88(0.69) 2.23(0.91) 2.41 Someoneinfrontofyoudoesnotstartmovingwhenthelightturnsgreen. 1.74(0.68) 2.21(1.21) turnsgreen. Apedestrianwalksslowlyacrossthemiddleofthestreet,forcingyoutoslow 1.56(0.80) 1.97(0.98) down. Someoneisdrivingtooslowlyinthepassinglane. 2.34(1.06) 2.50(1.17) Totaldrivinganger(α=0.90) 2.39(0.68) 2.57(0.73) 5.26* *p<0.05 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793.t002 groupofnon-professionaldrivers(M=2.23;SD=0.91),whichwassimilartotheprofessional drivers.Inbothgroups,drivingangerwashighlyprovokedbytwoitems,namely,“theremindingflagisnotsetwhentheroadisunderreconstruction”and“someoneparkshiscaratan intersectionentranceorexit”,andbothitemshadascoregreaterthan3. Overall,comparedwithfindingsintheUSA,TurkeyandMalaysia[5,36,37],alldriversin China,regardlessofwhethertheywereprofessionaldriversornon-professionaldrivers, reportedlowerlevelsofangerthanthedriversintheseothercountriesonsimilarsubscales. Furthermore,foreachdimension,thelevelsofdrivingangerwerelessthan3intheChinese drivers,whichwassimilartotheresultsreportedbyLi,Yao,JiangandLi[38],whofoundthat aChinesesamplereportedsignificantlylowerlevelsofangerthanthosefromcountries,such astheUSA,Turkey,etc.IntheUSAandMalaysiasamples,thediscourtesysubscaleproduced thehighestmeans.However,thesubscalewiththehighestmeanscoreinthenon-professional driversinChinawasthetrafficobstructionssubscale,whereasfortheprofessionaldrivers,the highestmeanscorewasreportedontheillegaldrivingsubscale. PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 7/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger Table3. Thecorrelationcoefficientsamongdrivinganger,demographicsandpreferredspeeds. Trafficobstructions Discourtesy Illegaldriving Slowdriving Totalscore Pro Non- Pro Non- Pro Non- Pro Non- Pro Non- pro pro pro pro pro Age 0.02 -0.14 0.05 -0.08 0.09 0.01 0.03 -0.01 0.07 -0.07 Drivingexperience 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.12 -0.02 0.09 0.08 0.12 Mileageinthepastyear(km) 0.11 0.01 0.03 -0.16 0.14 -0.05 -0.01 -0.05 0.11 -0.06 Preferredspeedonexpressway 0.35** 0.21* 0.58** 0.07 0.18* -0.01 0.47** 0.11 0.46** 0.12 Preferredspeedonhighway 0.21* 0.20* 0.27** 0.23* 0.03 0.11 0.27** 0.21* 0.22* 0.22* Preferredspeedonurbanroad 0.27** 0.09 0.27** 0.09 0.09 -0.01 0.28** 0.15 0.26** 0.08 *p<0.05 **p<0.01 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793.t003 Becauseage,drivingexperienceandmileageinthepastyearcouldpotentiallyaffectthedif- ferencesinthedriving-relatedvariablesbetweenthetwogroups,theinfluenceofthedemo- graphiccharacteristicswasadjustedforinthesubsequentanalyses.Amultivariateanalysisof covariance(MANCOVA)wasperformedtoinvestigatethedifferencesindrivingangerevoked bythetrafficscenariosbetweenthetwodrivergroups.TheMANCOVAwasusedtoexamine whetherthemaineffectofbeingaprofessionalornon-professionaldrivermaintainedsignifi- cancewhentheinteractionsbetweenthegroupstatusanditsdemographicsweretakeninto consideration.ABox’sMtestwasconductedtoinvestigatethehomogeneityofthevariancein thecovariancematricesandrevealedthatthevarianceswereequal(F=1.62,p>0.05).Further- more,theoutcomeoftheMANCOVAindicatedthatthecovariatesofage,drivingexperience andmileageinthepastyearwerenotsignificant. Thespecificdifferencesindrivingangerbetweentheprofessionalandnon-professional driversarereportedinTable2.Thereweresignificantdifferencesinthetrafficobstructions subscale(F=4.47,p<0.05),thediscourtesysubscale(F=4.98,p<0.05)andthetotalscale scoresbetweenthetwogroups(F=5.26,p<0.05).Furthermore,thenon-professionalgroup reportedsignificantlyhigherlevelsofdrivingangerthantheprofessionalgroup.Theseresults providesupportforthefirsthypothesis,thatthereisasignificantdifferenceinthedriving angerexperiencedbyprofessionalandnon-professionaldrivers,andprofessionaldriversexperiencelessangeroverall. Relationshipsamongdrivinganger,demographicsandpreferredspeed APearson’scorrelationalanalysiswasperformedtoinvestigatethecorrelationsbetweenthe foursubscalesorthetotalscaleofdrivingangerandthedemographics,suchasage,driving experienceandmileageinthepastyear.InTable3,theleftcolumnprovidesinformation regardingtheprofessionaldrivers,andtherightcolumnprovidesinformationregardingthe non-professionaldrivers.Theprofessionaldrivers’age,drivingexperienceandmileageinthe pastyearwereweaklyandpositivelycorrelatedwiththedrivingangerscores.Thenon-professionaldrivers’ageandmileagewereweaklyandnegativelycorrelatedwithdrivinganger, whiledrivingexperiencewasweaklyandpositivelycorrelatedwithdrivinganger. Therelationshipsbetweendrivingangerandthedrivers’preferreddrivingspeedonthe threedifferentroadtypesarepresentedinTable3.Onexpressways,thepreferreddriving speedsofprofessionaldriversweresignificantlyandpositivelycorrelatedwithallsubscales andtheoveralldrivingangerscores.Onhighwaysandurbanroads,thepreferredspeedsofthe professionaldriversweresignificantlyandpositivelycorrelatedwithallsubscales,exceptfor PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 8/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger theillegaldrivingsubscale,andpositivelycorrelatedwiththeoveralldrivingangerscores.In thenon-professionaldrivergroup,onlythepreferreddrivingspeedonhighwaysdisplayeda significantcorrelationwiththeDASscores,exceptfortheillegaldrivingsubscale,whilethe othercorrelationswerenotsignificant.Asexpected,thenon-professionalandprofessional driverswhoreportedhigherspeedpreferencesonroadsaremorelikelytoexhibithigherlevels ofangerthanthedriverswhopreferredslowerspeeds. Drivinganger,TABPandtraitanger The232participantsweredividedintothreecategories,namely,typeA,middleandtypeB, accordingtotheevaluationcriteriaoftheTABP.One-wayanalysisofvariance(ANOVA)was conductedtoinvestigatethedifferenceindrivingangeramongthethreepersonalitytypes. Thepersonalitydifferencesinoverallanger(F(2,229)=4.36,p<0.05),angerevokedbytraffic obstructions(F(2,229)=4.59,p<0.05)andangerevokedbyslowdriving(F(2,229)=7.56, p<0.005)weresignificant.Then,theLeastSignificantDifference(LSD)methodofmultiple comparisonswasperformedtoconductpair-wisecomparisons,andtheresultsareshownin Table4.AdditionalposthoctestsindicatedthatthedriverswithatypeApersonalityreported significantlyhigherlevelsofdrivingangerthanthedriverswithatypeBpersonalityonthe trafficobstructionssubscale,slowdrivingsubscaleandthetotalscale.Interestingly,drivers withatypeApersonalityreportedsignificantlyhigherlevelsofdrivingangerthanthosewitha middlepersonalityonlywhenconfrontedwithslowdriving.Overall,driverswithtypeAper- sonalitiesexperiencedthehighestlevelsofanger,followedbythosewithmiddle-typepersonal- ities.ThedriverswhoexperiencedthelowestlevelsofdrivingangerwerethosewithtypeB personalities. APearsoncorrelationanalysiswascalculatedtotestthecorrelationsamongdrivinganger, typeAbehaviorpatternandtraitanger.InTable5,theleftcolumnsprovideinformation regardingtheprofessionaldrivers,andtherightcolumnsprovideinformationforthenon- professionaldrivers.Moderaterelationshipswerefoundintheprofessionaldriversbetween theCHsubscaleandtheDAS.However,THwassignificantlyandpositivelycorrelatedwith thetotalDASandthetrafficobstructionssubscale,suggestingthatprofessionaldriverswho hadhigherlevelsofTHwerelikelytobecomeangeredovertrafficobstructionsituations.The TABPwasfoundtobesignificantlyandpositivelycorrelatedatasmalltomoderatelevelwith eachdrivingangersubscale,particularlythetotalDAS,r=0.34,p<0.01.Additionally,thecor- relationbetweentheTABPandtraitangerwassignificant,r=0.38,p<0.01.Thesecorrelations suggestthatprofessionaldriverswithhighlevelsofTABPsarenotonlymorelikelytoexperi- enceangerbutalsomorelikelytoexperienceamoreprofoundfeelingofangerbothonthe roadandineverydaylife.Asexpected,asignificantlypositivecorrelationwasobserved Table4. Theresultsofthemultiplecomparisontests. Drivinganger TypeAN=114,M Middle TypeBN=79,M F N=39,M Trafficobstructions 2.92 2.75 2.53 4.59* Discourtesy 2.21 2.14 1.96 1.84 Illegaldriving 2.75 2.81 2.56 1.32 Slowdriving 2.23 1.95 1.78 7.56*** Totalscale 2.59 2.49 2.28 4.36* *p<0.05 ***p<0.005 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793.t004 PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 9/17 DrivingangeranditsrelationshipswithtypeAbehavioralpatternsandtraitanger Table5. Thecorrelationcoefficientsofdrivingangerandpersonalitytraits. Traffic Discourtesy Illegaldriving Slowdriving Totalscore obstructions Pro Non- Pro Non- Pro Non- Pro Non- Pro Non- pro pro pro pro pro TH 0.25** 0.15 0.16 0.07 0.13 0.09 0.16 0.23* 0.23** 0.15 CH 0.36** 0.04 0.19* 0.01 0.18* 0.01 0.29** 0.15 0.32** 0.05 TABP 0.37** 0.11 0.22* 0.04 0.20* 0.05 0.29** 0.21* 0.34** 0.11 TAS 0.47** 0.14 0.52** 0.21* 0.35** 0.07 0.43** 0.33** 0.55** 0.20* *p<0.05 **p<0.01 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793.t005 betweentraitangeranddrivinganger,r=0.55,p<0.01,indicatingthatprofessionaldrivers whoreportedhightraitangertendedtoproduceelevatedlevelsofdrivinganger. Innon-professionaldrivers,theTABPandTHsubscaledisplayedsignificantpositivecorre- lationswithdrivingangerevokedbyslowdriving,indicatingthatnon-professionaldrivers whoscoredhighonTHwereangered,ingeneral,oversituationsthatforcedthemtodrive slowly.OnlythetotalDASandthetwosubscalesofdiscourtesyandslowdrivingweresignifi- cantlyandpositivelycorrelatedwithtraitanger.Inparticular,therewasnosignificantcorrela- tionbetweenTABPandtraitanger.Therefore,thenon-professionalgroupwasnotincluded intheregressionanalyses. Hierarchicalmultipleregressionanalyses TodeterminewhetherTABPs,asanindependentvariable,exertanindirecteffectondriving angerbymediatingtheinfluenceoftraitangerinprofessionaldrivers,BaronandKenny’s[39] fourstepswereperformed.First,drivingangerwasregressedontoTABP.Asshownin Table6,asignificantlypositiverelationshipwasobservedbetweenTABPsanddrivingangerin Model1,whichsatisfiedstep1.Next,traitangerwasregressedontoTABP,andModel2 showedthatTABPsremainedasignificantpredictor,whichsatisfiedstep2.Then,driving angerwasregressedontoTABPandtraitangerinModel3.Asignificantandpositiverelation- shipwasobservedbetweendrivingangerandtraitanger,whichsatisfiedstep3.Thisfinding supporthypothesis2,thattraitangerandtypeAbehaviorpatternaresignificantlyrelated todrivingangerinbothgroups.Inthisfinalmodel,TABPwasnolongersignificant,thus Table6. Standardizedregressioncoefficients(β)inthehierarchicalmultipleregressionmodels. Model1 Model2 Model3 Drivinganger Traitanger Drivinganger TABP 0.273**** 0.375**** 0.094 Traitanger 0.493**** R 0.273 0.375 0.535 R2 0.074 0.141 0.286 F(1,130)=10.46*** F(1,127)=20.76**** F(2,126)=25.27**** ***p<0.005 ****p<0.001 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793.t006 PLOSONE|https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189793 December18,2017 10/17

Driving anger and its relationships with type A behavior patterns and trait anger

Similar Driving anger and its relationships with type A behavior patterns and trait anger