TAILGATING IN MALAYSIA: MARITAL STATUS MATTERS

Transcription

1 TAILGATING IN MALAYSIA: MARITAL STATUS MATTERS Ahmad Azad Ab Rashid Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research ABSTRACT The study adopted a self-report measure to investigate tailgating, or close following, among drivers in Malaysia. Responses from 240 participants revealed that age, gender, marital status and monthly income are significant predictors: younger, male and single drivers are more likely to closely follow front vehicles when driving. A further scrutiny of influence of gender-marital status interaction on tailgating tendency, after controlling for age, revealed noteworthy results: marital status moderates the tendency to tailgate only among male drivers. In other words, male-single drivers have the highest tendency to tailgate relative to not only female (regardless being single or married) drivers, but also more importantly to male-married drivers. Potential explanation for the results is discussed. Field of Research: tailgating, close following, marital status, risky driving Introduction Road safety is a problem in Malaysia. A day driving in Kuala Lumpur, its capital, is enough to give us the sense of traffic and its associated safety condition. Because the country is dashing forward towards becoming a developed country, more transportation activity is sine qua non. Hence the collateral effect of escalating number of vehicles on the road day by day is the increase of crash risk as well. While the government is trying to address this issue with public transport, its effect is yet to take place. Data from Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM) highlights that, in average, 18 to 20 crashes happen daily on Malaysian roads. Their data further indicates that in 2014, 2,208 crash cases, from the total of 16,763, were rear collisions; and out of that, 1,289 cases contributed to fatalities and serious injuries of the victims. Of course, rear collisions were not necessarily due to tailgating, but they are a reliable proxy hinting the tailgating problem. This is because, the law of physics posits that a proper following distance would give sufficient time and space for the driver to control and stop the car. If a driver fails to stop before making contact with the front vehicle, i.e. rear collision, this may likely indicate insufficient following distance, or tailgating. This argument brings us to the definition of tailgating or close following. 2. Tailgating To tailgate or, cucuk in local colloquial, refers to driving too close with front vehicle. The question is then how close is considered as too close? Evans and Wasielewski (1982) in their study showed that among those who followed front vehicle with time interval of less than 1 seconds, 49.7% had been involved in a crash, and 65.4% had at least a record of committing traffic offences. A later study by Rajalin, Hassel and Summala (1997) adopted 0.8 seconds of interval as the cut off for close following 277

2 in their observational study. They also reported that those who drove with this time gap were 2.3 times more likely to accumulate traffic offences. Relatedly, an on-road measurement of braking reaction time revealed that for average drivers, the braking reaction time can range from 1.0 to 2.0 seconds (Green, 2000; Sohn & Stepleman, 1998). This brake reaction time entails the time for drivers to perceive a threat, release the accelerator pedal, and shift the leg to the brake pedal. Michael, Leeming and Dwyer (2000) also suggested that tailgating refer to driving with headway that is less than 2.0 seconds. From these studies, therefore, a driver tailgates when he or she drives with time interval of 2.0 seconds and less with front vehicle. Further, Rajalin, Hassel and Summala (1997) also reported that while their results replicated results of Evans and Wasielewski (1983) that tailgaters were more likely to get involve in crash and committed traffic offenses, they found that the effect was only evident in male drivers, and even more glaring among young male drivers. The gender difference on tailgating behaviour is also evident in other studies: with male drivers dominating in expressing risky behaviours, including tailgating (Monteiro, Balogun, Kote & Tlhabano, 2015; Rhodes & Pivik, 2011; Jiménez-Mejías, Prieto, Martínez-Ruiz, et al., 2014; Nancy, Pivik & Sutton, 2015; Li, Yan, Wu, Radwan & Zhang, 2016; Amarasingha & Dissanayake, 2014). Various causal factors can be associated with this risky behaviour. Beside driver s trait factor such as sensation seeking, certain situational factors could also trigger anger, which then motivates the drivers to tailgate. To the best of the authors knowledge, published study of tailgating in Malaysia is extremely scarce if not absent. Thus, this study aims to uncover tailgating behaviour as an expression on anger behind the wheel, as well as potential predictors for the behaviour. 3. Methodology 3.1 Sample and data collection method The study involved 240 respondents of which 51.2% of them were female. Data collection procedure involved systematic sampling technique where only certain people who crossed an imaginary line at public places were approached. 3.2 Instrumentation After giving consent, participants answered aggressive driving questionnaire, Driver Anger Expression Inventory (DAX; Deffenbacher, Lynch, Otting & Swaim, 2002). It entails 49 questions, of which seven of the questions are related to tailgating. Other questions were not analysed for this article. The responses to these questions were then summed up to form tailgating score. The score reflects tendency of drivers to tailgate when they were angry. The extracted tailgating subscale from the inventory has an acceptable Cronbach s alpha coefficient, =

3 4. Results 4.1 Descriptive Statistics & Analysis Means participants age were (SD = 9.53) years old. Table 1 provides descriptive details of other variables, as well as results of further inferential statistical tests. From Table 1, the overall mean of tailgating score was (SD = 3.28). Tailgating score for male drivers deviated higher than the overall mean at (SD = 3.45). Female drivers, however, had tailgating scores lower than the overall mean at 9.63 (SD = 2.52). Independent Sample t-test further verified the difference between male and female drivers, t(211.72) = 6.75, p <.001. Similarly, tailgating score for single drivers, (SD = 3.82), was also higher than the overall average, whereas married drivers, (SD = 2.57) were lower. Results of Independent Sample t- Test verified the difference between single and married drivers, t(154.85) = 4.13, p <.001. Besides gender and marital status, tailgating scores were also significantly different across different brackets of monthly income, F(3, 236) = 2.92, p =.04. Across the income brackets, those who reported had no stable income had the highest score of tailgating followed by those who enjoyed RM 1,000 5,000 monthly. Because of relatively big variations of sample size among one income bracket to the other, post-hoc analysis was ignored. Unlike monthly income, the level of education of drivers is not a significant predictor for tailgating scores, F(3, 236) = 1.78, p =.15. In addition, correlation of age and tailgating score produced negative significant relation, albeit weak, r = -.30, p <.01. Table 1: Descriptive results for tailgating scores according to participants demography. N Tailgating scores Mean (SD) Overall (3.28) Statistical Test Results Gender Female (2.52) t(211.72) = 6.75, p Male (3.45) <.001 Marital Status* Single (3.82) t(154.85) = 4.13, p Married (2.57) <.001 Monthly Income below 1, (2.74) Highest Education 1,000 5, (3.34) above 5, (2.13) no stable (5.17) 8 income Secondary (3.13) 117 school Diploma (3.79) Undergraduate (2.78) Postgraduate (2.38) F(3, 236) = 2.92, p =.04 F(3, 236) = 1.78, p =

4 Note: * Two participants did not declare their marital status 4.2 Gender-Marital Status Interaction A further interesting question from these results would be the interaction between gender and marital status onto tailgating scores. Table 2 summarises the mean score for this interaction. The highest mean of tailgating score belongs to male-single drivers, (SD = 3.95), followed by male-married drivers, (SD = 2.29), and female-single drivers, 9.93 (SD = 2.38), respectively. The lowest score belongs to female-married drivers, 9.44 (SD = 2.60). One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) revealed that the differences between these groups are significant, F(3,234) = 26.70, p <.01. Post-hoc analysis further revealed that all of the differences among driver groups are significant (p <.05), except between female-married and female-single, p =.35, and between male-married and femalesingle, p =.06. Table 2: Means of tailgating score for the interaction between gender and marital status Single Tailgating Score Mean (SD), N Married Female 9.93 (2.38), (2.60), 77 Male (3.95), (2.29), 64 This results, however, is subjected for a covariation of age because single drivers are likely to be younger than married drivers. Thus, to address potential covariation of age in the analysis of gender and marital with tailgating score, the analysis continued with ANCOVA procedure controlling for age. The analysis revealed that age was a marginally significant covariate, F(1, 233) = 6.72, p =.01, for the difference of tailgating score among the four driver groups. Nonetheless, after controlling for the influence of age, the analysis of variance still produced a significant results, F(3, 233) = 20.60, p <.01. The adjusted means of tailgating score for each driver group are in Table 3. Relative to Table 2, the highest mean is still in male-single group, followed by male-married group. The third highest mean, however, is shifted to female-married instead of female-single in Table 2. Nonetheless, pairwise comparison among female drivers retained the same non-significant different results, p =.65. All other comparisons are significant, p <.05. Another noteworthy result is that, relative to before controlling for age, pairwise difference between male-married drivers and female-single drivers is significant, p =

5 Table 3: Adjusted means after controlling for age Single Tailgating Score Adjusted Means [CI] Married Female 9.53 [8.66, 10.40] 9.74 [9.07, 10.40] Male [12.54, 14.22] [10.56, 12.01] 5. Discussion Tailgating, despite one of the prominent road safety issues in Malaysia, is understudied. Present study investigated the tendency of drivers to exhibit the risky behaviour via self-reported method, as an expression of anger while driving. The results suggest that male drivers have higher tendency to tailgate, relative to female drivers. Further, negative correlation of tailgating score with age also hinted that younger drivers have higher tendency to tailgate relative to their older counterpart. This is consistent with the results of headway observation that Evans and Wasielewski (1983) reported: young and male drivers had shorter headways. Besides gender and age, tendency to tailgate also significantly different across various bracket of monthly income of drivers; but not across different education levels. The study also highlighted that the interaction of gender and marital is important. Even though the initial results of the interaction indicates that male-married drivers are equally likely to tailgate as female-single drivers; after controlling for age as a covariate, however, the results changed. Malemarried drivers are more likely to tailgate than female-single drivers. Among female drivers, regardless of marital status, the propensity to tailgate is equally likely. In short, the tendency to tailgate is more prominent among male drivers, and mostly eminent if they are still in their bachelorhood. The influence of marriage onto tailgating behaviour is underexplored, especially in Malaysia context. Outside our national border, nevertheless, an old study by Harrington and McBride (1970) has shown that married men are less likely to involve speeding, and reckless driving. While the study did not address tailgating specifically, speeding, reckless driving, and tailgating share common theme of aggressive driving. More surprisingly is that a highly contrasted study between crash-involved and - free drivers revealed that married men are less likely to be involved in crash (Harano, McBride & Peck, 1975). One possible explanation for relating marriage and aggressive actions lies on social exclusion. Previous experimental studies have shown that participants who were socially rejected (i.e. poor sense of belongingness) were consistently more aggressive towards other people (Twenge, Baumeister, et al., 2001), less prosocial than others (Twenge, Ciarocco & Baumeister, 2001), and had higher tendency for committing self-defeating acts (Twenge, Catanese & Baumeister, 2001). In addition, Baumeister, Twenge and Nuss (2002) also demonstrated that social exclusion reduces the ability of effective higher reasoning. Thru marriage, people (i.e. drivers) secure not only personal connection, which in turn brings a sense of belongingness; but also gain certain recognition from their society. In other words, drivers would have better sense of belongingness and socially inclusion after getting married. Thus, married drivers are less likely to engage in self-defeating and risky behaviour, 281

6 including tailgating. 6. Limitation This study measured tailgating behaviour using self-report questionnaire, and thus the data are subjected to the usual biases such as social desirability. However, we have ensured that during data collection, participants were given enough privacy to answer the questions. Given the large sample size, and reasonable dosage of anonymity, we believe the issue, if any, is reduced. Another limitation of the study is that the participants are mainly collected around Selangor. Given sub-culture different in the other states of Malaysia, there is a possibility for difference of results if responses of participants from these states were taken into the study. 7. Conclusion From this study, the propensity to tailgate is more among male drivers, and more prominent if they are single. While this study, we believe was the first to address tailgating in Malaysia, managed to uncover important results, it certainly did not undermine the need of more thorough studies in the future, especially to understand the mechanism and why drivers in Malaysia cucuk. References Amarasingha, N., & Dissanayake, S. (2014). Gender differences of young drivers on injury severity outcome of highway crashes. Journal of Safety Research, 49, Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of social exclusion on cognitive process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), Deffenbacher, J. L., Lynch, R. S., Oetting, E. R., & Swaim, R. C. (2002b). The Driving Anger Expression Inventory: A measure of how people express their anger on the road. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40, Evans, L., & Wasielewski, P. (1982). Do accident-involved drivers exhibit riskier everyday driving behavior. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 14, Evans, L., & Wasielewski, P. (1983). Risky driving related to driver and vehicle characteristics. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 15, Green, M. (2000). How long does it take to stop? Methodological analysis of driver perceptionresponse times. Transportation Human Factors, 2(3), Harrington, D. M., & McBride, R. S. (1970). Traffic violations by type, age, sex, and marital status. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2(1), Jime nez-meji as, E., Prieto, C.A., Marti nez-ruiz, V., Castillo, J. d., Lardelli-Claret, P., Jime nez- Moleo n, J.J., Gender-related differences in distances travelled, driving behaviour and traffic 282

7 accidents among university students. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 27, 81 89, Li, X., Yan, X., Wu, J., Radwan, E., & Zhang, Y. (2016). A rear-end collision risk assessment model based on drivers' collision avoidance process under influences of cell phone use and gender A driving simulator based study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 23(97), doi: /j.aap Michael, P. G., Leeming, F. C., & Dwyer, W. O. (2000). Headway on urban streets: Observational data and an intervention to decrease tailgating. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 3, Monteiro, N. M., Balogun, S. K., Kote, M., & Tlhabano, K. (2014). Stationary tailgating in Gaborone, Botswana: The influence of gender, time of day, type of vehicle and presence of traffic officer. IATSS Research. 38: DOI: /j.iatssr Rajalin, S., Hassel, S. O., & Summala, H. (1997). Close-following drivers on two-lane highways. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 29(6), Rhodes, N., & Pivik, K. (2011). Age and gender differences in risky driving: the roles of positive affect and risk perception. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, doi: /j.aap Rhodes, N., Pivik, K., & Sutton, M. (2015). Risky driving among young male drivers: The effects of mood and passengers. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 28, Harano, R. M., McBride, R. S., & Peck, R. C. (1975). The Prediction of Accident Liability through Biographical Data and Psychometric Tests. Journal of Safety Research, 7(1), Sohn, S. Y., & Stepleman, R. (1998). Meta-analysis on total braking time. Ergonomics, 41, Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., Tice, D. M., & Stucke, T. S. (2001). If you can t join them, beat them: The effects of social exclusion on antisocial behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(6), Twenge, J. M., Catanese, K. R., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, B. F. (2001). If no one will ever love you...: Social exclusion causes self-defeating behavior. Unpublished manuscript. Twenge, J. M., Ciarocco, N. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2001). Help! I need somebody: Effects of social exclusion on prosocial behavior. Manuscript submitted for publication. 283