Couple similarity for driving style.

Previous research has found couple similarity for personality and psychopathology, couple congruency on a variety of issues, and gender differences in driving styles. The current investigation, however, represents the first attempt to integrate these aspects by examining couple similarity for driving styles.

In line with previous studies, here too men were found to report aggressive and risky driving styles more than women, and women reported a higher tendency for an anxious driving style than men. Interestingly, no gender difference was found in the careful style. It is possible that such a difference should be expected for younger participants, than for older ones, as a previous study found that sons (aged 18–33, Mean age 22.66) revealed the lowest level of careful style in comparison to daughters (same age range as sons), mothers (aged 35–68, Mean age 49.17) and fathers (aged 41–74, Mean age 53.26). In other words, whereas the younger men in that sample had lower careful driving style scores than women, older men did not.

More interestingly, our results provide support for our hypothesis of a similarity between couple’s driving styles. Thus, though men tend to report driving more recklessly and aggressively than women, still, the higher the level of recklessness and aggressiveness characteristic of men, the higher level of such driving styles can be expected for their women partners. These relatively high couple correlations for driving style may be understood in light of finding that couple similarity for actual antisocial behavior was quite substantial, whereas couple similarity for personality traits related to antisocial behavior was low. They argued that “unlike personality—an inferred, latent potential for engaging in certain sorts of actions—antisocial behavior consists of specific actions, both conceptually and operationally … people will find it easier to find their ‘behavioral likeness’ than their ‘personological likeness’. Driving style might thus represent a behavioral field in which individuals observe specific overt behaviors of their partner, and may either adopt part of that behavior, or perhaps even choose their partner because of it. Future research is required in order to identify the specific path by which this similarity emerges.

It is, however, important to note that despite the correlations for couple similarity found here, the associations are not complete, indicating that other influences, not accounted for in the present study (such as societal norms, personality characteristics, etc.), may also contribute to driving style. These factors warrant further investigation in future studies.
Our findings also demonstrate associations between a woman’s own driving-related characteristics and reported styles and her partner’s reported driving style on the one hand, and her tendency to commit traffic violations on the other. More specifically, the study indicates that the more a woman drives and the longer she has been driving, as well as the higher her reported tendency for a reckless or angry driving style and the lower her reported tendency for a careful style, the higher her rate of reported involvement in traffic violations.

In addition, the higher her partner’s reported tendency for an anxious driving style and the lower his reported tendency for a careful style, the greater her reported involvement in traffic violations. Moreover, greater weekly mileage and years of driving, a higher reported tendency for the reckless and lower reported tendency for the careful driving styles, and the partner’s reported higher tendency for the anxious style all uniquely contribute to women’s reported involvement in traffic violations. Thus, not only their own driving habits, but also their partner’s driving style may contribute to women’s tendency for reckless driving behavior and the likelihood of their committing traffic violations. These variables were less relevant for men, for whom only older age and a lower reported tendency for the careful style were found to be related to reported traffic violations, and only a higher reported tendency for the anxious style uniquely contributed to their reported involvement in traffic violations. Thus, it seems that women might be more affected by their partner’s driving style, than men, pointing to the need to relate to men as a primary at-risk population in various interventions, aiming at moderating not only men’s non-adaptive driving styles but also indirectly – women’s as well.

The finding that only their own anxious driving style contributed to men’s reported involvement in traffic violations, is surprising, and should be more thoroughly explored in future studies.
In addition, the study found substantial correlations between self-report and partner report in respect to driving style. This is important as it indicates the value of self-report, regardless of the doubts that have been raised concerning the use of this technique, because it shows that self-reports might be a reliable source of data for driving-related measures. Future studies might do well to elaborate on this issue in order to increase our understanding of the practical applications of self- and other-report.

Certain limitations of the present study must be addressed. Firstly, although participants were recruited from several organizations and universities throughout Israel, participation was voluntary and the sampling procedure was not random. Future studies might try to employ a more representative random sample. Secondly, the fact that all respondents first filled in the self-report questionnaire and then the report about their partner, at the same point in time, might have created a somewhat artificial similarity. Future studies should address this bias and counterbalance the questionnaire order or try to administrate the questionnaires in two separate occasions.

Thirdly, this study was conducted in a correlational research set. Thus, though we hypothesized that the commission of violations of one partner would be influenced by the driving style of the other, it might also be that the commission of violations actually affects the partner’s driving style. Longitudinal or experimental designs would be able to give better answers to this possibility. Fourthly, it is possible that different cultures exhibit different kinds of preferred relationships. Cross cultural validations of the current findings are thus recommended. Finally, although this study seems to support the accuracy of self-report, it is also possible that the similarity in reports is due to the high level of assortment, discussed earlier referring to attitudes and behavior. Future investigations might consider validating this approach by combining self-reports with more objective measures, such as simulators or observations to assess driving styles and behaviors.

Despite these limitations, the current study benefited from the use of the reports of both partners in a relatively large sample. In view of the limited attention that has been paid to the associations between couples’ driving styles, more research is clearly needed to identify the impact of couple similarity for driving behavior on other aspects, such as involvement in car crashes, personal relationship and family functioning, and the inter-generational transmission of driving styles from parents to offspring. Moreover, it would be of interest to investigate the role of various personal and personality traits in this association between couples’ driving styles.

To conclude, the current study represents a preliminary, but important, step both in understanding the association between couples’ driving styles, and in confirming the use of self-report measures. Future research aimed at determining whether couple similarity for driving behavior is the result of a learning process could help in the development of interventions specifically addressing the potential negative implications of such transmission. Nevertheless, the current findings are important, as they implicate that intimate partners may enhance and add to each other’s risk-taking tendencies, amplifying the risk taken while driving. Moreover, such tendencies might affect not only their own non-adaptive or problematic driving styles, but have long-term implications on their offsprings driving habits, since parents are an important source and a model for learning reckless driving. The presence of two risk-taking parents in the car, who are unable to moderate reckless driving of each other, might be a very bad example for either a child or a teenager sitting in the same car, watching and developing long-lasting values regarding driving.