Report
2
My Understanding of Driving Psychology
By: Brandi McWade
Instructions for this report are at
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409a-g22-report2.htm
(a) Consider Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 in the Lecture Notes, in the
Section on Driving Psychology Theory and Charts at www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409a-g22-lecture-notes.htm#Charts
Consult the article from which the Tables were taken. (b) Using your own words,
describe the three behavioral domains and levels of a driver (nine cells). (c)
Illustrate each domain with your own driving behavior skills and errors, or
that of another driver you know well, or a driver in a particular movie. (d)
Make up a "driving personality makeover" plan for yourself (or
another driver you know well), relating specifically to negative thoughts you
have about other road users. (e) Discuss the problems you anticipate in
carrying out such a plan successfully. (f) Any other comments you wish to make.
B)
There are three domains of behavior that are necessary to successful driving. First, the affective domain includes your desires and motives to drive your car. For example, your desire to get to your destination without getting into an accident. The second domain is the cognitive domain, which consists of the knowledge of traffic laws and regulations as well as the knowledge of how to actually drive a car. Finally, the sensorimotor domain is basically your ability to react and perform the cognitive and affective domains.
Each individual is on a different level of each domain, which results in the type of behavior on the road they execute. There are three different levels within each of the domains, with all levels having a positive or negative orientation. This essentially totals eighteen different zones of possible driver behaviors. The three levels of skills of the affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor domains are zones 1-9, and the errors are the corresponding zones 10-18.
Level one is labeled “Proficiency” to measure the affective proficiency-staying calm and alert, the cognitive
proficiency-figuring out what is going on around you and the sensorimotor
proficiency-your coordination and response to events. Level two is labeled “Safety” to illustrate the affective
safety-avoiding accidents, the cognitive safety-identifying trouble areas and
sensorimotor safety-performing cautious and sensible actions. The third level is labeled “Responsibility”
to symbolize affective responsibility-being accountable for your actions,
cognitive responsibility-prosocial skills and planning, and sensorimotor
responsibility-social exchanges and calmness.
C)
|
SKILLS (+) |
||
|
AFFECTIVE (+A) |
COGNITIVE (+C) |
SENSORIMOTOR (+S) |
|
I should slow
down around here; there are usually a lot of pedestrians. |
This person has been
trying to get in for a while; I should let him go in front of me. |
Go right ahead! (Waving) |
|
ERRORS (-) |
||
|
AFFECTIVE (-A) |
COGNITIVE (-C) |
SENSORIMOTOR (S) |
|
I can’t stand
it when my boyfriend tells me how to drive and always tries to correct me! |
I really hate
being stuck behind tourists in their convertibles that drive so slow and
don’t know where they are going! |
(BEEP!) Jesus!
What the hell’s the matter with you? (followed by an obscene gesture) |
D)
|
Affective
Level |
Cognitive
Level |
Sensorimotor Level |
I should be more accepting of my boyfriend’s comments.
He’s only trying to help.
|
I need to learn to be more relaxed on the road. |
I should restrain myself from using my horn for when it is an emergency or absolutely necessary. |
|
I need to be more open to criticisms because it will help me see my flaws so I can correct them. |
I was once unfamiliar with these
roads and should be more understanding of people new to the area. |
I should never use obscene gestures because I don’t know what the other driver is thinking. |
I should not allow
myself to demean other drivers or pedestrians.
|
I need to acknowledge my own errors and take
responsibility for them instead of blaming other drivers.
|
Yelling won’t solve the incident; it will only cause more
problems.
|
I should restrain myself from negative thoughts, because
they only create negative actions.
|
I need to put myself in other’s shoes and see their side
of the situation.
|
I should not tailgate
someone to “teach them a lesson” about driving slow.
|
I will
probably have some problems with being able to carry out this plan successfully
because I get “in the zone” and I am not really aware of what I am doing or
saying. I am what is identified as a “rushing
maniac” and I try to get to my destination as quick as possible. I get
aggravated with anyone or anything that slows me down. I become extremely
irritable in traffic, and often try to time myself and beat my record for going
to work or coming home. I need to
become more conscious of my bad driving habits in order to change them.
(a) Discuss these two Web sites: drivers.com vs. drdriving.org by first describing their overall
appearance and purpose. (b) What are their main differences? Be sure to
consider at least these areas: (i) articles (ii) newsletters (iii) style (iv)
probable audience (v) public relations or policy (vi) advertising (vii) size
(vii) ranking (viii) Other sites that link to each. (c) Any other comments you
wish to make.
A)
Drivers.com
claims to be the “world’s leading site on drivers and driving.” I was surprised to see both computer drivers
and vehicle driving side by side on the same site, because they are obviously
unrelated. It appears to be very
professional and organized. The
homepage for drivers.com was clean and simple.
I am not sure of the purpose of this site other to provide informational
articles to readers. It doesn’t offer
help or interaction like DrDriving.org does.
Drdriving.org is clearly a site directed at aggressive driving and road rage. The name of this website is precise in that it is intended to help people with their driving problems and questions. The homepage is a bit overwhelming since there is so much small writing and tables all compacted into one site with many links to other sites. The site focuses on ways of identifying aggressive driving behaviors and how to stop or avoid them.
Even though Drivers.com may appear more appealing, I think DrDriving.org is definitely a more efficient site because it offers so much more information, articles and news.
B)
I.
Drivers.com does not offer a specific link for
articles, because the entire site basically consists of only articles. You can select any of the topics and it will
produce a list of articles related to that topic.
Drdriving.org has a distinct link
for articles related to driving. The
link brings you to a site consisting of over thirty links to different articles
from psychology principles and personality test and philosophies and many other
issues concerning road rage and aggressive driving.
II.
Drivers.com has a free once-a-month newsletter that
is sent through email to keep people informed of any developments at the
website. I was not able to view any past newsletters unless I was a member or
signed up.
I don’t believe Drdriving.org has
a monthly newsletter, however the site offers many updated news articles about
road rage and current letters and questions that are sent in by visitors and
answered by Dr. Driving himself, Leon James.
This allows the visitors to the site to keep up with news and events
that are relevant to road rage.
III.
As I mentioned before, the style of the Drivers.com
website is very organized and easy to navigate. It is designed much more professionally than Drdriving.com and is
more appealing to the eye. The site has
a uniform style through the pages and the sections are clearly visible.
I think DrDriving.org has too much writing and tables all on one page and it becomes very overwhelming. The site has small text and too many things crammed together, however the information and links are very valid. The headings and titles are not distinct and blend together with the other writings.
IV.
The audience of Drivers.com is obviously much more
broad than DrDriving.org simply because it includes computer and software
driver information as well as car driving info. People who visit this site are probably only seeking articles on
certain topics that relate to driving.
DrDriving.org offers a lot more information and actually help to its audience. It probably attracts many more students and victims of aggressive driving than Drivers.com does. It offers a wide range of preventative strategies and behavior modification to its audience.
V. As far as public relations go, Drdriving.org wins for its incredible interactivity, responsiveness and personalization. Drdriving.org provides its visitors with email exchanges and two-way communication. Dr. James posts and responds to letters and questions written by visitors. It is personalized and relates to all groups of people, such as elderly, children/youth, pedestrians, professional drivers and bicyclists. The site is directed more towards helping the people and talking to them, rather than just simplying providing them with articles that may or may not be related to them like Drivers.com does.
Drivers.com doesn’t offer much interactivity other than hyperlinks to other articles. The site is not personalized and doesn’t provide the connectedness that Drdriving.org does with its visitors. There is no communication between people and it is just basically a place to read articles relating to driving in some way or another.
VI. Drivers.com has advertisements lining its entire site. Although they are organized and placed on the sides of the information, it still takes away from the site. Fortunately they are all related to driving such as driver education programs, commercial driving licenses, and career opportunities in driving. Drdriving.org has no advertisements or sponsors. The site is dedicated to showing only the necessary information to its visitors and not distracting them with ads.
VII. Drdriving.org is a much larger site than Drivers.com if you are only looking at the auto drivers section of Drivers.com. Drdriving.org seems to offer endless pages of information, articles, newsletters, law enforcement, surveys and questionnaires. Again, Drivers.com is limited in its variety of documents and information. The site offers limited articles related to driving and environment, law, education, safety ect.
VIII. The ranking of a website is very important to its business. Drdriving.org seems to be ranked pretty high in terms of searches for “driving,” Drivers.com, however is not even in the top 30 websites. Drivers.com however does reach the top ten when a search is done for “drivers,” however, that term is ambiguous and applies to computer drivers as well. When people are searching for automobile sites they are much likely to type in “driving” rather than “drivers.”
IX. Drdriving.org has an unprecedented amount of related links on its site! Drivers.com has no comparison to this site. Drivers.com only uses advertisements as links, while Drdriving.org lists hundreds of links pertaining to every possible topic related to driving safety and road rage. However, both of sites do contain links to each other’s sites for further information.
(a) Select six student reports on driving psychology from Generation
20 , as listed in the Readings Section of the Lecture Notes. www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy22/409a-g22-lecture-notes.htm#g20-reports
You must select any two students from Report 1, two different students
from Report 2, and two still different students from Report 3. So there will be
a total of six different students, two students for each report. (b) Summarize
each of the six reports. Be sure you put a link to the report you are referring
to. (c) Add a General Conclusion Section in which you discuss your reactions to
what they did – (i) their ideas, (ii) their method, (iii) their explanations.
(d) What did they gain from doing their reports? (e) How do their ideas
influence what you yourself think about these issues? (e) Any other comments
you wish to make.
B)
Shari
Arakawa-Longboy begins her Report I with a preface. She writes that the Driving Psychology
course will teach you why people drive the way they do, how to change your
driving behavior, and the external and internal factors that influence the way
people drive. She explains that we
learn all this though the psychological mechanics of driving, including the
threefold self. Shari admits that
before taking the class, she did not believe there was psychology to driving,
but now she realizes how important driving psychology is. She is proud of what she has learned in this
class and feels that everyone should take a driving psychology class because
she thinks it will help everyone and make the roads safer.
Furthermore,
she says she thinks generational reports are an effective way of learning,
however, she doesn’t like oral presentations.
She says the course made her more aware of her driving behavior and
realized that she can be a reckless and aggressive driver. She also explains the two goals of driving
psychology: to decrease the number of auto accidents per year and the second
goal is improve the American character overall.
Shari continues her report
with a short introduction and definitions of the driver’s threefold self,
self-witnessing methodology, road rage, emotional intelligence, and theory of
driving. She then gives an
autobiography in which she describes how she learned her aggressive driving
behaviors from her father and grandfather.
Her grandfather taught her that “the fastest way to get to your
destination was always the best way.”
She also mentioned how her boyfriend and movies, such as Fast and
Furious, influenced her driving. She explains how before taking this course she
thought she was a good driver and that everyone should drive like her. Now, she even considered taking anger
management classes.
Shari concluded her report
by saying this course put driving in a whole different perspective for her. It made her realize how everyone on the road
effect each other and now she can help others understand their driving
persona. She believes that driving
psychology needs to be taught to legislation so they can find new and improved
ways of enforcing safer driving laws.
She ended her report with this advice to future generations: “Do the
reading, follow the schedule, and be on top of things!! DO NOT wait until the
last minute and follow the instructions!!”
Jenny
Arakaki followed the same format as Shari Longboy’s report I with a
preface, introduction, definitions, and autobiography. Jenny also added the definitions of
scofflaw, left lane bandit and newsgroup for drivers. Jenny describes driving psychology as a way to manage your
thoughts and emotions while driving on the road. She explains how our society is always in a rush and can’t stand
to sit in traffic. She says she has
friends that take roundabout ways just to avoid traffic, even though it may
take them longer to get to their destination.
Jenny is proud to be a
part of generation 20 because she can voice her opinions and people can use her
advice in the future. She hopes it will
change people’s driving behavior and maybe even save lives. She has also
admitted that she tends to be an aggressive who speeds and fails to use her
blinker or stop at stop signs. However,
she is proud to admit she keeps her anger within the boundaries of her car and
will not flick people off or yell at them.
She also believes the media plays an important role on influencing
people’s behavior. Movies show fast
driving, multitasking and crazy car wrecks that people always walk away
from.
She feels like she learned
her reckless driving from her friends and her boyfriend’s mother. She also admits that her parents are slow
and calm drivers, while she is quite the opposite. Jenny ends her report with advice to future generations. She says the most important thing is to take
the information in the course seriously because it will help us create a safer
society.
Ikue
Fukushima explains that her Report II will use her knowledge from Report I
to actually engage in experiments to improve the attitude of aggressive
drivers. Since Ikue does not have her
license, she chose to do her experiment on her boyfriend because he shows signs
of an aggressive driver. She analyzed
her boyfriend’s answer to the tests in Road Rage and Aggressive Behavior,
his personality and thinking style, and his views on the driver’s threefold
self. She concluded that he needs
improvement in his cognitive and affective ability. He thinks very negatively and has a tendency to blame others and
also enjoys “punishing” others.
She then creates a model
to modify her boyfriend’s negative emotion and thinking attitude. To change his attitude, she developed two
methods: “cognitive writing assignment” and “road rage punishment.” The cognitive writing assignment involves
recording his swearing and yelling while driving and then having him listen to
it when he gets home and writing down exactly what he was thinking at the
time. The road rage punishment involves
putting a rubber band on her boyfriend’s wrist and snapping it every time he
yells, swears or complains at a motorist/pedestrian. She hoped that this would distract him and prevent him from
yelling.
She created tables and
analyzed the data from her experiments.
She concluded that engaging her boyfriend in the experiments had a
positive result to his behavior. She
also realized that the writing assignment was more effective than the
punishment. But most importantly, she
stated that modifying a person’s behavior does not happen immediately and can
take a long time.
Chris
Concepcion stated that the purpose of his Report II was to test himself
with various questionnaires from Road Rage and Aggressive Driving to
help him identify what his bad driving habits are and how to correct them. After taking the tests, Chris classifies
himself as an “unsupportive” driver. He
claims when he drives aggressively, it is unintentional and acknowledges that
his mood has a lot to do with how he behaves on the road. He states that he is not proud of his bad
habits, but realizes that acknowledgement is the first step to the driver
self-improvement plan.
Chris designs a
self-modification experiment in order to improve his driving style. He noted that he had reoccurring problems
with tailgating, swearing, failing to yield, and slowing down to irritate
tailgaters. To change these problems,
he drove around everyday for a week and self-witnessed himself doing the
action, and would remind himself of proper supportive driving techniques and
put himself in the other driver’s shoes.
After his intervention,
his driving improved, but was obviously still not perfect. He admitted that “bad
habits are hard to break” and that it is a lifelong driver education plan for
him. He plans to raise his driver
intelligence and modify his thoughts by implementing this plan throughout his
life. He concluded his report with the
advice to future generations that the best way to understand bad driving habits
is to go out and observe your own.
Jesse
Chang explains that for his Report III, he had to examine chapter nine of Road
Rage and Aggressive Driving and construct a proposal for a lifelong drivers
education plan. Through acknowledgement
and witnessing he realizes he suffers from extreme road rage, but he hopes that
he will be able to overcome his habits and transform himself into a supportive
driver with his education plan.
Jesse summarizes chapter
nine as basically explaining how adolescents drivers are the most prone to
accidents on the road. Chris quotes the
book to illustrate the danger of adolescent drivers: "A sixteen year old
driver is 42% more likely to be in a crash than a 17 year old.” The chapter makes Jesse question the age
that legislation allows teens to get their licenses. He supports the idea of a graduated license. The chapter also describes a CD-rom program
called Driver-Zed which was created by the AAA Foundation for traffic safety.
The book also describes
that the lifelong driver’s education program should involve the affective,
cognitive and sensorimotor behaviors and assimilate them into the learning
process of the child, all the way until the child graduates high school. This will give the child a better
understanding of themselves, and allow them the ability to adapt a higher
quality or think and driving as well as having a higher level of driver
intelligence.
Jesse explains that his
life long driver’s education program in seven stages, beginning with
infancy. He writes that a parent should
always provide their baby with a supportive, loving and nurturing environment
in all situations, especially driving.
Parents should be well informed on how they influence their baby’s
behaviors at all times. As a toddler,
parents should speak to their children about their feelings and emotions and
teach them to take responsibility for their actions. During early childhood, children are exposed to outside
influences, such as school, peers and the media. Parents should be involved in their child’s activities and
question what behavior they display for their emotions. They should also be taught basic rules of
the road, such as stopping at red lights and looking both ways before crossing
the road, and being a good passenger.
During middle childhood,
the focus should become more cognitive and parents should have their child
verbalize the dangerous things he/she sees when in a car, and what should be or
could have been done to avoid dangerous situations. As an adolescent, they should know the cognitive and affective
aspects of driving, and can now focus on the sensorimotor. Jesse feels that classes should be mandatory
in high school for driver’s education.
Driver safety can easily be implemented into the curriculum. Jesse also
feels students This is may be the most
important stage because it is the first time they are allowed to actually drive
on the road.
Jesse continues his
lifelong education program by describing the adulthood and then elderly
stage. He concludes by saying that road
rage is a learned behavior and if we can educate people at an early age, there
is no reason we can not prevent it.
Jesse also explains how he thinks Hawaii has a serious problem with road
rage and that too many people “live fast in paradise.”
Jeremy Kubo
said that the purpose of his Report III was to understand the importance of a
lifelong driver’s education program and develop a solution to implement the
program to all ages. Jeremy also had to
summarize chapter nine from Road Rage.
He discussed a quote from the book: “This
focus on the importance of values looks toward a new philosophy of driving that
is community oriented rather than individual centered.” He
believes that we need to be aware of other’s actions, behaviors and emotions,
not just our own. He also feels that our behaviors are influenced by other’s.
Jeremy’s proposal for
lifelong driver education consists of four stages: infancy through elementary,
intermediate, high school and post high school. Jeremy claims that the affective self plays the biggest role in the
first stage because the children are only passengers and take in everything
that their parents/guardians say, feel and do.
Children are very observant and tend to mimic what they see others
doing.
In his second stage,
intermediate, Jeremy explains how the cognitive self plays the most important
role. This is the age that children
determine right from wrong and have to take responsibility for their
actions. Children can be taught why
accidents happen and how they can be prevented at this age. Children can review and analyze as
passengers at this stage.
In the third stage, high
school, teenagers are beginning to use their sensorimotor self and can apply
their cognitive and affective self to make the right actions. They should use simulated events before actually
being on the road to know if they are fully prepared to drive a car. It is important that the teens use all three
levels when driving and be able witness and modify their actions.
In his last stage, post
high school, Jeremy realizes that everything is voluntary, but QDC should be
essential. He hopes that after so many
years of forced education, the adult will choose to continue his driver
education and improve himself even more.
Jesses ends by acknowledging how nearly impossible and hard it will be
to implement a driver education course like this. But he is very optimistic and believes that one day we will beat
the war on road rage.
C)
General Conclusion
I.
I generally agreed with all of the ideas of the students I
selected from generation 20. Like
Shari, I did not think there was any psychology involved with driving before
taking this course. I support Shari and
Jenny’s idea that people’s driving behavior is influenced by our parents,
friends and the media. However, I
personally drive much more aggressively than my mother, brother and
boyfriend. I also agree with Ikue that
changing our behavior cannot happen immediately, and it take time and
effort. They all had interesting ideas
to share that gave me a more rounded perspective of aggressive driving. All six of the students were clearly well
educated about driving psychology.
II.
Each Report had a different method to follow, but they were
all easy to understand and follow. The
reports were well organized and easy to read due to their legible font and
proper spacing. The sections of each
report were distinctly marked and easy to find. For Report II, the students had to actually develop a method to
change their aggressive driving habits.
I enjoyed reading Ikue’s method of battling her boyfriend’s
road rage by snapping a rubber band on his wrist whenever he showed aggression
on the road. I thought her idea was
very original. I was surprised to read
that Chris’ method of self-improvement actually worked because I don’t think I
would be disciplined enough to rely on myself to change my own behavior. Jesse and Jeremy had to develop a method for
life long driver education. I was
impressed in how detailed they both were with their stages.
III.
I think all six students gave excellent explanations of
their reports, data, and information learned from the course. For Report I, they defined the terms and
course material very accurately. Both the students wrote very detailed
descriptions for their data collection and analysis sections of Report II. And the two students for Report III gave
extremely in-depth explanations of the stages for their life long education
program.
D)
Overall, all six students agreed that
before taking this course, they believed they were good drivers. Now, they know they were wrong and they know
what they need to do to become supportive drivers. More specifically, Shari acknowledged that generational reports
were an effective way of learning for her.
She was able to learn from other’s mistakes and advice. Ikue gained the knowledge that changing
behavior takes time and effort.
Furthermore, Jesse realized that he has the power to not subject his
children to aggressive driving behavior, with the hopes that they will grow up
to be supportive drivers as well.
E)
I basically agreed with the student’s
ideas regarding road rage and aggressive behavior. However, I did disagree with Chris’ concept that the age of
getting your license is too young. He
bases his idea on the quote “A sixteen year old driver is 42% more likely to be
in a crash than a seventeen year old.”
I am sure this quote is accurate, however, I question whether it is due
to age or experience. No matter what
age someone gets their license, they will be more likely to get into an
accident in their first year of driving than they will be in their second
year. It is not a question of maturity,
but rather age.
(a) Consider Table 5 in the Lecture Notes, in the Section on Driving
Psychology Theory and Charts at www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy21/409a-g21-lecture-notes.htm#Charts
(b) Consult the article from which the Table was taken. (c) Copy and paste the
table into your file. Now delete the examples in each cell and replace them
with your own examples that you make up. (d) Discuss why driving is such a big
problem in all societies and why no effective solutions have yet been found for
them. (e) Discuss the solutions offered by Dr. Leon James (www.DrDriving.org). What likelihood is there
that his approach will be adopted? Explain. (f) Any other comments you wish to
make.
C)
|
Emotionally
Intelligent Driver Personality Skills |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
D)
Aggressive
driving is a big problem in all societies because it has become such an
accepted social norm. We learn road rage
from parents, peers and the media.
Movies depict aggressive driving as “cool” and thrilling. Hollywood often shows people walking away
from car accidents that would be fatal in real life. The media presents a skewed image of road rage to our impressionable
youth. Furthermore, we are exposed to
aggressive driving at young ages as passengers in our parents’ cars. Young children often mimic the behaviors
they see their parent do.
No effective
solution has been developed for road rage simply because it is so widely
accepted. We are “born into road rage”
and we acquire it from a very early age.
There is such diversity to the drivers on the road that it is nearly
impossible to change their behavior.
E)
Dr. Leon James proposes that a life long driver education program will combat the road rage epidemic. He suggests that driver education should begin in first age to develop affective driving skills. It should continue through intermediate school for the cognitive development and high school for the sensorimotor stage. As adults, driver education should include Quality Driving Circles to ensure self-improvement and self-confidence as a driver. Dr. James also says that in order to reduce road rage, we have to change our cultural norms of “disrespect condoning hostility” to “respect promoting civility and community.”
Unfortunately, it is unlikely that his approach will be adopted anytime soon. The concept of a life long education program is very costly and time consuming. More importantly, the majority of people will not agree to this idea because they are not educated in driver psychology and don’t think they have a “problem.” The only way to fight the war on road rage is if everyone becomes aware of how serious of a problem it is, and by that point, it may be too late!
(a) Our textbook Road Rage and Aggressive Driving has exercises in
several chapters. Do the following four exercises: (i) Exercise on scenario analysis
on p. 129; (ii) Exercise on self-assessment on p.134; (iii) Exercise on
identifying assumptions on p. 131; and (iv) Exercise on negative vs. positive
driving on p. 122. (b) What were your reactions to the exercises? (c) Discuss
how these exercises help you to become more aware of yourself as a driver. (d)
Do some of the exercises with another driver you know. How do they help you
understand some principles of driving psychology mentioned in the book? (e) Any
other comments you wish to make.
A)
Exercise 1: Scenario Analysis to Modify Oppositional Thinking
The objective of this exercise was to
examine common statements that are used in traffic and then determine an
emotionally intelligent remedy to in order to reduce road rage in that
situation. I then replaced some of the statements with my own words and created
alternative intelligent remedies.
Exercise 2: Assessing Myself as a Driver
This exercise involved me recording what
I thought of as my good driving traits and my worst driving traits. Then I asked my boyfriend his opinion on my
good and bad driving habits.
Surprisingly, our answers were not the same.
I claimed that I was a safe driver and
always stop at yellow lights instead of trying to pass it before turning
red. I also feel I am considerate of
other drivers and often allow them to go in front of me. However, he stated that I speed a lot and
tailgate.
Exercise
3: Identifying Wrong Assumptions
This exercise requires you to read a
letter from a man who was arrested for drunk driving while sitting in a parked
car. The objective is to note all of
the man’s wrong assumptions that caused him this expensive mishap.
The first mistake the man makes is getting angry at an officer who is
only doing his job. If the car was
parked in a parking space to begin with, there would have been no problem. Another mistake he makes is that he blows
his horn back at the officer, which suggests insubordination. Finally, the man blames the other officers
for his arrests just because they were not there when it occurred. More importantly, he fails to take
responsibility for his own actions.
Exercise 4: Negative vs. Positive Driving
Exercise 4 involved explaining the
difference between antisocial and prosocial driver skills. For example, the statement “They’d better
stay out of my way-I’m in no mood to put up with them!” is negative because it
focuses on blaming others. A postive
approach would be to say “I wish there was no traffic, but there is nothing I
can do about it” because it stays clear from aggressing one another.