Attitudes about Instrumental Driving Aggression Scale

Abstract

The Attitudes about Instrumental Driving Aggression Scale (AIDAS), developed by Love, Indrawan, & Larue in 2024, is a six-item psychometric instrument designed to assess problematic attitudes toward instrumental aggressive driving behaviors. This scale specifically evaluates beliefs that rationalize speeding or rule-breaking under conditions where the driver perceives such actions as beneficial, such as improving traffic flow or achieving personal gain. The attitudes measured align with instrumental forms of driver aggression identified in previous research. The scale was validated using data collected from Australian adult drivers, and subsequent factor analysis provided strong evidence supporting a robust single-factor structure. Comprehensive reliability and validity evidence was reported in the scale’s initial publication.

Keywords

Instrumental Driving Aggression, Aggressive Driving Behaviors, Problematic Attitudes, Traffic Psychology, Attitude Measures, Highway Safety, Drivers, Human Factors Measures

Authors

Steven Love, Yolinda Indrawan, Grégoire S. Larue

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Attitudes about Instrumental Driving Aggression Scale is to measure and quantify problematic attitudes held by drivers regarding instrumental aggressive behaviors. This measurement helps researchers understand the cognitive foundation supporting intentional violations of traffic rules, particularly when such violations are perceived as serving a functional goal (e.g., saving time, maintaining perceived traffic efficiency).

The scale contributes to the nuanced study of driver aggression by isolating instrumental aggression attitudes from purely hostile or emotional forms of aggressive driving. Understanding these attitudes is crucial for developing targeted road safety interventions and educational programs aimed at reducing dangerous driving choices.

Construct

The scale measures the construct of Instrumental Driving Aggression Attitudes. This construct is defined as the cognitive acceptance and endorsement of driving behaviors that violate traffic safety norms (like speeding or bending rules) when the driver believes these actions will lead to a specific, non-hostile, instrumental outcome.

The items are designed to capture the belief system that supports the prioritization of efficiency or perceived competence (e.g., “good driving skills”) over strict adherence to traffic laws, differentiating this instrumental motivation from reactive aggression (e.g., road rage).

Validity

The Attitudes about Instrumental Driving Aggression Scale demonstrated strong psychometric validity across multiple metrics in its initial validation study.

• Factorial Validity: Factor analysis confirmed the structural integrity of the measure, supporting the hypothesized single-factor structure of Instrumental Driving Aggression Attitudes.
• Convergent Validity: Evidence of convergent validity was established through positive correlations between the AIDAS and the Aggressive Driving Style Questionnaire (ASDQ; Love, Indrawan, & Larue, 2024). This indicates that the AIDAS measures a construct related to, yet distinct from, general aggressive driving styles.

Reliability

The scale exhibits high levels of internal consistency, suggesting that all six items reliably measure the same underlying construct.

• Internal Consistency: The measure achieved an excellent internal consistency coefficient, with a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.89. This high reliability score confirms the cohesiveness of the scale items.

Factor Analysis

A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed to test the proposed single-factor model structure of the AIDAS using data from Australian drivers. The results generally supported the structural validity, although some fit indices indicated room for improvement, which is common in attitudinal scales.

The key fit statistics from the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) are summarized below:

• Chi-Square: χ²(9) = 63.36, p < .001
• Goodness of Fit Index (GFI): 0.959
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): 0.967
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): 0.967
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): 0.107
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): 0.033

Instrument

Test Type: Rating Scale

Format: Responses are recorded on a five-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The scale consists of 6 items and is designed for electronic administration.

Language Available: English (Validated using Australian drivers).

Population Group: Human (Male and Female).

Age Group: Adulthood (A broad range spanning Young Adulthood, Thirties, Middle Age, and Aged populations).

Population Details: The validation sample consisted of Adult Drivers aged 18 to 89, primarily located in Australia.

Test Methodology: The validation process utilized rigorous psychometric methods, including Test Validity, Convergent Validity, Test Reliability, Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), Factor Analysis, and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

Keywords

Psychological Measurement, Driver Behavior, Speeding Attitudes, Self-Regulation, Traffic Psychology, Road Safety Research, Instrumental Aggression

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier (Steven Love): ORCID: 0000-0002-2183-4464

Affiliation Email addresses: Not Specified (Authors affiliated with University of the Sunshine Coast, MAIC/UniSC Road Safety Research Collaboration and School of Health)

Correspondence Address: Not Specified

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 2024

Permissions & Fee: Permissions and usage fees for this scale should be sought directly from the corresponding author, Steven Love, or the University of the Sunshine Coast. Specific fee information is not publicly specified in the source material.

Reference’s

Love, S., Indrawan, Y., & Larue, G. S. (2024). Development of a nuanced approach to aggressive driving: An investigation into the self-regulatory and attitudinal profiles of aggressive drivers and their contextual role in negative road interactions. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 102, 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.02.012

Note: The development of this scale drew conceptual inspiration from the speeding attitude scale by Ulleberg and Rundmo (2002).

Items of the Attitudes about Instrumental Driving Aggression Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Statements

This scale assesses attitudes towards certain driving behaviors. Participants are asked to rate their agreement with each statement, indicating how much they agree with the presented attitudes. There are no right or wrong answers, and participants are encouraged to respond to all items.

The statements included in the scale are as follows:

1. It’s okay to speed if the traffic conditions allow you to do so.

2. If you have good driving skills, it is safe to drive above the speed limit in certain conditions.

3. If you are a safe driver, it is acceptable to slightly exceed the speed limit in built up areas.

4. Sometimes it is necessary to bend the rules to keep traffic going.

5. It is better to drive smoothly than always to follow the traffic rules.

6. Sometimes it is necessary to break the traffic rules in order to get ahead.

Scale

The rating scale used for each statement is presented in the following table:

Scale	Value
Strongly Disagree	1
Disagree	2
Sometimes Agree	3
Agree	4
Strongly Agree	5