Mindfulness predicts less texting while driving among young adults: Examining attention- and emotion-regulation motives as potential mediators

Simmons College, Boston MA.
Personality and Individual Differences (Impact Factor: 1.86). 11/2011; 51(7):856-861. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.07.020
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Many young adult drivers read and send text messages while driving despite clear safety risks. Understanding predictors of texting-while-driving may help to indentify relevant targets for interventions to reduce this dangerous behavior. The present study examined whether individual differences in mindfulness is associated with texting-while-driving in a sample of young-adult drivers. Using path analysis, we tested whether this relationship would be mediated by the degree to which individuals use text-messaging as a means of reducing unpleasant emotions (emotion-regulation motives) and the degree to which individuals limit texting in order to focus on present-moment experiences (attention-regulation motives). Individuals lower in mindfulness reported more frequent texting-while-driving and this relationship appeared to be mediated primarily by emotion-regulation motives. Results may help inform the development of mindfulness-based interventions to prevent texting-while-driving.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Driver cognitions about aggressive driving of others are potentially important to the development of evidence-based interventions. Previous research has suggested that perceptions that other drivers are intentionally aggressive may influence recipient driver anger and subsequent aggressive responses. Accordingly, recent research on aggressive driving has attempted to distinguish between intentional and unintentional motives in relation to problem driving behaviours. This study assessed driver cognitive responses to common potentially provocative hypothetical driving scenarios to explore the role of attributions in driver aggression. A convenience sample of 315 general drivers 16–64 yrs (M = 34) completed a survey measuring trait aggression (Aggression Questionnaire AQ), driving anger (Driving Anger Scale, DAS), and a proxy measure of aggressive driving behaviour (Australian Propensity for Angry Driving AusPADS). Purpose designed items asked for drivers’ ‘most likely’ thought in response to AusPADS scenarios. Response options were equivalent to causal attributions about the other driver. Patterns in endorsements of attribution responses to the scenarios suggested that drivers tended to adopt a particular perception of the driving of others regardless of the depicted circumstances: a driving attributional style. No gender or age differences were found for attributional style. Significant differences were detected between attributional styles for driving anger and endorsement of aggressive responses to driving situations. Drivers who attributed the on-road event to the other being an incompetent or dangerous driver had significantly higher driving anger scores and endorsed significantly more aggressive driving responses than those drivers who attributed other driver’s behaviour to mistakes. In contrast, drivers who gave others the ‘benefit of the doubt’ endorsed significantly less aggressive driving responses than either of these other two groups, suggesting that this style is protective.
    Transportation Research Part F Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 04/2015; 30. DOI:10.1016/j.trf.2015.03.001 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A sample of 158 male and 357 female college students at a midwestern university participated in an on-line study of psychosocial motives for texting while driving. Men and women did not differ in self-reported ratings of how often they texted while driving. However, more women sent texts of less than a sentence while more men sent texts of 1–5 sentences. More women than men said they would quit texting while driving due to police warnings, receiving information about texting dangers, being shown graphic pictures of texting accidents, and being in a car accident. A hierarchical regression for men’s data revealed that lower levels of feeling distracted by texting while driving (20% of the variance), higher levels of cell phone dependence (11.5% of the variance), risky behavioral tendencies (6.5% of the variance) and impulsivity (2.3%) of the variance) were significantly associated with more texting while driving (total model variance = 42%). A separate regression for women revealed that higher levels of cell phone dependence (10.4% of the variance), risky behavioral tendencies (9.9% of the variance), texting distractibility (6.2%), crash risk estimates (2.2% of the variance) and driving confidence (1.3% of the variance) were significantly associated with more texting while driving (total model variance = 31%.) Friendship potential and need for intimacy were not related to men’s or women’s texting while driving. Implications of the results for gender-specific prevention strategies are discussed.
    Accident Analysis & Prevention 11/2014; 74. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2014.10.001 · 1.87 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Mobile Media & Communication 01/2016;