↓ Skip to main content

Personality domains and traits that predict self-reported aberrant driving behaviours in a southeastern US university sample

Overview of attention for article published in Accident Analysis & Prevention, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Personality domains and traits that predict self-reported aberrant driving behaviours in a southeastern US university sample
Published in
Accident Analysis & Prevention, July 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.aap.2014.06.023
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Personality traits are meaningful predictors of many significant life outcomes, including mortality. Several studies have investigated the relationship between specific personality traits and driving behaviours, e.g., aggression and speeding, in an attempt to identify traits associated with elevated crash risk. These studies, while valuable, are limited in that they examine only a narrow range of personality constructs and thus do not necessarily reveal which traits in constellation best predict aberrant driving behaviours. The primary aim of this study was to use a comprehensive measure of personality to investigate which personality traits are most predictive of four types of aberrant driving behaviour (Aggressive Violations, Ordinary Violations, Errors, Lapses) as indicated by the Manchester Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ). We recruited 285 young adults (67% female) from a university in the southeastern US. They completed self-report questionnaires including the DBQ and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5, which indexes 5 broad personality domains (Antagonism, Detachment, Disinhibition, Negative Affectivity, Psychoticism) and 25 specific trait facets. Confirmatory factor analysis showed adequate evidence for the DBQ internal structure. Structural regression analyses revealed that the personality domains of Antagonism and Negative Affectivity best predicted both Aggressive Violations and Ordinary Violations, whereas the best predictors of both Errors and Lapses were Negative Affectivity, Disinhibition and to a lesser extent Antagonism. A more nuanced analysis of trait facets revealed that Hostility was the best predictor of Aggressive Violations; Risk-taking and Hostility of Ordinary Violations; Irresponsibility, Separation Insecurity and Attention Seeking of Errors; and Perseveration and Irresponsibility of Lapses.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Romania 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 143 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 13%
Researcher 18 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 11%
Student > Master 15 10%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 31 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 58 39%
Engineering 19 13%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 36 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,865,477
of 32,013,898 outputs
Outputs from Accident Analysis & Prevention
#381
of 3,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,751
of 259,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Accident Analysis & Prevention
#6
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,013,898 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 259,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.