A STUDY ON STRESS AND ANXIETY AMONG THE TWO WHEELER

RIDERS IN CHENNAI CITY

ABSTRACT

“A driving behaviors is aggressive if it is deliberate, likely to increase the risk of collision

and is motivated by impatience, annoyance, hostility and/or an attempt to save time”.

Research on stressful driving behavior has been relatively scant despite sustained interest
by the media and wider public. The available research can be divided into two main categories:
1) surveys of the driving public and 2) small-scale field experiments involving small samples of
two wheeler riders. The surveys provide estimates of self-reported, not actual on-road behavior.
The field experiments have generally been designed to provoke aggressive behaviors in a
contrived setting. Systematic observational studies of actual, aggressive driving behavior on
highways are not available. These studies are necessary to improve our understanding of the
incidence and causes of aggressive driving behavior.

Driver stress is caused by various factors that can be broadly classified into two
categories: short-term factors and long-term factors. One example of short-term stress is sudden
emotional one that may be reflected in the driver’s driving behavior. Such type of stress typically
appears as anger and irritation. Also one example of long-term stress is one that accumulates
over time, the typical of which is the stress induced by long-term inconvenience with car use.
This type of factors may influence a customer’s decision when purchasing next vehicleThis
research help to find out factors which is causing stress and anxiety for two wheeler riders such
as durational of travel, distance of travel and so on. This research also have given suggestion to
getout of stress and anxiety.

1
 A STUDY ON STRESS AND ANXIETY AMONG THE TWO WHEELER
RIDERS IN CHENNAI CITY

INTRODUCTION

People are subject to stress caused by different environmental factors in their daily lives.
Stress induces mental and physical burdens, distortion and pressure. Under a situation involving
continued tension, stress animates the sympathetic nerves. This upsets the balance between the
sympathetic nerves and the parasympathetic nerves, the latter of which work to keep the bodily
functions stable. It is widely known that this is a factor that causes various physiological
disorders, such as psychosomatic and psychoneurotic disorders.

Driver stress is caused by various factors that can be broadly classified into two
categories: short-term factors and long-term factors. One example of short-term stress is sudden
emotional one that may be reflected in the driver’s driving behavior. Such type of stress typically
appears as anger and irritation. Also one example of long-term stress is one that accumulates
over time, the typical of which is the stress induced by long-term inconvenience with car use.
This type of factors may influence a customer’s decision when purchasing next vehicle.

It is important for automakers to gain an understanding of this driver stress and improve
the brand strength of the car by eliminating these factors. In this study, a free-answer
questionnaire was distributed on the Web to extract stress factors. The purpose was to identify
the relation in characteristics between the driver’s susceptibility to stress. This method was
employed because it enabled the survey to be conducted relatively easily over a broad area with
respondents from all age groups and also because it was a well-established method generally
used to research market trends by quickly obtaining many responses. This survey method was
matched to this study, which required sufficiently numerous answer samples to analyze the
complex and diverse characteristics of drivers’ susceptibility to stress.

Efforts to identify predictors of driving anger and aggression have examined both
situational and personality explanations but have typically been theoretically lean. The majority

2
of research examining situations has explored the impact of traffic congestion or travel
impedance, which is conceptually similar. More recent theoretical accounts of frustration-
aggression suggest that the causal link between congestion and aggression is likely due to the
activation of negative affect and anger trait differences in driving stress have been positively
associated with state stress while driving. Trait aggression and stress have been positively
associated with number of traffic accidents.

The specific behaviors which constitute aggressive driving would include:

• Tailgating
• Weaving in and out of traffic
• Improper passing (eg.cutting in too close in front of vehicle being overtaken)
• Passing on the road shoulder
• Improper lane changes (failure to signal)
• Failure to yield the right of way to other road users
• Preventing other drivers from passing
• Unwillingness to extend cooperation to motorists unable to merge or change lanes due to
traffic conditions
• Driving at speeds far in excess of the norm which results in frequent tailgating, frequent
and abrupt lane changes
• Running stop signs
• Running red lights

Displays of annoyance or hostility which are not intended to physically harm other road users
but likely to intimidate, irritate, anger or provoke them may accompany these behaviors and
serve as indicators of the underlying motivation. These behaviors would include:
• flashing headlights
• sustained horn-honking
• glaring at another driver to show disapproval
• yelling
• gesturing

3
 This list of specific behaviors is preliminary. There is a need to describe some of these
behaviors and the circumstances under which they would occur in greater detail. For example,
while tailgating is always included on lists of aggressive driving behaviors, we are never offered
a more detailed description of what constitutes an unacceptable gap length between two vehicles.
These descriptions can best be obtained through observational studies.

The small amount of survey research on aggressive driving indicates that most drivers
admit to these behaviors, at least on occasion. However, it appears that survey respondents tend
to provide socially desirable responses. It is unclear if the lower incidence of certain behaviors
associated with higher collision risks such as running stop signs is due to this tendency rather
than to an actual low incidence of such behavior. The driving behavior generally has one or more
of the following characteristics:

• Likely motivated by impatience, annoyance or anger with another road user(s) or with a
prevailing traffic condition
• Calculated to save time at the expense of other road users
• Shows obvious disregard for other road users
• Intimidate or be perceived as dangerous by other road users
• Irritate or anger other road users
• Force other road users to take evasive action
• Driven through yellow lights that are turning red
• Driven 20 kms per hour or more over the speed limit
• Changed lanes without signaling
• Tailgated or driven too closely behind another car
• Flashed high beams at car in front of you
• Made rude gestures
• Waited until last second to merge with traffic on highway
• Pulled into parking space someone else is waiting for
• Passed on the shoulder of the road
• Another driver had cut very closely in front me

4
 • Another driver drove very closely behind me
• Another driver passed me in a dangerous manner
• Another driver cut me off at an intersection or exit
• Another driver made an obscene or threatening gesture
• Another driver wove in and out of traffic

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Individuals have traits which dispose them to behave regularly and persistently in a
variety of situations. These traits are said to constitute their personality. Efforts have been made
to explain social behavior with personality test results. Personality, however, has been found to
be a poor predictor of social behavior. Sensation seeking may be defined as the "need for varied,
novel and complex sensations and experiences and the willingness to take physical and social
risks for the sake of such experiences". A report says that only four of the thirty-eight studies
did not find a positive relationship between sensation seeking and risky driving. Much of
the research has focused on drinking and driving, but thirteen of the studies reviewed also
assessed the effects of sensation seeking on other risky driving behaviors.

Shinar (1998) suggests that drivers possessing traits associated with extroverted or Type
a personalities may be more likely to drive aggressively. While Shinar's suggestion is certainly
plausible, there does not appear to be any published research which reports a significant
relationship between these two personality traits and aggressive driving behavior. Much of the
road safety research on personality has focused on crash risk, not driving behavior.

Greyetal (1989) report that personal factors which have been identified as associated
with motor vehicle crashes include generally high levels of aggression and hostility,
competitiveness, less concern for others, poor driving attitudes, driving for emotional release,
impulsiveness and risk taking.

Norrisetal (2000) conducted a prospective study of 500 drivers aged 19-88 and found
that the combination of high trait hostility and low self-esteem resulted in significantly higher
crash risk. Personality traits certainly appear to have some predictive value.

5
 Hennessy and Wiesenthal (1997) interviewed a small sample of 40 drivers who
experienced rush hour congestion on a major divided highway in the Greater Toronto Area.
They measured each driver's trait stress (i.e. the driver's predisposition to stress) and state stress
(driver's exposure to traffic congestion) and interviewed the drivers to determine how these
variables affected a driver's behaviour. Observed stress levels were highest in drivers with high
trait stress who also experienced higher levels of roadway congestion.

The concept of lifestyle refers to clusters of behaviors typically displayed by individuals

with certain personalities. Beirness (1996) reviewed the fairly substantial research on the
relationship between lifestyle, driving performance and collision risk. These studies, which
focused primarily on young drivers, found a higher incidence of risky driving behavior and
collision involvement in individuals with lifestyles characterized by a favorable disposition
towards taking chances, impulsiveness and displaying aggression. These young drivers were
more likely to display other delinquent and health-compromising behaviors i.e. drinking, drug
use, smoking, fatigue due to late night socializing, poor academic performance and encounters
with the police. Forty per cent of the sample was classified as "Thrill Seekers." They were
tolerant of deviant behavior and were more likely to be influenced by peers. Thirty-nine per cent
of participants was "Conventional" and displayed a strong attachment to traditional values, high
levels of self-confidence and less responsiveness to peer influence. The remaining was classified
as "Inadequate" and displayed low levels of self-confidence, difficulty controlling anger and
frustration, low attachment to traditional values and poor academic performance. By the second
year of the study, the Thrill Seeking group scored significantly higher on a risky driving index
than either the Inadequate or Conventional groups. By the third year of the study, 27 per cent of
Thrill Seeking group, 14 per cent of the inadequate group and 9 per cent of the Conventional
were involved in motor vehicle collisions. Research on lifestyle factors has not been applied
specifically to aggressive driving behavior. The combined focus on both personality and social
factors typical of lifestyle research may improve our ability to understand the motivation of an
individual who often displays aggressive driving behavior (i.e. an aggressive driver).

Shinar(1999) reports a strong association between environmental conditions and

manifest driver aggression. He has reported a fairly strong relationship between the length of the

6
red phase and length of the green phase at an intersection, on the one hand, and the tendency for
drivers either run a red light or honk their horns when they are delayed by a vehicle that fails to
proceed when the light turns green. Drivers were more likely to run red lights at intersections
with long red phases and more likely to be impatient and honk at intersections with shorter green
phases.

Hennessy and Wiesenthal (1997) found that the most commonly reported behaviours on
a divided highway in high congestion conditions were direct coping behaviours (eg. seeking pre-
planned routes and listening to radio traffic reports), time facilitation behaviours (eg. listening to
music or the radio) and aggressive behaviours (eg. tailgating, swearing and yelling at other
drivers and horn honking). While the incidence of aggressive behaviours increased during
congestion, these behaviours still ranked third behind both direct coping behaviours and time
facilitation behaviours.

Formal interest in aggressive driving behavior as a research topic can be traced back to a
short monograph by Meyer Parry entitled Aggression on the Road. Parry's work pre-dated that
of Leeming by one year. Also writing in England, he suggested that "the increasing stress
involved in motoring nowadays makes the psychological efficiency of the driver a more
important factor than the mechanical efficiency of the vehicle he drives" (Parry, 1968). He
found that drivers with high scores on tests for anxiety and aggression had a higher crash risk.
Parry's work makes it clear that aggressive driving is not a new phenomenon.

In a study of aggressive driving, Hauber (1980) defined aggression on the road as actual
or intended behavior which the offender supposes will do physical or psychological harm to the
victim and which the victim experiences as such. This definition states that the aggressors must
have the expectation that their behavior will cause victims to experience physical or
psychological harm. Hauber, however, does not provide a list of driving behaviors he would
include or exclude from this definition.

Mizell (1997) for the purposes of his study, aggressive driving is defined as an incident in
which an angry or impatient motorist or passenger intentionally injures or kills another motorist,

7
passenger or attempts to injure or kill another motorist, passenger , in response to a traffic
dispute, altercation or grievance. He reports that violent traffic disputes resulting in homicide
and assault are increasing at the rate of 7 per cent per year. Mizell's study is based on 10,037
media and police reports of violent traffic disputes over a six year period. These incidents
resulted in 218 deaths. Bearing these methodological limitations in mind, it should nevertheless
be noted that the incidence of this extreme roadway violence appears to be quite low relative the
number of fatalities and injuries resulting from motor vehicle collisions. During the same six
year period covered in Mizell's study, there were 22,761,000 motor vehicle collision injuries and
290,105 motor vehicle collision fatalities recorded in the U.S. (NHTSA, 1999).

METHODOLOGY USED FOR THIS STUDIES

The objective of this research studies are

 To study the stress among the two wheeler riders during driving in CHENNAI city.
 To study the behavioral pattern of driving among bikers.
 To come out of with remedial measures for curbing the stress among bikers.
 To study the responses of bikers with anxiety .

The radom sample method used in this study. The sample collected from 110 respondents
at various places of Chennai city through structured questionnaire. Following statistical tools
were used in the study for analysis of data.

 Percentage Analysis
 Chi-square Method.
 ANOVA Test
 Weighted average method

8
MAJOR FINDINGS OF STRESS AND ANXIETY

Gender & Marital status

It is inferred that, out of the surveyed population, 75 were males (68%) and 35 were
females (32%). 86 were unmarried (78%) and 24 were married (22%). It shows that most of the
respondents are male and married. The comparative analysis between gender with marital status
by using chi- square observed that there is no significant difference between marital status &
gender.

The daily average duration & travel of two wheelers usage

It is noted that 24 rides (21.8%) less than 5km on an average, 28 rides (25.4%) 5-10km
on an average, 20 rides (18.3%) 10-15km on an average, 38 rides (34.5%) more than 20km on an
average. Also it is inferred that 72 rides (65.4%) less than 2hrs, 17 rides (15.4%) for 2-3hrs, 14
rides (12.7%) for 3-4 hrs, and 7 rides (6.5%) for more than 4hrs.

Statement which best suits your response while driving

It is observed that, 42 of the two wheeler riders strongly disagree that they have night
mares, 49 of the rider strongly disagree that they get cold & 55 strongly disagree that their sleep
is fitful and disturbed while riding the two wheelers. Also 44.4% riders strongly disagree the
symptoms while driving.

Causes and period of stress and anxiety

It is noted that two wheeler riders perceive the action only sometimes that cause them
stressed (43 riders), drivers gets stressed sometimes (55 riders) & even they get stressed they
lack only for less than 2 minutes (46 riders).

Status which you belong to while driving

9
 It is observed that only sometimes (43 riders) drivers feel danger of being late while
driving, they are not at all taking care of their driving (49 riders) i.e. stress affect their driving &
46 riders of drivers are sometimes aggressive in their driving

Response towards a stressful situation

From the analysis it is cited that the first response towards the stressed situation was
SLOWED DOWN (60 responses), second response was FLASHED LIGHTS (48 responses),
third response was TAPPED OR HIT BRAKES (42 responses).

Comparative analysis

• It is observed from chi-square test that there is no significance difference between gender
& distance traveled two wheeler riders daily.
• It is noted from chi-square test that there is significance difference between marital status
and daily distance traveled by the riders.
• It is inferred from ANOVA test that column wise there is a significant difference between
symptoms and riders but row wise there is no significant difference between the response
and riders.
• It is cited from ANOVA test that column wise there is no significant difference between
the response and riders but row wise there is significant difference between the response
and riders.
• It is observed from weighted average method the nightmare is first symptoms given by
the drivers while driving.

10
RECOMMENDATIONS

• Try to clear your mind of personal or work problems before driving;

• Focus on the drive ahead and its hazards – be aware that an unexpected hazard could crop
up at any moment and if you are not concentrating it could be fatal;
• Remember that you have a responsibility as a driver to look out for vulnerable road users
(pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and horse-riders), which requires your full attention;
• Predict and accept things that bother you on the road and make a decision not to let them
wind you up;
• Calm, controlled breathing helps to release muscular tension and relieve stress;
• don’t drive if you’re tired and take regular breaks during long journeys to refocus your
concentration (the Government advises breaks at least every two hours for fifteen
minutes);
• Plan your route carefully and allow plenty of time for your journey - rushing will only
increase anxiety;
• Ensure the driver’s seat and handle column are correctly adjusted for you;
• Drive at an appropriate speed within the speed limit – driving aggressively, speeding and
overtaking are unlikely to get you there much faster, but could prevent you from arriving
at all;
• Don’t go hungry - hunger can affect your concentration but don’t eat at the wheel;
• Tell your employer if you think you may be suffering from stress due to your job-its their
duty to resolve the problem

11
CONCLUSION

Driving Psychology is now in the beginning stages and is still evolving in content and
method, in response to the new need for managing driving behavior in an industrialized society.
The goal of driving psychology is to reverse the natural trend of escalating accidents that occur
with a sharp increase in the number of drivers and miles driven. The escalation of accidents,
injuries, and their financial cost is a preventable phenomenon, but it requires socio-cultural
interventions by government, social agencies, and citizen organizations. It is not preventable or
containable by law enforcement methods alone because these are external coercion mechanisms
that have only a limited effect. Drivers will revert to aggressive driving styles when detection by
police can be avoided. Compliance is dependent on surveillance.

Therefore, internal influence is possible only through the voluntary cooperation of each
individual. This voluntary cooperation can be engineered by means of the social influencing
process that naturally occurs in small groups like the Quality Driving Circles (QDCs). In
addition, the new driving norms that these socio-cultural methods create in each community, are
then spontaneously adopted from their parents by the current generation of children who will
form the next wave of drivers in the region.. Thus, driving psychology is also a health-enhancing
practice. Driving psychology can draw on the methodology used in allied fields such as behavior
management techniques for self-modification. This feature can be used in self-assessment as
well as in setting standards for testing, licensing, and rewarding or punishing (socially,
economically, and legally).

“HASTE MAKES WASTE”

12
REFERENCES

1. James (Jakobovits), L.A. and Nahl, Diane. (1987) Learning the library: Taxonomy of
skills and errors. College and Research Libraries, 48 (3), pp. 203-214.
2. Kohlberg, L. (1976) Moral stages and moralization. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral
Development and Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
3. Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., and Masia, B.B. (1964) Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook II: Affective Domain.
New York: David McKay.
4. Luria, A. (1961) The Role of Speech in the Regulation of Normal and Abnormal
Behavior. New York: Liveright.
5. McKnight, A.J. and Adams, B.B. Driver education task analysis. Alexandria, VA:
Human Resources Research Organization, 1970-1 (Volumes I, II, III) (Cited in Michon,
1985)
6. Meichenbaum, D. and Goodman, S. (1979) Clinical use of private speech and critical
questions about its study in natural settings. In G. Zivin (Ed.), The Development of Self-
Regulation Through Private Speech. New York: Wiley.
7. Michon, J.A. (1985) A critical view of driver behavior models: What do we know,
what should we do? In L. Evans and R.C. Schwing (Eds.). Human Behavior and Traffic
Safety. New York: Plenum Press. pp. 485-520.
8. Mischel, W. (1991) Personality dispositions revised and revised: A view after three
decades. L. A. Pervin (Ed.) Handbook of Personality Theory and Research (pp. 111-
134) New York: Guilford Press.
9. Nahl,. Diane (1999) What is Driving Informatics. On the Web at
http://DrDriving.org/informatics.html
10. Nahl, Diane. (1998) Novices' First Use of Web Search Engines: Affective Control in
Cognitive Processing. Internet Reference Services Quarterly 3(2): pp. 51-72.
11. Nahl, Diane. (1997). Information Counseling Inventory of Affective and Cognitive
Reactions while Learning the Internet. Internet Reference Services Quarterly 2(2/3):
pp. 11-33.
*****

13