Do you think you’re a good driver? Very few people are likely to answer “no”. Generally we like to present ourselves to other people in a positive light, so we may adapt how we respond to questions to make us seem like better people. In psychological research this is called social desirability and we make this positive adjustment to our responses in a wide range of circumstances. Essentially, any time we’re asked to report our attitudes and behaviours we’re likely to be over positive.

Over the past ten years a large number of online assessments have been developed to allow employers to quickly, easily and cheaply understand their employees driving behaviours and attitudes, including whether they are “risky drivers”. Whilst these assessments do provide a valuable source of information on employees’ driving behaviours, I suspect that the responses from employees might be influenced by social desirability.

Toward the end of the 1990’s a research team from the Traffic Research Unit in Finland developed a questionnaire to specifically measure social desirability in surveys of driving behaviour – the Driver Social Desirability Scale. The questionnaire included 25 items and was completed by more than four hundred participants from Finland and Australia.

From their analysis they identified two distinct aspects of driver social desirability. People scoring highly on the Driver Impression Management scale were more likely to lie about their actual driving behaviours, for example reporting that they would never exceed the speed limit or had driven through a traffic light turning red. People with high scores on the second scale, Driver Self-Deception, tended to overestimate their own driving beliefs. For example, they’re more likely to report being calm, confident and rational when driving.

While most people seek social desirability, some are more susceptible to it than others. Some people will give very honest (but possibly not very desirable) responses to driver assessments, whereas others are more likely to given socially desirable (but possibly not very honest) responses. Are there differences in driving behaviours and attitudes between these types of people?

An international team of researchers examined the relationship between social desirability, using the Driver Social Desirability Scale, and driving behaviours. They found that high scores on the social desirability scale were associated with fewer self-reported traffic collisions, but that they were not associated with the number of incidents recorded by the employing organisation. This means that people who seek social desirability, and want to be seen as good drivers, tend to report being safer drivers than the objective evidence suggests.

Online assessments of driver behaviour have many advantages. It’s easy, quick and cheap to assess the driving behaviours and attitudes of a large number of employees. It’s then possible to identify individuals who report more driving errors or violations or who are riskier drivers and then arrange further training for them. However, it’s important to bear in mind the possible effects of social desirability, which means that some people who might benefit from additional training are not identified.

Many of the recently developed self-report measures include items to test for social desirability. However, simply asking people how good they are at driving is not necessarily the most accurate way of finding out how good they really are. Having an awareness of social desirability when looking at self-report assessments will help a manager to have a better understanding of a driver’s attitudes and behaviours, which should then feed into the development of driver training and other interventions.

Dr Victoria Bourne (BA Hons, DPhil)

Counsultant to Driving Risk Management

In recent years there has been a great deal of emphasis placed on an organisation’s responsibilities towards the health and safety of its employees. In terms of driving, this has led to the Health and Safety Executive developing legislation to ensure that employers have the appropriate policies, procedures and training in place to ensure the welfare and safety of their employees when driving.

So, how much do the organisational climate and employer attitudes influence the driving behaviours of employees? A number of psychological studies have examined this relationship. So, can different approaches to driver training, and health and safety implementation, actually lead to employees driving in a safer way?

Recently, a review of driving safety at work was conducted by Australian researchers Sharon Newnam and Barry Watson, in the light of evidence showing that driving incidents are the most common reason of injury and death in the workplace. One aspect they considered was the organisational procedures, which was found to have three key components:

• holding a crash reporting database
• procuring/maintaining vehicles
• the recruitment and training of drivers.

Newnam and Watson concluded that the interventions instigated and implemented by senior management were essential to successfully increase safe driving behaviours. They also suggested that employees report safer driving behaviours when they have supervisors and fleet managers who encourage safety-related discussions and interventions. This shows the importance of adopting an organisational climate that is driving safety-aware at all levels, from the company directors right through to the company drivers themselves.

A research group in Finland, headed by Bahar Oz, asked 230 professional drivers to complete two questionnaires. One asked about their own driving behaviours and the other asked about the organisational culture of the company they work for. They found that the organisation’s culture divided into two key aspects: work orientation and employee consideration. Each aspect was differently associated with employee driving behaviour.

People who worked for companies with high work orientation scores, companies that actively promote the effective running of a company, were likely to report fewer intentional driving violations and more positive driving behaviours. In contrast, people working for companies that have high levels of employee consideration reported higher levels of unintentional driving errors, but lower levels of intentional driving violations. This finding is both interesting and important, as it highlights that companies which are openly considerate of their employees’ needs are likely to be rewarded by safer employee driving behaviours, and consequently less associated time and financial loss.

Research conducted at Cranfield University in the UK has also shown that driver training can increase safe driving behaviours. They compared the driving behaviours of drivers who had received professional training with those who had not. In a driving simulator they found that those who had received that training had better lane positioning, slower driving speeds and generally safer driving behaviours.

The research clearly shows that a company’s attitude to driving for work can change or influence an employee’s driving behaviours. In order to create the most advantageous organisational climate, companies need to pay particular attention to showing consideration to their employees and the training they provide. Such a climate leads to employees driving in a safer way, whereby they have fewer traffic incidents and violations. This in turn leads to savings for the company and better health and well being for the employee. In these difficult financial times many companies are searching for ways to save money so investing in driver safety is likely to provide long term benefits financially.

Dr Victoria Bourne (BA Hons, DPhil)

Counsultant to Driving Risk Management