|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Mitsui, G4 459 Kristin Subia, G6 459 Holly Ishikawa, G8 459 Kathy Teruya, G8 459 Carolyn Agmata, G9 409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tailgating is an action that most all drivers have
experienced. Tailgating can be described simply as following another vehicle
too close, preventing enough space and time for you in an emergency to
stop without hitting the car in front of you. A general rule of
driving that is taught in some driver's education classes is that,
a driver should follow 1 car length behind the vehicle in front for every
10 mph they are traveling. Of course this rule of thumb is just an
approximation but it does provide a driver with a sense of the distance
needed for a vehicle tocome to a complete stop. Tailgating like many other
problem behaviors on the road can be evaluated using three domains: affective
(the emotions of drivers involved), cognitive (the thoughts of drivers
involved), and sensorimotor (the actions of drivers involved). This
report will investigate the effects of all three of these domains and their
interaction in the act of tailgaiting.
BACK TO TOP
Tailgating Behaviors: Past Generations
Ryan Mitsui described a very atypical tailgating experience as he was
driving on the freeway one night and a new truck pulls up righ behind him
and is forced to switch lanes in order to aviod him. Ryan's reactions
are at first affective, he is startled by the
wrecklessness of another driver these feelings of fear soon lead to
anger. Ryan's cognitive procesess dictate this change in emotion
as he thinks that the other driver has placed him in danger.
The continuation of this cognitive processes leads to the decission to
impose the same feelings of danger upon the driver of the truck.
Ryan is now driving by another emotion that of revenge and his
sensorimotor reactions lead him to follow the truck at a close distance.
The conflict ends with the driver of the truck exiting the freeway and
Ryan being forced to use his cognitive reasoning skills to follow the vehicle
or not. Ryan chooses not to follow the truck as he thinks about the
consequences of his actions, that such behavior could lead to serious injury
for himself as
well as the other driver.
BACK TO TOP
Kristin Subia presents another common occurance of tailgaiting that
happened to her as she was driving to the mall. An anxious driver
behind her began to tailgate her. Kristin interprets this behavior cognitivly
as an attempt to get her to drive faster. In reaction to this interpretation
Kirstin decides to remain at her present speed. After a breif time
Kirstin makes another decission to check her rear view mirror, she uses
her sensorimoter skills to see if the driver has backed off. This
series of actions demonstrates that Kirstin is interested in the effect
of her passive behavior on the driver behind her. The driver continues
to tailgate and begins to stop abruptly in another attempt to show disapproval
of Kirstin's speed. Kirstin affective reaction is one of irritation,
she makes the cognitive decision to comit the sensorimotor action and wave
the driver on to pass her.
BACK TO TOP
Holly Ishikawa shares what she lables as a "mini-experiment" in the
hopes to understand the process of thoughts, feelings and actions that
causes her to tailgate other drivers. The first day of Holly's experiment
she is driving her own car and ends up following behind a slow moving vehicle
in the passing lane. Holly discribes her affective reation as "upsetting"
and her cognitive processes further supported these feelings as she thought
the other driver was driving slowly with intentions of frustrating her.
Holly continued to note her affective reactions of disgust and her sensorimotor
reaction to press the accelerator more iradically. Holly's affective
reactions are strengthened by her cognitive realization that the slower
driver in front of her is preventing her from even switching lanes and
getting around him. The second day of Holly's experiment she is driving
her boyfriends car and experiences the same situation. Holly admits
to having the same affective reactions of frustration in this situation.
Holly's cognitive thought process however leads her to feel a greater sense
of responsibility because she is driving another person's car. Therefore
in this situation Holly does not use her sensorimotor reactions to
tailgate the other driver.
BACK TO TOP
Kathy Teruya noted her personel dislike of tailgaters in reference to
an accident she experienced. While trying to merge onto the freeway Kathy
made a cognitive assesment that the onramp that day was particularly crowed
and left little room for maneuvering. The traffic suddenly came to
a halt and Kathy using her sensorimotor reactions was barely able to stop
her vehicle in time. However a few cars back a driver was not able
to stop and this lead to a four car accident which involved Kathy.
This incident effected Kathy so much that she hold a particular dislike
for individuals who tailgate and she her sensorimotor reaction while in
the car is to frequently check her rear view mirror to note the distance
of the following vehicle.
BACK TO TOP
Carolyn Agmata shares an incident of tailgating while on the freeway
in heavy traffic. As Carolyn discribes a driver in a Red Cherokee
pulled up behind her and began to tailgate her. Carolyn's first
reaction is cognitive as she thinks about the consequence of getting into
another accident, this though process leads to an affective reation of
feeling fear and ultimately a sensorimotor reaction to speed up.
Although Carolyn speeds up the driver in the Cherokee continues to tail
her Carolyn then makes the cognitive choice to step on her brake and stop.
Carolyn notes that the driver of the Cherokee has to brake hard in order
to avoid hitting her and this provides Carolyn feeling of statisfaction
as if she had been given retribution.
BACK TO TOP
Moral Implications to Tailgaiting
Wheather or not tailgating is deemed ethical is dependent upon the values
of each individual driver. The balance between a drivers need to
impose their will upon another driver and the negative consequences of
tailgating, that include, getting into an accident and injuring oneself
and others. As individual driver's we are all given the option of
making this choice whenever we are faced with a situation in which we could
be tempted to tailgate. Equally tempting is the situation in which another
driver is tailgating us and we are given the choice as how to react.
In either situation there are other options we as drivers can use in order
toremove ourselves from these situations in order to prevent possible injury
to ourselves and others.
BACK TO TOP
No tailgating is not fair but there are very few things that one might
consider in this world to be truely fair. The very act of tailgaiting
involves having an individual impose their will upon you is not fair because
it is unlikely that you will have control over their
decission to do this. However, we do have the ability to chose
how to react to this unfair act. In any tailgaiting situation we
can
react with reasonably by allowing the individual to pass us or unreasonably
by braking hard or tailgating that person in revenge. Tailgaiting
is not fair but we all have to oppertunity to make reasonable choices to
end such conflict.
BACK TO TOP
Is any act that places ones own life and the lives of many others justifiable?
In this context tailgating is not justifiable and should never be considered
so. Many drivers drive in a way that satisfies their own best interest.
Faulty justification easily enters adrivers mind when one looks only at
their own personel benefit. We all as driver must begin to see the
road as a community in which we need to uphold decissions that provides
safety for ourselves as well as all other drivers.
BACK TO TOP
Is tailgating spiritually wrong?
Regaurdless of what religion an individual belongs to or if they belong
to any religion at all most people believe in a sence of spirit or the
essance of being of a person. The act of tailgating is a very selfish
one in which one person endangers themself and others for little or no
benefit. The act itself only spawns negative feelings amongst both
persons and for this reason tailgating is spritiually wrong. The
ability to restrain one's inital feelings of frustration and act reasonable
manner that exits them from the situation will always prove more benefical
to both parties.
BACK TO TOP
Is tailgating covenient and is no big deal?
Tailgating has in the past seemed to be an occurance on the road that
everyone has turned their head too. Perhaps it is because so many
of us are guilty of commiting this wrong. However, tailgating in
any situation increases that chance for an accident. For this very
reason I believe I should be taken with more seriousness and be considered
legally as an act of wreckless driving.
BACK TO TOP
Up untill seven years ago I would have had no problem
with tailgating another driver who I thought was going too slow.
However seven years ago I rear ended someone. I was in a rush trying
to get somewhere without allowing myself the proper amount of time to do
so. As I travelled down the highway I passed cars trying to get ahead
of who ever I could. Finally traffic in the passing lane became to
heavy for me to pass again and I was stuck behind a car, that was traveling
at the speed limit. Even though they were within the limit, they
were not going fast enough for me and I began to tail them. Suddenly
the car in front of me stopped and because I was so close to them I had
not noticed their turn signal. I colided into them. This accident
changed my entire view of how one should drive. One cannot describe
the fear that sets in when you get into a collision and realize that you
could have seriously injured or even killed another person. When
we chose to act wrecklessly on the road we can never forget that there
are other on the road with us and that we put ourselves and them in danger.
I have never tailgated another driver since then.
BACK TO TOP
In my opinion there is no justification for tailgating.
Perhaps my expereience left such a traumatic imprint on me that I could
never imagine tailgating another person again. This is not to say
that I don't experience the same frustrations that all drivers do when
following a slow moving vehicle, however I quickly remember the consequences
of acting irrationally in such a situation. All drivers regaurdless
of the intensity of the emotions they are experiencing have the ability
to reason wheather or not tailing another car is worth the risk of getting
into an accident. To me this risk is not justified and should be
considered with more seriousness by all drivers.
BACK TO TOP
My suggestions to future generations would be to
observe our own driving behaviors including the incidents in which you
find yourself tailing or being tailed by someone. If you are aware
enough you may be able to note your own feelings and cognitions.
At this time take the time to consider the consequences of
your actions and base your decisions upon what you think is reasonable.
Self awareness is perhaps the best way to determine your thoughts on a
particular conflict and will help you to formulate an opinion in relation
to others on the subject.
BACK TO TOP
As a result of this report I have found that tailgating
is a common act of one individual attempting to impose their will upon
another. Althought the act is commonly viewed as selfish and endangering
to others few people make a firm stand against tailgating.Because I was
at fault in an accident that could have been prevented if I had not tailgated
someone I have very much against tailgating. I have also learned
that other drivers share the opinion that all drivers have the cognitive
ability to chose an option that limits the amount of danger present in
possible tailgating situations.
BACK TO TOP
|
|
|
|
|
Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace "Best Practices" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|