Velocity, safety, or both? How do balance and strength of goal conflicts affect drivers' behaviour, feelings and physiological responses?

Motivational models of driving behaviour agree that choice of speed is modulated by drivers' goals. Whilst it is accepted that some goals favour fast driving and others favour safe driving, little is known about the interplay of these conflicting goals. In the present study, two aspects of this interplay are investigated: the balance of conflict and the strength of conflict. Thirty-two participants completed several simulated driving runs in which fast driving was rewarded with a monetary gain if the end of the track was reached. However, unpredictably, some runs ended with the appearance of a deer. In these runs, fast driving was punished with a monetary loss. The ratio between the magnitudes of gains and losses varied in order to manipulate the balance of conflict. The absolute magnitudes of both gains and losses altered the strength of conflict. Participants drove slower, reported an increase in anxiety-related feelings, and showed indications of physiological arousal if there was more money at stake. In contrast, only marginal effects of varying the ratio between gains and losses were observed. Results confirm that the strength of a safety-velocity conflict is an important determinant of drivers' behaviour, feelings, and physiological responses. The lack of evidence for the balance of conflict playing a role suggests that in each condition, participants subjectively weighted the loss higher than the gain (loss aversion). It is concluded that the interplay of the subjective values that drivers attribute to objective incentives for fast and safe driving is a promising field for future research. Incorporating this knowledge into motivational theories of driving behaviour might improve their contribution to the design of adequate road safety measures.