The role of attitudes in transportation studies

Transcription

1 The role of attitudes in transportation studies Lars Åberg T&S, Dalarna university, Borlänge and Department of psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala Attitude and safe behaviour in traffic Attitudes are often discussed in relation to road user behaviour for example concerning safety like violations of traffic rules or use of safety equipment or mode choice like bicycle or public transport. Frequently wrong attitudes are blamed for bad behaviour in traffic, for behaviours that increase pollution, for congestion, for risk taking etc. Also, often it is heard that if it only was possible to change attitudes great improvements of driver behaviour and traffic safety would be achieved. The connection between attitude change and improved traffic safety presumes two things. Firstly, that there exists a causal relationship between attitudes and behaviour. Secondly, that it is possible to influence attitudes of road users and that there are known measures about how to change attitudes. It is important to consider both aspects of attitudes in a discussion about attitudes and traffic safety. In the present paper I will briefly present a commonly accepted view of the concept of attitude as well as introducing a model stating the relationship between attitudes and behaviours. Some results from our own studies in Uppsala of different aspects of road user attitudes will be used in the present discussion. Furthermore, possibilities to change attitudes will be discussed, mainly based on results presented in the literature. What is an attitude? The initial question to be asked is about the nature of attitudes. Attitude is a concept that has been studied for more than a hundred years and a numerous more or less overlapping definitions of the attitude concept have been suggested. In the present paper a definition suggested by Eagly and Chaiken (1993) will be used saying that attitudes are: tendencies to evaluate an entity with some degree of favour or disfavour, ordinarily expressed in cognitive, affective, and behavioural responses. The tendencies are relatively stable and to a great extent learned. The relation between attitude and behaviour To optimise the relationship between attitudes and behaviours it is important to follow the principle of compatibility (Manstead, 1996), e.g. measures of attitudes and and behaviour are more likely to be correlated with each other if they are compatible with respect to action performed, object at which the action is directed, context in which the action takes place and time at when it takes place. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) defined an attitude as the sum of a number of belief products according to: A=Σb i e i (where b is belief in a certain entity and e evaluation about an entity i) The formula is used in structural models of attitudes and behaviour. Initially the authors presented a theory of attitude behaviour relations (the theory of reasoned action) and later the model was extended by Ajzen (1991) in a model called the theory of planned behaviour

2 (TPB). A further development aimed at road user behaviour have been suggested by the present author (Åberg et al 1997) and is depicted in Figure 1. Attitudes towards the behaviour Subjective norm Intention Behaviour Perceived behaviour control Behaviour Of Other persons Figure 1. Extended version of The theory of planned behaviour The model predicts behaviour via behavioural intentions. Intentions are determined by attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behaviour control and perceived behaviour of others. Perceived behaviour control and behaviours of others might also affect behaviour directly. Attitudes, subjective norm and behaviour control are determined by different kinds of beliefs and evaluations. The model has been used in a number of studies and some results from these studies are used to describe some aspects of the attitude concept in traffic. Attitudes, other predictor variables, and road user behaviour According to the model attitude is not necessarily the only variable that is important for behaviour in traffic. Below some examples are given that show that attitudes can be related to

3 behaviour but also that the relationship might vary with the situation and that the other variables of the model be stronger predictors than attitudes. Example 1: Attitudes and different traffic violations In order to follow up measures intended to improve traffic safety the Swedish road administration administered a questionnaire to a nation wide sample of Swedish license holders (N=3000; return rate 63%) that resulted in a sample of 1860 subjects. Thirteen different driving violations were investigated of which four are used as an example in the present paper (speeding on 50 km/h and on 90 km/h roads (15 km/h over limit), close following and overtaking on a pedestrian crossing). The questions of the questionnaire were based on the extended TPB an included behaviours (How often?), intentions (How probable in the future?), attitudes (How acceptable is your behaviour?), subjective norm (How acceptable is your behaviour to important presons?), perceived behaviour control (How easy is it to follow the rules?), and others behaviour (How many others are violating?). The use of self reported violations as measures of behaviour might be criticised but previous results (Åberg et al and Haglund 1998) show correlations between.36 and.57 between observed and self reported speed (including speed violations). The results showed a great variation in reported frequency of different violations. Speeding on highways (90 km/h) was the most frequently mentioned violation while overtaking on a pedestrian crossing was a behaviour that very few reported to any greater extent. When path analyses were performed on data, and in accordance with the theoretical model it was found that the role of attitude was different for different violations. In table 1 the self reported violations are regressed on four of the independent variables of the model, and their relative contributions to the explained variance (R²) are estimated. Table 1. Relations between self reported violations and attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and others behaviour. Figures within brackets denotes estimated contribution to explained variance. Violation 50 km/h 90 km/h Close f. Overtaking β (%) β (%) β (%) β (%) Attitude.26 (11).35 (24).26 (12).18 (05) Subj.norm.14 (03).16 (05).16 (05).10 (02) Perc. beh. contr..30 (15).32 (20).14 (03).32 (17) Others beh..18 (06).15 (05).32 (18).16 (04) R²(adj.).35 (35).54 (54).38 (38).28 (28) All coefficients are significant (p<.001) From the results presented it can be concluded that the four variables can explain a significant share of the variance of violations. Although attitudes are among the best predictors it is not always the most important predictor. Subjective norms are less important than other variables, mainly because there are strong relationships between attitudes and norms. Example 2: Change of attitudes with change of transport mode In two minor studies (Englund, 1997; Gradin, 1998) about attitudes towards traffic violations and self reported violations, while driving a car or riding a bicycle, were investigated. In the studies the subjects (about 75 subjects in each study) answered questions about violations

4 when driving a car or when riding and bicycle riding. The violations concerned shooting red lights, wrong way driving, not giving way to right hand traffic and being drunk on the road. The results from one study showed that only 2% reported that the often-sometimes drove a car against red or against traffic, 38% when riding a bicycle, and 81% when walking. In the second study no subject admitted driving a car against red (quite seldom-often) while 31% and 54%, respectively, of the same subjects did that on a bicycle. During car driving 8% did not give way to right hand traffic and during cycling, 40%. No one had any experience of driving a car while being intoxicated while 73% reported (quite seldom-often) to have been drunk on a bicycle. Concerning attitudes as a driver compared to being a cyclist those are presented in table 2. Table 2. Attitudes towards violations in traffic as a car driver or as a cyclist. Percentages of subjects that accept a violation. (N=78) Violation Against Against Not giving Being traffic violations red lights traffic way drunk in general Car 5% 2% 5% 0% 5% Cycle 20% 40% 13% 59% 31% Bicycle violations in general (48% violated rules quite seldom often when cycling) correlated.72 with attitudes towards bicycle violations in traffic. It is obvious from the results presented that the same individuals have different attitudes depending on their mode of transport. Example 3: Attitudes and differences in traffic cultures Drivers from three of the Scandinavian countries (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) were compared with respect to drunken driving and road user attitudes in a questionnaire study with totally 6200 respondents (Glad m fl. 1991). Among the questions it was asked about how often the respondents were drunk, how often they had been driving under influence and about their attitudes towards drunken driving. The answers to these questions are presented in table 3. Table 3. Drinking habits(often-sometimes), drunken driving (often-sometimes) and attitudes towards drunken driving (positive) for drivers from Denmark, Norway and Sweden (Percentages). Country Drunk Drunk Attitude Driving Denmark 51% 51% 65% Norway 56% 14% 20% Sweden 38% 11% 18% It is clear from table 3 that the Danes report more drunken driving than Norwegians and Swedes, in spite of similar drinking habits, and Danes also report much more positive attitudes toward drunk driving than subjects from the other two countries.

5 These examples of attitude behaviour relationships show that attitudes varies with type of violation performed, with different mode of transportation as well as with differences in traffic culture. The results suggest that attitudes might be affected by experience and learning. This also means that it would be possible to affect attitudes by use of suitable information and educational measures. One such measure is mass media campaigns that frequently are used in attempts to change attitudes and behaviours. Therefore, in a campaign is successful a change in attitudes and consequently of behaviour would be observed. Below a meta-analysis of traffic information campaigns presented by Elliott (1993) is discussed. Can attitudes be changed? Many attempts have been made to influence road user attitudes by means of mass media campaigns. However, many (perhaps most) of the campaigns are not, or improperly, evaluated (Elliot, 1993). It is necessary to be able to compare pre- and post measurements in a meta-anlysis in order to make computation of effect measures. In Elliotts (1993) analysis 87 different campaigns met the criteria and were included in the investigation. Elliott concluded that the campaigns were effective in changing behaviour as can be seen in table 4 where the effects of campaigns on seat belt wearing, use of bicycle helmets, speeding and drunk driving are presented. Table 4. Effects of mass media campaigns on behaviour (after Elvik et al, 1997). Behaviour Before After Drunk driving 29.8% 24.2% Speeding 50.5% 40.1% Bicycle helmet use 12.4% 19.8% Seat belt use 61.6% 73.7% The figures presented in table 4 concern effects of campaigns on behaviour. It should also be mentioned that the campaigns are often supported by other measures like, for example, enforcement. In only a few evaluations (n=15) effects on attitudes are investigated. Overall the effects (over all different measures) was about 6%. When attitudes alone were considered there was a positive result but the attitude effect was lower, between 2-3%. Thus campaigns had clear effects on behaviour but the effects on attitudes were not so strong. Among the conclusions from the meta-analysis is an important observation that most campaigns are not at all or badly evaluated. Very seldom attitude measures are evaluated. A similar result was obtained in an OECD study (OECD,199 ) where it also was observed that very few of the evaluations considered were based on theoretical frameworks including attitudes. Discussion Attitudes and beliefs are often discussed in relation traffic safety analyses although the number of studies that are based on theoretical frameworks are rare in the literature (e.g. Åberg, et al, 1994). According to a commonly accepted view attitudes are believed to be relatively stable and learned dispositions for decisions and behaviour. The examples of results presented in this paper show that attitudes are related to behaviour but also that the relationship might be quite complex. Attitude are often only one of several factors that influences behaviour in traffic and it is therefore important to base evaluations of education or

6 information campaigns on theoretical frameworks including attitudes and other factors. It is also shown that attitudes in traffic are rather specific and that the predictive power of general attitudes towards traffic safety can be expected to be quite low. It is important that attitudes (and other predictors) and behaviour are compatible with each other. Differences between measures of attitudes obtained in different countries might indicate that attitudes are possible to change although very little is known about the effectiveness of methods used to influence behaviour in traffic via attitudes and beliefs. One important reason for this state of the art is lack of or badly designed evaluation studies. Still many attempts are made all over the world today to influence road user attitudes through mass media campaigns and through different educational efforts. Proper guidance and evaluation of such activities could lead to better knowledge about factors affecting behaviour and hopefully to more effective campaigns. However. today very little is made to improve instruments and methods for evaluations of attitude change. Conclusions - It is important to clearly define the attitude concept and to discuss attitudes within a theoretical framework. - Attitude is only one factor that affects behaviour and the importance of attitudes varies over behaviours and situations - It is possible to change attitudes but there are few known and effective methods to influence attitudes. - Some suggestions for future research: - Better evaluations of efforts to change attitudes - Standardised routines for attitude measurements - More intercultural comparisons. References Ajzen, I. (1991), The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, Eagly, A.H., Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. Orlando. Elliott, B. (1993). Road safety mass media campaigns: A meta analysis. CR 118. Federal office of road safety, Canberra. Englund, A-C. (1997). Att cykla mot rött ljus. En enkätstudie bland cyklister i Uppsala. C- uppsats, Psykologiska institutionen, Uppsala university, Uppsala. Glad, A., Bernhoft, I.M., Mäki, M., Åberg,L. (1991). Faktorer som påvirker beslutningene om alkoholpåvirket kjöring. Nordisk trafiksikkerhedsråd, Rapport 56, Oslo. Gradin, J. (1998). Attityder till regelbrott i trafiken. En studie av skillnaden mellan bilister och cyklister. C-uppsats. Psykologiska institutionen, Uppsala universitet, Uppsala Haglund, M. (1998). Stability in drivers speed choice. Manus under bearbetning, Department of psychology, Uppsala universitet.

7 Manstead, A.S.R. (1996). Attitudes andbehaviour. In Semin, G.R.; Fiedler, K. (Eds) Applied Social Psychology. SAGE publications, London. Åberg, L., Sànches, F., Valentin, A. (1994). Current research and national experiences. Improving road safety by attitude modification. OECD, Paris, Åberg, L., Larsen, L., Glad, A., Beilinson, L. (1997). Observed vehicle speed and drivers perceived speed of others. Applied psychology: An international review. 46,