Feelings of vulnerability and effects on driving behaviour – A qualitative study

Abstract

Feelings of vulnerability in driving can be considered an emotional response to risk perception and the coping strategies adopted could have implications for continued mobility. In a series of focus groups with 48 licensed drivers aged 18-75 years, expressions of vulnerability in driver coping behaviours were examined. Despite feelings of vulnerability appearing low, qualitative thematic analysis revealed a complex array of coping strategies in everyday driving including planning, use of 'co-pilots', self-regulation, avoidance and confrontive coping, i.e. intentional aggression toward other road users. The findings inform future intervention studies to enable appropriate coping strategy selection and prolong independent mobility in older adults.

An intervention encouraging planned self-regulation and goal setting in drivers across the lifespan: Testing an extended theory of planned behaviour

“…These scales were not used as they did not cover the full range of avoidance and planning behaviours. New items were generated using planning and preparation strategies gathered from focus groups (Gwyther & Holland, 2014). Items were subject to internal consistency analysis and Principal Components Analysis (PCA) to establish construct validity.…”

“…Traditionally, it has been conceptualised as driving avoidance, specifically in difficult or challenging circumstances, often in response to skill attenuation or age-related physical and functional decline (Baldock, et al, 2006;Ball et al, 1998;Hakamies-Blomqvist & Wahlström, 1998). However, the value of driving avoidance has been questioned, in terms of constraining everyday behaviour and independent mobility and disregarding an older adult's goals and motivations for driving (Gwyther & Holland, 2014). Molnar et al, (2013) examined self-regulatory practices in older adults taking into account motivations behind driving avoidance in certain circumstances.…”

“…Further, avoidance is only one strategy amongst a range of self-regulatory behavioural countermeasures, including pre-journey route planning and trial runs, pre-arranging rest stops, making vehicle adaptations (Molnar, et al, 2009) and presence of a 'co-pilot' (e.g. Shua-Haim, Shua-Haim, & Ross, 1999;Vrkljan & Millar Polgar, 2007;Gwyther & Holland, 2014).…”

User perception of transfers in multimodal urban trips: A qualitative study

“…Personal characteristics also influence the perception of factors related to transfers. This is the case of age (Broome, Worrall, Fleming, & Boldy, 2013;Emmerson, Guo, Blythe, Namdeo, & Edwards, 2013;Gwyther & Holland, 2014;Hancock & Rausch, 2010;Murray, 2015), which may imply a functional decline and influence the perception of barriers and facilitators to the "transfer experience".…”

“…Qualitative methods are a powerful tool for capturing transport users' perceptions, attitudes and emotions, and focus groups are frequently used as a technique (Ferrer, Ruiz, & Mars, 2015Hopkins & Mandic, 2017;Kenyon & Lyons, 2003). Focus groups (FG) have been used to explore topics such as the role of the built environment for short walking trips (Ferrer et al, 2015(Ferrer et al, , 2018, the provision of integrated multimodal traveler information (Kenyon & Lyons, 2003), issues related to motorcycle rider's safety (Huth, F€ ussl, & Risser, 2014), the perception of cycling among high school students and their parents (Hopkins & Mandic, 2017), or the perceived vulnerability in driving behavior (Gwyther & Holland, 2014).…”