IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v14y2011i6p657-684.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A cross-cultural comparison of road traffic risk perceptions, attitudes towards traffic safety and driver behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Trond Nordfjærn
  • Stig Jørgensen
  • Torbjorn Rundmo

Abstract

The present study investigated cross-cultural differences in road traffic risk perception, risk sensitivity and risk willingness in Norway, Russia, India, Ghana, Tanzania and Uganda. Differences in driver attitudes and driver behaviour were also examined. An additional aim was to test whether the risk constructs and driver attitudes explained the variation in risky driver behaviour in these countries. To obtain these aims, a questionnaire survey was conducted among a randomly obtained representative sample of the Norwegian public ( n = 247). Stratified samples were established in Russia ( n = 245), India ( n = 196), Ghana ( n = 299), Tanzania ( n = 559) and Uganda ( n = 415). The respondents completed a questionnaire which consisted of validated self-reported measures of the risk constructs, and driver attitudes and behaviour. Norwegians reported safer attitudes regarding drinking and driving, and speeding in road traffic. These respondents also reported more seat belt use and lower frequencies of drinking and driving than the remaining subsamples. Respondents from Sub-Saharan Africa reported higher road traffic risk perceptions and risk sensitivity than respondents from Norway, Russia and India. Respondents from Tanzania reported the highest willingness to take risks both in traffic and in general. Participants from Sub-Saharan Africa and India reported safer attitudes in regard to speaking out to an unsafe driver, rule violations and sanctions, attitudes towards pedestrians, and traffic rules and knowledge. Respondents from Sub-Saharan Africa also reported more precautious behaviour and less speeding. The predictive model of driver behaviour explained a satisfactory amount of variance in Norway, Russia and India, but was poorly fitted in the African countries. The results are discussed in line with the general risk environments and the road traffic systems in high- and low-income countries. Challenges related to measuring road traffic attitudes and behaviour in low-income countries are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Trond Nordfjærn & Stig Jørgensen & Torbjorn Rundmo, 2011. "A cross-cultural comparison of road traffic risk perceptions, attitudes towards traffic safety and driver behaviour," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(6), pages 657-684, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:14:y:2011:i:6:p:657-684
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2010.547259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2010.547259
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2010.547259?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abhijit Sen & Abdulrahman Khamaj & Majed Moosa & Sougata Karmakar, 2022. "Cross-Cultural Study on OSH Risk Perception of Solar PV Workers of Saudi Arabia and India: Risk Mitigation through PtD," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Hélène Laurent & Marc Sangnier & Carole Treibich, 2021. "Traffic safety and norms of compliance with rules: An exploratory study," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 41(4), pages 2464-2483.
    3. Zain Ul-Abdin & Pieter De Winne & Hans De Backer, 2019. "Risk-Perception Formation Considering Tangible and Non-Tangible Aspects of Cycling: A Flemish Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-19, November.
    4. Mingyu Liu & Jianping Wu & Adnan Yousaf & Linyang Wang & Kezhen Hu & Katherine L. Plant & Rich C. McIlroy & Neville A. Stanton, 2021. "Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes, Risk Perceptions, Fatalistic Beliefs, and Pedestrian Behaviors in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-14, March.
    5. Shahram Heydari & Adrian Hickford & Rich McIlroy & Jeff Turner & Abdulgafoor M. Bachani, 2019. "Road Safety in Low-Income Countries: State of Knowledge and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-29, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:14:y:2011:i:6:p:657-684. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.