Volume List  / Volume 7 (2)



DOI: 10.7708/ijtte.2017.7(2).04

7 / 2 / 192-202 Pages


Matúš Šucha - Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Palacky University, Krizkovskeho 10, 771 80, Olomouc, Czech Republic -


This article presents the How-to-influence-behaviour model, the purpose of which is to describe situation-specific factors that influence the behaviour of road users, drivers in particular. Behaviour is considered to be the result of the action of human-specific and situation-specific factors; it cannot be influenced directly, but through interventions at the level of the given factors. The model focuses on to what extent situation-specific factors are influenced by interventions at the societal level. Indeed, it is society rather than a human being as an individual entity that is responsible for the implementation and effectiveness of such interventions. Relationships with other relevant approaches, such as the 3 E’s (Enforcement, Engineering, and Education) and hierarchic models of human behaviour in traffic (e.g. the Gadget model) are pointed out. The application of the model is illustrated through the issue of the choice of a safe driving speed. The levels of the process of a driver’s choice of speed (the levels of knowledge, experience, values, and attitudes and the metalevel) and the areas of the interventions according to the model (traffic rules and law enforcement, vehicle design, traffic infrastructure, and culture and norms) are defined. Available evidence concerning interventions and their effects on traffic safety (effectiveness) leads to the conclusion that the domains of traffic rules and law enforcement are represented to a significant extent, especially at Levels 1 and 2 of drivers’ decision making (knowledge and experience). On the other hand, very little information is available about interventions aimed at Levels 3 and 4 of drivers’ decision making (values, attitudes, and the metalevel) and the domain of traffic culture.

Download Article

Number of downloads: 242


This research was funded by research grant of Ministry of Education of Czech republic, project IGA FF_2017_021 “Psychology research in the selected fields of pedagogical and clinical psychology.


Bjørnskau, T.; Elvik, R. 1992. Can road traffic law enforcement permanently reduce the number of accidents?, Accident Analysis & Prevention 24(5): 507-520.


Chaloupka-Risser, Ch.; Risser, R.; Zuzan W.D. 2011. Verkehrspsychologie. Grundlagen und Anwendungen [Traffic psychology: Theory and practice]. Facultas-Verlag, Wien. 145 p.


Christensen, P.; Elvik, R., 2007. Effects on accidents of periodic motor vehicle inspection in Norway, Accident Analysis & Prevention 39(1): 47-52.


Christie, N.; Cairns, S.; Towner, E.; Ward, H. 2007. How exposure information can enhance our understanding of child traffic “death leagues”, Injury prevention 13(2): 125-129.


Conger, J. J.; Gaskill, H. S.; Glad, D. D.; Hassel, L.; Rainey, R. V.; Sawrey, W. L.; Turrell, E. S. 1959. Psychological and psycho physiological factors in motor vehicle accidents: Follow-up study, Journal of the American Medical Association 169(14): 1581-1587.


Dewar, R. E.; Olson, P. L.; Alexander, G. J. 2001. Perception and information processing, in: Dewar, R. E., Olson, P. L. (Eds.), Human Factors in Traffic Safety. Lawyers and Judges Publishing, Co. Int., Tucson, AZ. 223 p.


Elliott, M.; Broughton, J. 2004. How methods and levels of police affect road casualty rates. TRL Report PR SE/924/04. Transport Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, England. 43 p.


Elvik, R.; Vaa, T. (Eds.). 2004. The Handbook of Road Safety Measures. Pergamon, Amsterdam. 564 p.


ETSC, 2015. 9th Road Safety Performance Index Report. Available at http://etsc.eu/9th-annual-road-safety-performance-index-pin-report/. Accessed March 10, 2016.


European Road Safety Observatory, 2006. Speeding. Available at: www.erso.eu. Accessed January 20, 2007.


Fahlquist, J. N. 2006. Responsibility ascriptions and Vision Zero, Accident Analysis & Prevention 37: 601-603.


Evans, L. 2004. Traffic safety. Science Serving Society, MI, USA. 355-356p.


Fuller, R. 1984. A conceptualization of driving behaviour as threat avoidance, Ergonomics 27(11): 1139-1155.


Fuller, R. 2005. Towards a general theory of driver behaviour, Accident Analysis & Prevention 37: 461-472.


Goodwin, A.; Kirley, B.; Sandt, L.; Hall, W.; Thomas, L.; O’Brien, N.; Summerlin, D. 2013.


Countermeasures that work: A highway safety countermeasures guide for State Highway Safety Offices, 7th edition. (Report No. DOT HS 811 727). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC. 233-234p.


Hatakka, M.; Keskinen, E.; Gregersen, N. P.; Glad, A.; Hernetkoski, K. 2002. From control of the vehicle to personal self-control; broadening the perspectives to driver education, Transportation Research Part F 5(3): 201-215.


Hegel, G. W. F. 2010. Wissenschaft der Logik [Doctrine of Being]. Science of Logic, tr. George di Giovanni. Cambridge University Press, UK. 210-212 p.


Keskinen, E. 1996. Why do young drivers have more accidents? Junge Fahrer und Fahrerinnen. Referate der Ersten Interdiziplinären Fachkonferenz, December 12-14, 1994, Köln, Germany. In: Berichte der Bundesanstalt für Strassenwesen. Mensch und Sicherheit, Heft M 52.


Ker, K.; Roberts, I.; Collier, T.; Beyer, F.; Bunn, F.; Frost, C. 2005. Post-licence driver education for the prevention of road traffic crashes: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials, Accident Analysis & Prevention 37(2): 305-313.


Klebelsberg, D. 1971. Subjektive und objektive Sicherheit im Strassenverkehr als Aufgabe für die Verkehrssicherheitsarbeit. Schriftenreihe der deutschen Verkehrswacht [Subjective and objective safety in the field of traffic psychology and traffic safety in general in German context], 51: 3-12.


Mayhew, D. R; Simpson, H. M. 2002. The safety value of driver education and training, Injury Prevention, 8(suppl 2): ii3-ii8.


McKnight, A. J.; Adams, B. B. 1970. Driver Education Task Analysis. Volume II: Task Analysis Methods. Final Report. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED075624.pdf. Accessed March 9th, 2016. 49 p.


Michon, J. A. 1989. Explanatory Pitfalls and Rule-Based Driver Models, Accident Analysis & Prevention 21(4): 341-353.


NHTSA, 2004. Safe Routes to School: Practice and Promise. Author, Washington, DC. Available at: www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/bike/Safe-Routes-2004/. Accessed March 10th, 2016.


Nilsson, G. 2004. Traffic safety dimensions and the power model to describe the effect of speed on safety. PhD thesis, Lund University, Norway. 131-132 p.


Rasmussen, J. 1980. What can be learned from human error reports, in Duncan, K., Grunenberg, M. & Wallis, D. (Eds.), Changes in Working Life. Wiley, London. 55-56 p.


Risser R. 2004. Philosophy of Traffic Calming, The Asian Journal, Journal of Transport and Infrastructure 11(1): 1-9.


Summala, H. 1985. Modeling driver behavior: A Pessimistic Prediction?, in: Evans, L. & Schwing, R., (Eds.), Human Behavior and Traffic Safety. Plenum Press, New York.


Tay, R. 2005. Drink driving enforcement and publicity campaigns: are the policy recommendations sensitive to model specification? Accident Analysis & Prevention 37(2): 259-266.


Taylor, D. H. 1994. Drivers’ galvanic skin response and the risk of accident, Ergonomics 7: 439-451.


TRB, 1998. Managing Speed. Review of Current Practice for Setting and Enforcing Speed Limits. Special report 254. Author, Washington, DC. 34-45 p.


WHO, 2015. Global status report on road safety 2015. Author, Geneva. Available at http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/en/. Accessed March 9th, 2016.


Ward, N. J.; Linkenbach, J.; Keller, S. N.; Otto, J. 2010. White paper on traffic safety culture. the series: White Papers for “Toward zero deaths: a national strategy for highway safety”–White Paper, (2). Available at http://www.westerntransportationinstitute.org/documents/reports/4w3048_final_report.pdf. Accessed March 10th, 2016.


Wilde, G. J. 1982. The theory of risk homeostasis: implications for safety and health, Risk Analysis 2(4): 209-225.