Traffic Locus of Control Scale

Abstract

The Traffic Locus of Control Scale (TLCS) is a specialized psychometric instrument designed to assess how individuals attribute responsibility for potential involvement in traffic safety events, particularly motor vehicle accidents. Developed by Özkan, Lajunen, and Kaistinen, the scale measures the degree to which drivers perceive accident causation as stemming from internal factors (e.g., their own driving skills or risk-taking behavior), external factors related to other drivers (e.g., others’ shortcomings or aggressive driving), or external factors related to chance, fate, or environmental conditions.

Understanding a driver’s locus of control regarding traffic events is crucial for predicting risky driving behaviors and developing targeted safety interventions. The TLCS provides a standardized measure for researchers and practitioners in traffic psychology and human factors, often being employed in studies examining the acceptance of advanced in-vehicle technologies like Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA) and Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC).

Keywords

Traffic Locus of Control Scale, Locus of Control, Driving Behavior, Traffic Accidents, Risk Perception, Driver Safety, Psychometrics, Traffic psychology

Authors

Türker Özkan, Timo Lajunen, Jyrki Kaistinen

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Traffic Locus of Control Scale is to quantify individual differences in attributional style concerning road safety outcomes. Specifically, the scale aims to determine whether a driver believes that getting into a car accident is primarily dependent upon their own actions (internal control), the actions of others, or uncontrollable external forces such as luck, fate, or environmental conditions.

This assessment is vital for research aimed at correlating personality traits and motivational factors with observed driving performance and accident history. By isolating different dimensions of perceived control, the TLCS helps in identifying high-risk driver profiles and evaluating the efficacy of educational or technological interventions designed to promote responsible driving.

Construct

The TLCS measures the domain-specific application of the general psychological construct of Locus of Control (LoC), originally proposed by Julian Rotter. Locus of Control refers to the degree to which individuals believe they have control over the outcomes of events in their lives.

In the context of traffic, the scale generally distinguishes between three primary dimensions of attribution regarding accident involvement:

• Internal Locus of Control: The belief that accidents are caused by one’s own driving skills, risk-taking, or adherence to safety rules.

• External Locus of Control (Other Drivers): The belief that accidents are primarily caused by the carelessness, risk-taking, or poor skills of other drivers on the road.

• External Locus of Control (Fatalistic/Environmental): The belief that accidents are the result of uncontrollable forces such as bad luck, fate, poor weather, road conditions, or mechanical failure.

Validity

While specific detailed validity coefficients (such as criterion or convergent validity) require reference to the original publication, the scale is typically established through rigorous psychometrics procedures. Content validity is ensured by deriving items directly from common scenarios and attributional statements related to traffic accidents and risk behaviors.

Construct validity is generally supported by demonstrating that the scale’s subfactors align conceptually with established LoC theory (Internal vs. External dimensions) and that scores correlate logically with related driving constructs, such as self-reported aggressive driving, accident involvement, and attitudes toward safety measures and advanced vehicle systems.

Reliability

Reliability of the TLCS is typically assessed using measures of internal consistency, such as Cronbach’s alpha, within the established factor structure. High reliability indicates that the items measuring a specific dimension (e.g., Internal Control) are strongly interrelated and consistently measure the intended construct.

In initial validation studies, the reliability of the subscales is generally reported to be acceptable for psychological research, ensuring that the scale provides stable and consistent measurements of the driver’s attributional style over time and across different samples of licensed drivers.

Factor Analysis

The structure of the Traffic Locus of Control Scale is typically confirmed using Factor analysis, which identifies the underlying dimensions or latent variables that account for the correlation among the 17 items. Although the original source material does not explicitly detail the factor structure, standard LoC scales applied to specific domains usually yield a multi-factor solution.

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis procedures are employed to confirm that the scale items load onto the hypothesized dimensions: Internal Attribution, External Attribution (Other Drivers), and External Attribution (Chance/Fate/Environment). This process ensures the scale is a valid measure of distinct attributional tendencies rather than a single, monolithic measure of control.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire, Psychometrics scale

Format: Likert-type response scale (typically 5- or 7-point, indicating degree of agreement with the attribution statement).

Language Available: English, potentially Finnish and Turkish (based on author affiliations).

Population Group: Licensed motor vehicle drivers.

Age Group: Adults (typically focusing on active driving populations).

Population Details: Used primarily in studies of driver behavior, traffic psychology, and human factors research involving road safety.

Test Methodology: Respondents are asked to rate the extent to which they agree that the stated factor is responsible for causing a car accident.

Keywords

Attribution theory, Driving risk, Road safety, Internal control, External control, Driver attitude, Vehicle technology, Accident causation

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in the source material (Requires external lookup for specific author ORCIDs).

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] (Corresponding author)

Correspondence Address: Traffic Research Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Helsinki, Finland (Primary affiliation for corresponding author Türker Özkan).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: The scale was developed and validated in the context of research published around the early 2000s, based on the provided reference material concerning the study of driving skills and attitudes towards in-vehicle technologies (ISA & ACC).

Permissions: Usage permissions are typically governed by the lead authors (Özkan, Lajunen) and standard academic research ethics. Researchers should contact the corresponding author for formal usage permissions.

Fee: Generally available for academic research use without charge, though restrictions may apply for commercial applications.

Reference’s

The scale was developed and utilized in the context of the following research:

• Özkan, T., Lajunen, T., & Kaistinen, J. (Year not explicitly stated in snippet, inferred early 2000s). TRAFFIC LOCUS OF CONTROL, DRIVING SKILLS, AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS IN-VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES (ISA & ACC).

• The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=03B37F715E6BFB98D628E43C9402E44B?doi=10.1.1.117.2910&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Items of the Traffic Locus of Control Scale

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

1. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on shortcomings in my driving skills

2. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on my own risk-taking while driving

3. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on shortcomings in other drivers’ driving skills

4. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on other drivers’ risk-taking while driving

5. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on bad luck

6. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on dangerous roads

7. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on if I drive often with too high speed

8. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on if other drivers drive often with too high speed

9. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on if I drive too close to the car in front

10. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on if other drivers drive too close to my car

11. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on fate

12. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on bad weather or lighting conditions

13. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on a mechanical failure in the car

14. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on other drivers driving under influence of alcohol

15. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on other drivers’ dangerous overtaking

16. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on my own dangerous overtaking

17. Whether or not I get into car accident depends mostly on coincidence