Report 2
My Report on Driving Psychology
By Kelley Graves
Instructions for this report are at:
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409a-g25-report2.htm
I am answering Questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 for extra points.
Dr. Leon James,
December 2006
Aloha!
My name is Kelley Graves and I am currently enrolled in Dr. Leon James’
Driving Psychology course at the
My Report on the Previous Generation.
After choosing any four of Generation 20’s
reports I am going to answer the following questions about them:
(i) How do their reports differ from your report?
(ii) How is the theory or content similar?
(iii) How do you evaluate their level of
understanding of driving psychology?
(iv) What advice do you have about the generational
curriculum?
The first report I reviewed was by Jenny Arakaki and can be found at http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409as2004/arakaki/report1.htm
.
(i)Differences: I
noticed right away that her report is drastically shorter than my own. Jenny’s report is titled ‘theory and
application’ so I am sure this means that our reports are not based on the
exact same material. The (ii)content in our reports are different also. She begins by describing our society as being
fast pace and then immediately goes into definitions. Her definitions are very descriptive of the
key words she chose to use. I (iii)evaluate her understanding of driving psychology as
being at a decent level. Due to the
shortness of her report and her lack of elaboration it is hard to say for
sure. By reading her key word
definitions I can assume that she at least understands the key concepts of the
course. My (iv)advice
would be to give some sort of heading before each section to help the reader
understand the transitions and what the author is trying to cover in each
section.
The second report I reviewed was by Ikue Fukushima and it can be found at http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409as2004/fukushima/report2.htm
.
(i)Differences: Her paper is
very different from mine because the above link is for Ikue’s
driving personality makeover. This is
where a student performs appropriate steps, either on himself, or on a friend,
in an attempt to replace aggressive driving behaviors with supportive
ones. (ii)Similarities: Our reports are similar in that I cover the
AWM three-step process in my report in question number 4. Her report on this process is far more in
depth than mine. (iii) I evaluate his level of understanding of driving
psychology to be fairly great. She
takes great care in describing each part of each step in his report. She shows that he has knowledge of the
subject by using important key terms correctly throughout his paper. (iv)My advice
about the generational curriculum would be no not list out the exact
questions that were answered “yes” to on the checklists. If the reader did not have prior knowledge of
the checklists and their purpose then this part could be confusing.
The third report I reviewed was by Hiroko
Kikuchi and it can be found at http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409as2004/kikuchi/report%201.htm
.
(i)Differences: Hiroko’s
paper begins with a preface which explains the purpose of the paper as well as
her intentions with it. Much like the
first report I reviewed, Hiroko jumps straight into definitions. It is very helpful that she provided links to
where she found the definition so that the reader can go back and do further
research if they did not understand something.
(ii)Similarities: Our
papers both cover some of the same topics such as the driver’s threefold self,
self-witnessing, and newsgroups. (iii) I evaluate her understanding as
being very good. She seems to be able to
express ideas about the course with confidence and she does a great job of
documenting and providing links for her work.
(iv)Advice: She maybe could have elaborated a little more
on some of the descriptions; but overall, I think that Hiroko did a great job
of covering the required information in her report.
The fourth report I reviewed was by Jeremy
Kubo and it can be found at http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/409as2004/kubo/report1.htm
.
(i)Differences: Jeremy’s
report is on theory and application.
Just like Hiroko and my first review, the paper begins with a preface
(except this one is very long). After
explaining the purpose of the assignment he continued by defining the key words
of the course. (ii) Similarities:
We covered some of the same materials in our papers such as the driver’s
threefold self, self witnessing, road rage, and news groups. His paper briefly touches on those above as
well as many more key terms that are not covered in my paper. (iii)I evaluate his understanding of
driving psychology to be great. He has a
lengthy preface explaining some information that he has come across in other
people’s reports and his definitions are precise with helpful links after
appropriate ones. (iv) Advice: As I just stated, he has a very lengthy
preface and introduction. It may be
helpful if he could break it up into a few different sections.
The
question I am answering is QUESTION 1.
(a) Contrast our two textbooks: Road Rage and
Aggressive Driving (James and Nahl), and Driving
Lessons: Exploring Systems That Make Traffic Safer (Peter Rothe, Editor). Name some ways they are similar, and some
ways they are different. Would either text be suitable for high school
students?
(b) Discuss in what way these ideas can help solve
society's driving problems. Be specific: describe the main problems (use some
statistics) and how can particular ideas in these two books help solve those problems.
(c) Describe the reactions of friends when you tell them
about driving personality makeovers and its psychological and social context.
ANSWER:
(a) our two textbooks: Road Rage and Aggressive Driving
(James and Nahl), and Driving Lessons: Exploring
Systems That Make Traffic Safer (Peter Rothe,
Editor). Name some ways they are similar, and some ways they are different.
Would either text be suitable for high school students?
First I will give a brief overview of the two books,
and then give their similarities and differences. The Driving
Lessons book is divided into three main parts each consisting of six to
seven chapters. The first section of the
book is “Personal Sub-Systems”. Personal
Sub-Systems consist of the Health Sub-System, the Social Sub-System, and the
Cultural Sub-System. It is explained
that psychologists see driving health as the driver’s ability to cope with the
mental processing of the traffic environment, other road users, and personal
levels of confidence, skill and problem-solving
The Health Sub-System states that the promotion of
health and our response to injury form a vital system that affects people’s
everyday lives. This deals with social
and political concerns as well as people’s individual relationships. Health directly affects traffic. The Social Sub-System
states that since humans are social beings that we discover ourselves through
the presence of and the cooperation with others. The point of this section is that we need to
treat our fellow drivers with the same respect and courtesy as we would show
our friends, family, and loved ones. The
Cultural Sub-System says that driving is a sort of culturally unifying
force. When someone gets behind the
wheel they presume that other drivers have similar backgrounds, experiences,
needs, values, and behavior patterns.
The second section is Institutional Sub-Systems. This section is divided up into Economic,
Legal, Media, and Educational Sub-Systems.
Society is held together by the institutions that we grant the authority
to represent our interests with a voice that individuals do not have. The Institutional Sub-System examines how
traffic safety is affected by the day-to-day interactions of institutions and
individuals, and the resulting social organization.
The Economic Sub-System discusses the importance of
cooperation between everyone in society, from the individuals and their
insurance premiums, to the auto mechanics looking for a profit, to the civic
governments seeking cost effective transportation, all the way up to
transportation-based corporations. The
Legal Sub-System is an institution concerned with enforcing the laws of the
road and making sure that people obey them.
This sub-system includes mainly the police, judges, and attorneys.
The Media Sub-System explains that the media is a
large authority of social communication and it plays a huge hand in
contributing to the function or dysfunction of the roadway system. The Educational Sub-System deals with the
education of drivers. It discusses how,
in the past, driving education has not been taken seriously by the students but
has recently regained its strength with the use of new learning tactics.
The third and final section in this book is the
Technical Sub-Section. It focuses on the
environment in which roadways and drivers are in. It states the importance of road design by
engineers to provide maximum safety. It
also brings up the point that a driver should ‘master’ his or her vehicle, not
just be in control of it.
The Road Rage book is divided into three parts with
several sub topics each. Part one is
“The Conflict Mentality”. It discusses
how large of a problem Road Rage really is throughout the whole world. It discusses driver’s mental health, the way
that most people do not realize they are being aggressive and how that can
actually make them ‘driving impaired’.
This section covers defensive driving and the crucial effects of peer
pressure. Finally it describes different
types of road rage problems such as being passive-aggressive, being an
automotive vigilante, using verbal road rage, and the tendency toward epic road
rage.
Part two is “Driving Psychology”. This section introduces the idea of emotional
intelligence and how to achieve it. It
covers the three step AWM (Acknowledge, Witness, Modify) driver
self-improvement program and how to follow through each step effectively. It brings up the issue of children learning
road rage at a young age from their parents.
Lastly, this section describes what a Supportive driver is and how to
become one, and the concept of Lifelong Driver Education. This is the idea that education should start
at a very young age and continue long after a driver obtains their
license.
The third section of this book is titled “The Future
of Driving”. It refers to the aggressive
driving problem and the need for it to stop as ‘The War Against Aggressive
Driving’, which discusses the different levels of society that are teaming up
to put an end to the problem. It
discusses speed limits, their need, purpose, and speed traps. The book ends with a section on driver
realities, which deals with image and all of the distractions found behind the
wheel.
Similarities:
Both books are unique in that they are based on a
topic which has not been approached in such an aggressive manner before. Most people do not even realize that
aggressive driving is quite the problem that it is in society today. Both books bring up different kinds of
problems that people face on the road every day and then give solutions to the
problems.
Differences
The books are different in that the Road Rage book
takes more of a ‘hands on’ approach by giving lots of precise examples to each
issue and it invites the reader to participate in the exercises. It allows the reader to adapt the material to
his or her own driving type and seek out problems. It gives step by step methods to correct
aggressive problems and explains that change does take time.
The Driving Lessons book is set up differently. It is composed by many different authors who
give their personal account to the different chapter. This can be helpful because it allows the
reader to have many different points of view.
This book seems to take a more passive stance to correcting the road
rage problem than the other book.
Suitable
for High School
I feel that both texts are suitable for high
school students. I would recommend them
to read the Driving Lessons book first to get a general idea of the topic, then follow up with Road Rage. The Road Rage book would take the information
they were given and then focus it in on the different aspects of road rage and
aggression. It divides the information
up in a way that it could be treated like a regular classroom text book and
there could easily be tests derived from the chapters.
(b) Discuss in what way these ideas can help solve
society's driving problems. Be specific: describe the main problems (use some
statistics) and how can particular ideas in these two books help solve those problems.
Society’s
driving problems
These ideas can help solve, maybe even
eliminate society’s driving problems because education is the key. If people are not aware that there is a
problem then there is no way for them to fix it. Nearly everyone I talk to (people not in this
course) have never even contemplated there being a
class called Driving Psychology. When I
give a brief explanation of the course they laugh and ask if it is really about road rage. No one takes the thought of road rage and
aggressive driving seriously. If people
are educated on the problem and they are given ways to fix it then road rage
could become a thing of the past.
Main
Problems
There are huge problems associated with
driving aggressively, for one; billions of U.S. dollars are spent every year
because of car accidents ($150 billion in 1996 alone). As I was saying before, people simply don’t
realize that there is a problem. When
given a survey and asked to rate their driving ability on a scale of 1 to 10
with one being poor and 10 being excellent, most people rated themselves as an
8, 9, or 10. In this same survey 75% of
them confess to driving aggressively often.
There is obviously something wrong with this picture. People assume that they are great drivers even
when they admit to driving aggressively.
(Statistics from this paragraph are from Road Rage and Aggressive
Driving).
Books
can help solve the problem
These books show that there is indeed a
problem. They shock the reader into
reality with their death and cost statistics.
The ideas that these two books present are key facts on how to put an
end to aggressive driving. There is the
idea of applying the AWM approach to the three different levels of the
threefold self. There is the need for an
increase of driver’s education and the introduction of Lifelong driver’s
education. If drivers can take the
advice from these books and apply them to their current driving habits then I
believe that the driving problems can be drastically reduced.
The
question I am answering is QUESTION 2:
(a) Search Google News section, for "road
rage." Describe what you see. Is it a general phenomenon? How do you
react?
(b) How do you explain what's going on -- using driving
psychology theory. Connect what you found in the news with the problems and
solutions you discuss in Question 1.
(c) Tell your friends about what you found. Describe
their reaction.
ANSWER:
(a) Search Google News section, for "road
rage." Describe what you see. Is it a general phenomenon? How do you
react?
The first article I came across was about an
incident in
The second article I read was actually a
murder case because a road rage victim was killed after being dragged under a
car in
The next article I looked at was from
I
feel that road rage is in fact a general phenomenon/ Reactions
I only speak of a few of the articles here,
but there were dozens and dozens of pages about road rage. It occurred anywhere from
Even after being educated on the subject it
is still hard to read about such violence escalading from driving. It is still hard to believe that a person can
become so enraged behind the wheel that they feel it is necessary to take
another driver’s life. Granted, these
are extreme cases were fatalities are a part of them, but the do happen.
(b) How do you
explain what's going on -- using driving psychology theory. Connect what you
found in the news with the problems and solutions you discuss in Question 1.
Explanation
The only way that I can explain what is going
on to cause such aggressive and violent actions is
that we are living in the age of rage.
We grow up to seeing our parents drive aggressively, throughout
childhood we are filled with violent media coverage and programming. Even children’s cartoons have violent and
aggressive plots. Violence becomes a
part of our subconscious. Movies and
video games are becoming ever more violent.
There are certain driving games, such as Grand Theft Auto, that further
enforce aggressive driving in adolescents.
Young people now a day are simply not taught patience and respect. We are the age of disrespect as well.
We are living in an age where we are highly
mobile and our cars are an extension of our ‘self’. Or at least that’s how we feel. If someone threatens our vehicle we take it
personally. In the same instance, we
feel protected by our vehicles and therefore become braver when behind the
wheel. We may act in ways that we would
normally never even contemplate if we were interacting with others face to
face.
Solution
As a solution, I think that people should
realize that they are the same person behind the wheel that they are when
standing in a public place. People
should be conscious of their actions toward others while driving just the same
as if they were in a room full of people.
Also, drivers need to be conscious of how other drivers feel. They need to be aware of how their actions
behind the wheel are affecting others.
It is important for drivers to understand and be able to predict
different events that occur on the road ways.
(c) Tell your
friends about what you found. Describe their reaction.
I told all three of my room mates about the
road rage news articles I read and at first they were a little reluctant to
react. They all agreed that it was “crazy”
that things like that actually happen.
Then they began sharing stories of road rage that they had heard either
on a television program, on the radio, or by word of mouth. Each story was told as if it were some far
fetched tale that the listener would probably not believe.
I relayed some of the information from this
class to them and told them some of the main ideas we have been learning
about. I explained that road rage and
aggressive driving actually occur much more often than they though. After this they all agreed that there is an
epidemic and that we need to find a solution before it is too late.
The
question I am answering is QUESTION 3:
(a) Select some student reports at www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/499s2003/newsgroups
Discuss your reactions to what they did – their ideas, their method, and their
explanations. What did they gain from doing their reports? How do their ideas
influence what you yourself think about these issues?
(b) Now go to Google Groups search and type in
"driving". See if you can corroborate the conclusions of the student
reports which were done several years ago. Is this still going on the same way?
ANSWER:
(a) The student
reports that I chose to review for this section are as follows:
(i)
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/499s2003/newsgroups/newsgroups12.html
(ii) http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/499s2003/newsgroups/newsgroups11.html
(iii) http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/499s2003/newsgroups/newsgroups10.html
(i) Ideas: The author of
this news report paper is anonymous so I will refer to him as a masculine
Anon. He had never even known of the
existence of news groups before this assignment and therefore he had no real
set ideas of what it would be like or what to expect. I simply decided to go through and find
things that caught his eye and then read further into them. It seemed that he actually ended up getting
very interested in some of the different article topics.
(i)Method: Anon searched
different news groups and when he found one that he liked he would simply copy
and paste that particular part of the page onto his report. After this he made a ‘conclusions’ section at
the bottom of the page that included a brief summary of the news group in his
own words. It also included any thoughts
that he had about the individual articles.
He did not have any real rhyme or reason as to which articles he chose. He simply went through and looked at the news
groups that caught his eye and then he read into them. He included articles about everything from
Yoga, to singles ads, to the NBA. He
always had something enthusiastic to say about each of the news groups and
their content.
(i)Explanation: At the end of
his conclusion sections (following each article) he would give a brief overall
thought on the article and he would try to connect the general message so that
it applies to everyday life. He noted
that people seem to be less inhibited when conversing through virtual means
such as these news groups. He also noted
that people seem more likely to give advice to others because people are more
likely to ask for help and advice when it is less personal than speaking with
someone face to face.
(i)What
did they gain? I think Anon
gained a new engine for information. He
now understands how news groups work and he feels
confident in using them to gain knowledge, experience, and maybe friends. He gained a valuable source of information
that he can use throughout his life. It is
a positive way to learn new things without being embarrassed to ask about
subjects that may be uncomfortable with a peer or mentor.
(i)How
do their ideas influence what I think about these issues? This is also my first experience with news groups and
I was surprised at the variety of topics that are out there especially since he
covered a dozen in just one report. I
liked the way he related different ideas to real life and how he found ways to
apply the positive messages he found.
His ideas did not really influence how I think on any of those
particular issues; however, I did enjoy reading his perspective on how
Americans like to make fun of themselves in an article
he referenced on Bill Clinton.
(ii) Idea: The second news report, titled “Attitudes Driving Newsgroups”, is by
Shehla Korff.
Shehla seemed to already have a general idea as to what newsgroups are
and how they work. She stated her
purpose which was to discuss the psychology of Newsgroups.
(ii)Method: Shehla
took a completely different approach to news groups than the first person’s
report I covered. Shehla focused her
entire study on a single post to a news group.
She logged onto something more like a community forum where there is a
topic posted and a question asked, then members are allowed to post responses
to the question or to other comments.
She chose a race oriented topic which originally came from a disk jockey
who make a racial comment referring to the murder of a
black man by a white man in
(ii)Explanation: Shehla explained that the reason she chose to use one topic
and follow the common thread, which included a total of 19 postings, is to be
able to show how the virtual community is really built. She felt that by choosing many different
postings consisting of different topics that it is not possible to understand
how the community aspect of these groups really works. She notes that there is a hierarchy and dominance
within the virtual community. Shehla
points out were some people post responses several times and attack other
members verbally while others are more submissive and only offer a neutral
comment and then do not post back when they are ridiculed.
(ii)What did they gain? I think that
Shehla gained a deeper understanding of how newsgroups work. She set out with an idea and then followed
through with it. Although some of her
reactions were repetitive of the post she was discussing, she had some good
points and comments about the members of the group. She concluded that Newsgroups are not so
different than every day life discussions in that there are some people with
certain decisions that just tend to dominate the floor, while other people only
speak to hear their own voice, and others still simply back down from their
stance at the first sign of resistance.
(ii)How do their ideas influence what I think about
these issues? Shehla’s ideas about
the issue she covered did not have any significant affect on me. Her opinions were heavy with psychological
theory and observances and she really did not have a lot of personal
statements. She did help me realize the
same thing that she learned: that virtual communities are filled with people of all
calibers just like regular society.
There are the loud mouths who pop off and are disrespectful who disrupt
the flow of daily life, there are the minorities that get offended, there are
the bullies that push their opinion on everyone else, there are the know-nothings
who add nothing but static to the issue, and there are the meek quiet ones who
just try to stay out of the issue at hand till it blows over.
(iii)
Ideas: The author of
this report is Alex Lactaotao. Alex is the only person, so far, that I have
seen using road rage as his news group topic.
He varies a little by including an article on youth violence, drug
addiction, and online affairs. Other
than these he sticks to the general idea of road rage.
(iii)Method:
He copies and pastes single
posts from news group members onto his page and then gives a description of
what the post’s message is. After this,
he gives his reaction to each of them (there are ten in total). In nearly all of his reactions, he begins by
saying that he agrees with the person who made the original post. He talks about the points of the post that he
supports and the parts that he feels do no have any factual basis. He also supports people’s opinions on the
thought that society needs to make a change in order to put an end to all of
the violence, aggression, and rage that is so prevalent today.
(iii)Explanation: Alex gave no
final reaction to the articles as a whole; however, he did comment on the
assignment. In the end he had very
strong feelings toward some of the articles compared to the others. For example, the article on
drunk driving. He strongly feels
that drinking and driving is an inexcusable act. He, along with the author of the post, feel that the penalties for drunk driving should be
drastically increased.
(iii)What did they gain? He explained
that he was timid at first about participating in news groups, but after doing
this assignment he feels that he has gained an asset and that this will not be
the last time he is involved with a news group.
He gained a sense of self while writing his reactions to the articles
because he was forced to take a stance and express his opinion, whether it is
for or against the article.
(iii)How do their ideas influence what I think about
these issues? Once again I do not feel that Alex’s ideas had
a great influence on the way I think about these issues. Some of the articles include very powerful
feelings about certain issues and is it moving to read how passionate someone
feels about something close to them. Two
of the articles that struck me a little is the one
about drunk driving and the one pertaining to youth violence. I enjoyed these two because the author began
by having an opinion that I had not thought of before. I enjoyed reading the articles that he chose
and I also found his personal reactions interesting but overall I don’t feel
that I was influenced by them.
(b) Now go to
Google Groups search and type in "driving". See if you can
corroborate the conclusions of the student reports which were done several
years ago. Is this still going on the same way?
After searching the Google Groups I found
many different articles dealing with aggressive driving. Since only one of the Newsgroup reports I
chose to cover discussed topics related to driving I do not have a good basis
to form an opinion on whether or not the groups are similar to what they used
to be. I can only assume that things are
still going the same way because if there had been any sort of drastic change I
think we would know about it. It
something had happened that influenced aggressive driving and road rage in such
a way that the articles posted from a few years ago differed much from those
that are from today then it would have had to be an even that we would all know
about. Since society still seems to have
their head in the sand, and does not realize how huge a problem road rage is
becoming, I can conclude that if there is any change in the past few years that
it has been a slight increase in aggressive driving occurrences.
The
question I am answering is QUESTION NUMBER 4.
(a) Consider Table 4 in the Lecture Notes at www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409a-g25-lecture-notes.htm#Charts
Read the Section titled "The AWM Approach in Driver
Self-Modification" where Table 4 is located. In your own words
summarize what it is about.
(b) Now select the norms that characterize your
threefold self as a driver, passenger, or pedestrian.
(c) Try the AWM procedure on at least two trips or
episodes. What is your conclusion? How can this approach be promoted in our
society?
ANSWER:
(a) Read the
Section titled "The AWM Approach in Driver Self-Modification" where
Table 4 is located. In your own words summarize what it is about.
“The
AWM Approach in Driver Self-Modification” is the process of Acknowledging that
there is a problem, Witnessing yourself perform the particular problematic
action, and then making an effort to Modify the behavior into a more appropriate
one.
Another thing to be aware of when using the
AWM approach is that the problem habit you are trying to change may not be
modified as easy as you think. People
have different behavioral domains and a problem may exist and the most
primitive domain, requiring much more effort to change the action. There is the Affective self, the Cognitive
self, and the Sensorimotor
self. The Affective self is the driver’s
feelings and motivations maintained behind the wheel. The Cognitive self is the thinking and
reasoning that we do behind the wheel. And
the Sensorimotor self is the sensations, perceptions,
and motor acts that we perform behind the wheel.
A driver can drive for years and never know
that he or she has a problem with their driving habits. It may take an outside source to point out an
aggressive or undesirable action to the person, it may take the person being
involved in some sort of accident before they realize it, or maybe they could
simply just one day observe someone else performing the exact same act and be
upset about it. Hopefully no one has to
be involved in an accident in order to find out they have a problem but
sometimes that is how it happens. A
passenger can point out that the driver, for example, does not use their
blinkers. This is the first step of the
process.
Once the driver is aware that there is an
undesirable act being performed then he or she can witness themselves
performing the act. This may happen with
assistance of the passenger pointing it out whenever it happens so that the
driver becomes completely aware of how often and when the act occurs. The driver will be able to observe his or her
own actions and take note.
Once the driver is fully aware of the
problem and has witnessed himself doing it, the last step is to modify the
action. The driver should practice at
every opportunity to correct the action.
The ‘Modify’ step of this process can take anywhere from one single
drive down to road, or it could take months, maybe even a lifetime to correct a
bad habit. The point is to continuously
practice modifying the act in order to change the natural response in the
Affective Self which was causing the bad habit to begin with. With enough repetition any action can be
modified.
(b) Now select
the norms that characterize your threefold self as a driver, passenger, or
pedestrian.
As a driver I think of myself as
supportive. In all three areas of self I
try to exhibit confidence, awareness, and openness.
The affective level deals
with a person’s feelings and emotions.
It includes the motivations and sensations that a driver feels behind
the wheel. It is the non physical acts
which a person unconsciously has while performing different driving tasks. I avoid feelings of aggression and anger
toward other drivers on the road, and I promote a feeling of calm and serenity
to myself and others inside my vehicle.
I feel responsible for my actions while driving. I regret any aggressive impulses and I get a
sense of well being as a result of friendly encounters or actions.
The cognitive level has to
do with a person’s thinking and reasoning that occurs while driving. This is the actual thought process that
occurs throughout driving, the play by play events that occur spark the cognitive
self’s process. I try to be self blaming. Instead of thinking that fellow drivers are
to blame for the different traffic incidents that occur I think more self
critically. I think objectively while
analyzing different driving situations.
I analyzing personal behaviors as well as the behaviors of others and I
am consciously aware of the thought process.
The
sensorimotor level is the sensations, perceptions,
and acts a person commits while engaging in driving. This is the actual physical reactions that a
person has behind the wheel. This level
is a culmination of the first two in that your physical actions are based off
of your emotional and thinking processes.
I avoid aggressive actions such as crowding or swearing. I avoid tailgating and cutting people
off. I behave supportively on the
road. I act cooperatively and
courteously while driving. I try to
anticipate what other drivers needs’ will be
(c) Try the AWM
procedure on at least two trips or episodes. What is your conclusion? How can
this approach be promoted in our society?
In my Report 1 I performed my own “Driver
Personality Makeover Plan” where I was required to use the AWM approach to try
to modify a behavior. In my experiment I
focused on a single aspect of my driving that I felt needed to be
modified. I discovered this negative
habit on my own, no one needed to point it out to me.
AWM
Procedure
The first step, Acknowledge, occurred during
busy traffic while having a passenger in the vehicle with me. My aggressive driving habit was, if I have a
passenger and the radio is not on, I become aggravated easily and exhibit
aggressive behaviors such as changing lanes irrationally and not letting people
in in front of me.
I Witnessed myself performing this action
several times and then took steps to Modify it.
I would monitor my level of aggression and edgyness
and when I began to feel frustrated I would turn on the radio (which calmed
me).
Once I became aware of my problem and
witnessed myself doing it I had no problem taking the necessary steps to modify
my actions. After repeating the
modification step over several trips I do not even have to use the radio as a
calming device anymore because I am aware of my problem and I am prepared for
its onset.
Conclustion
My conclusion is that the AWM approach to
self modification really works. I feel
that with enough practice a person can eventually modify all of their
aggressive tendencies and replace them with supportive actions.
Promotion
These actions can be promoted in our society
through education. This AWM process
needs to be taught in driver’s education courses and it should be reintroduced
often. Public service announcements
could relay this message to the population, or when drivers go in to renew
their license they could be given a pamphlet on the AWM approach. It could be given out at the DMV when people
first enter the door and this will provide perfect time for them to review the
information because there is always a long line.
The question I am answering is QUESTION NUMBER 5.
(a) Our textbook Road Rage and Aggressive Driving
has checklist exercises in several chapters. Have a friend do the following
four exercises:
(i) Exercise on Aggressive Thoughts
and Feelings on p. 65-66
(ii) Exercise on Are You an Aggressive Competitor on p. 104-5
(iii) Exercise on Positive Driving Behaviors on p. 212-3
(iv) Exercise on Your Passive Aggressive Road Rage Tendency on p. 88-9
(b) Discuss the results with your friends. How do you
explain the results? Where did they get this style of reacting and driving? How
do they help you understand some principles of driving psychology mentioned in
the book?
(c) Discuss how this activity helps you to become more
aware of yourself as a driver
ANSWER:
(b) Discuss the
results with your friends. How do you
explain the results?
I had
my best friend, Valerie, do the four checklist exercises. I chose Valerie because she has an
unpredictable fluctuation of different driving attitudes. One day she can be easy going and incredibly
courteous and the next day she can have a bad attitude toward other drivers and
get aggravated very easily. Also, I
chose her because I have spent countless hours riding shot-gun while she drives
and I would know if she was lying about her answers. (I did not want to have someone doing the
checklists that may have felt the need to be dishonest about their
answers.) She was very happy to help out
with my report and she was a little surprised by some of her answers.
(i) The first check list, Exercise on Aggressive Thoughts and Feelings, had
three sections within it. The first
section is ‘Fantasies of Retaliation and Revenge’. The only ones she answered “yes” to in this
section were the questions pertaining to slowing down when someone is
tailgating you, becoming very edgy while driving if you’ve had a stressful day,
and not liking passengers to tell you how to drive. I have witnessed all of these actions. She becomes aggressive when she feels that
she is being attacked in some way. The
slowing down when someone tailgates is a defense mechanism to someone driving
too closely to her for her comfort and she knows, from experience, that if she
slows down the person behind her will do the same or pass.
As for becoming edgy because of having a bad
day, I have tried to explain to her (while the aggressive driving is going on)
that the other drivers are not ‘out to get her’ and that they are driving the
same as always, it just seems that the only people on the road are idiots. Sometimes this can calm her down and she
will apologize for driving erratically, but sometimes it causes her to become
more angered and she will lash out at me as well. I can change the subject to something
pleasant or funny, or I can suggest getting some food and this also works
sometimes to calm her actions.
The second part of this checklist deals with
‘High-Pressure Driving and Competition’.
There were only a few that she answered yes to: being a ‘gap-closer’, having no patience and
tailgating when in a hurry, and ‘respectfully saluting’ careless drivers. Valerie grew up in a small town and we don’t
have an interstate or highway larger than a 4 lane. There is only one real place to merge in the
entire town and it never gets congested.
When we go out of town for shopping trips Valerie would always suggest
that someone else drive but I would insist that she be behind the wheel because
she needs the practice. Merging and
gap-closing is not the easiest of concepts to grasp so once she gets in her
perspective lane she tries to make sure that no one else gets in front of
her. I think that it could be a
defensive reaction because she is uncertain of her abilities in that
situation.
It is interesting that she tailgates slow
drivers when she is in a hurry since she answered ‘yes’ to being a person who
purposely slows down when people tailgate her.
I’m sure lots of people do this and the never realize that others may
think the same way that they do. As for
saluting careless drivers by flipping them off where they can’t see you, she
does this often. Mostly she will slap
her steering wheel or make a loud grunting noise instead, but it’s all the same
(reacting where other driver’s can’t see your actions).
The last part of this checklist has to do
with ‘Impulsive and Reckless Driving’.
One that she answered ‘yes’ to could be misinterpreted because listening
to loud music, in her case, has nothing to do with how she is driving. She loves to sing, horribly, and singing as
loud as she can while driving is enjoyable for her and entertainment to anyone
with her. She will carefully set the cruise
before cranking up her favorite Mariah Carrey song.
She answered yes to running yellow lights
when in a rush and driving even though she is tired. Valerie’s house is nearly an hour from town
so when she comes into town it is an all day event. Even if it is late she still has to make the
long drive back home but she swears that having a Mountain Dew and cranking up
the music makes the drive not so bad and keeps her awake. The last one she answered ’yes’ to is the one
about still driving even if you have had a few drinks. She answered this in a low, embarrassed
voice.
(ii) The second checklist was ‘Exercise on Are You an Aggressive Competitor’. She only answered ‘yes’ to two of these
statements: thinking that a driver who
did not let you into their lane, causing you to miss your exit, did it on
purpose, and not driving with other’s drivers’ feelings in mind- not worrying
about how your irrational driving may make other drivers angry. She tends to take driving situations
personally when she is the ‘victim’ but not when she is the aggressor. The does not intentionally aggravate other
drivers with her actions and she is surprised if another driver honks at her
because of her driving. Sometimes when
another driver gives an ugly look at her when they pass she mumbles something
rude about them under her breath. It
doesn’t occur to her that the other driver probably had a reason to be
upset.
(iii) The third checklist, ‘Exercise on Positive Driving Behaviors’, is different
than the others. It is not a checklist
of actions that you do, but actions that you would be willing to adopt in order
to improve your driving. She wanted me
to explain to any potential readers that the reason she was not willing to
adopt some of the driving suggestions is because she does not have a problem
with that to begin with, and she already does these actions. She seemed to hesitate before answering a few
of them which showed her reluctance to change and be more altruistic. The ones that she hesitated for are” driving with greater awareness; understanding
the difference in people’s expectations in the left and right lanes;
consciously managing following distance to keep it safe, following the three
second rule. She felt this is a lot of
stuff to do that seems a little unnecessary.
She said she tries to follow the three second rule but thinks it’s a
little strange to try to figure out other people’s expectations.
Another habit that she was willing to adopt,
after some hesitation, was: giving up a ‘laissez-faire” attitude toward other
drivers, such as “What’s happening to that driver is not my problem”. She decided that she does already kind of do
that because if there is an elderly driver who seems to be having some
difficulty she will be accommodating.
She said she would be willing to try to extend that courtesy to other
drivers.
(iv) The last check list is titled “Exercise on Your Passive Aggressive Road Rage Tendency”. She said ‘yes’ to all but one of the examples
of passive resistance. The only one she
did not claim is “showing sufficient alertness or consideration to drivers and
conditions”. I pointed this out to her
and I suggested that all of these passive aggressive actions could be
considered road rage. She did not agree
with me, but I did manage to convince her that being a passive aggressive
driver causes road problems, and it can cause other drivers to become
aggravated with her. She holds the
attitude that if she is not in a hurry then she should not have to speed and
accommodate other drivers who are.
(c) Discuss how
this activity helps you to become more aware of yourself as a driver.
By pointing out the different things that a
person does makes them aware of their actions as they may not have previously
known. Being aware of your actions is
the first step in making any changes.
Some people just assume that they do everything right and don’t self
evaluate or ask for advice. If someone
asks you to participate in a checklist then you give honest answers and you may
find that the end result is not what you expected.
Once you are aware that there is something
going on that is in need of a change then you will be on the look out for that
particular action to come up again. If
you are alert and you can witness yourself performing the act then you can observe
what everyone else sees. After observing
yourself several times you become accustomed to when and what exactly triggers
the particular action and you can be prepared for it.
The last step is to modify your action. If you are aware of what you are doing and
you know when it is going to happen then all you have to do is change it. For example, my friend Valerie used to have a
problem with taking off slowly from green lights. She was always scared that someone in the
cross lane would run their light and she would have a wreck. After pointing this out to her and explaining
that the drivers behind her were getting aggravated she slowly began to
change. At first when a light turned
green I would say ‘green’ to make her aware and she would go. Then she started to go as soon as the light
turned without having me prompt her.
Also, because of this she does not get angry when someone in front of
her does not go immediately when the light turns green.
Personally, this exercise helped me better
myself as a driver because while I am reading out the check lists and going
over responses I think of my own driving habits. It is especially helpful if I suffer from the
same aggressive driving problem because then we can discuss the issue and go
over why we do it and how to fix it.
Also, just helping other people understand their aggressive driving
tendencies helps to reinforce what I have learned in this class about the
three-fold self and the three step AWM method to reduce aggressive
driving. Repetition is the key.
(for extra points**) The question I am answering is QUESTION
7
(a) Find a road rage newspaper story on the Web that
gives enough detail that you can reconstruct the interactions between the
people involved. Now do a scenario analysis of events. The Road Rage and
Aggressive Driving book gives some examples (see the Book Index under
"Scenario analysis:. There is also an example in
the Lecture Notes in the Section on Charts at Table 7 -- see
www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy25/409a-g25-lecture-notes.htm#Charts
(b) Try to reconstruct the interactions by making a list
or table of the steps, as illustrated in our textbook. Apply driving psychology
principles to explain what's going on at each step and how it influences the
outcome
The news article I used can be found
at: http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=211707
|
Emotionally challenged behavior |
Segment from newspaper |
State how each step contributes to trouble |
Suggest smarter behavior |
|
Should have been paying closer
attention to the road in order to maintain
control of the vehicle |
“There was a black Honda City in front of me. I applied my brakes, but my car just grazed the Honda” |
The trouble all begins when the
driver of the first car is unable to maintain control and
hits the Honda. |
Firstly, the driver should not
have hit the other car. |
|
The driver should have assessed
himself to make sure things are ok and
then call the police if there is something
wrong |
“The driver of the Honda got down and came towards me” |
The driver of the Honda approaches
Piyush and this can be seen as an aggressive and
threatening gesture. |
The driver of the Honda should
have stayed in his car until he was able to
calm down and realize that it was probably an
accident. |
|
The driver could have waited
patiently for Piyush to exit his own vehicle after assessing himself |
The driver reportedly asked Piyush to roll down his window |
The driver proceeds to crowd Piyush and becomes more demanding and threatening. |
The driver should have waited
calmly by his own vehicle and Piyush should have assessed the situation to determine if it was
safe for him to exit his car. |
|
The driver becomes controlled by
rage and acts irrationally and
violently without warning |
He delivered three blows on my
face |
The driver is unable to control
his actions and physically attacks the other driver. At this point the situation is out of control. |
The two men should not have been
in this situation to begin with but
certainly any other act than violence would be suitable. |
|
She should have realized that
nothing would be solved by her getting out. |
The attacker’s employer also stepped out of the Honda |
This makes the scenario two to
one. She enters the scene with the intention of being
violent and the situation becomes more threatening as she
approaches. |
The passenger should have
never gotten involved in the situation
and should have stayed seated in the car |
|
The innocent passenger from the
first car now becomes an attacker |
“She slapped me” |
When she becomes physically
involved in the fight she escalates the danger level and
makes it less likely that they can calm down and solve the
dispute rationally. |
She should have tried to break up
the confrontation, not add to the conflict. |
|
She is not thinking clearly as she
calls for backup from her friends to assist in the attack of Piyush. |
“ She made some calls and within minutes there were about four-five
goons there” |
This adds to the problem because
the confrontation has no time to simmer down before
more people are added to the scenario. Nothing good can come from this. |
Her calls should have been to the
police, not her buddies. |
|
The violence continues with no
reason |
they beat him up |
The accomplices all take part in
violence that they had no reason to be a part of. Piyush could have
been killed from this attack. |
The accomplices should have never
come to |