A DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY
DESIGNED TO ASCERTAIN TOPICS
REQUIRING INSTRUCTIONAL EMPHASIS

Thesis for the Degree of ‘Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
WILLIAM JOHN MEDVE
1969

0-169

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

A DRIVER AW‘TITUDT? INT-TWO???
DWSTG—ITFTD TO ASCTRFE‘ATN ”707.310“:

RVQTTTRTWG IIISTRUCTIO

TIN T

J'a‘1_.

presented by
Tar-1:7, TAM {TOWN IvaIDTf’?

1 ”If“? ’A S T S

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

T’hD

 

Date 121.,

degree inL.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,W 211-9 ‘:<\1_..~;

R V amoma av "’

HUM; & SIINS
8W BINDERY INC.

'*\\
mm BINDERS
a, mwwl

       

  
    

the redu.
desirable
gram Obje
in a coux
resort tc
tunately'
been 016381

than to S

Sta

tQHEnt
\

T‘r

attitude i

ABSTRACT

A DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY DESIGNED TO ASCERTAIN
TOPICS REQUIRING INSTRUCTIONAL EMPHASIS

by William John Medve

Introduction

 

If driver education is to play an effective role in
the reduction of traffic accidents, then the development of
desirable driving attitudes should be one of the major pro-
gram objectives. Since the attitudes of students enrolled
in a course cannot be readily detected, teachers must
resort to the use of suitable measuring devices. Unfor-
tunately, most of the available driver attitude scales have
been designed to evaluate student attitudes per se rather

than to serve as instructional guidelines.

Statement of the Problem

 

The purpose of this study was to develOp a practical
attitude inventory which would be concise, relatively easy
to administer and interpret and yet give some indication of
student attitudes as they related to motor vehicle regula-
tions and driving practices. The intended function of the

inventory was not to evaluate individual attitudes per se,

but to u
l. Appr
PUIP
whic
in t
L The

ifyj

C)
e
(D
'—J
O
9

driver

W35 p05
(4) Alc
(BI Emc
Sixty (
favora}
EOWEve
TheSe

eral 1
edUCat

in? an

William John Medve

but to use subscores to designate:

1. Appropriate channels of instructional emphasis for the
purpose of changing or modifying student attitudes
which may be distorted in their expression or negative
in their effects. (Pre-test)

2. The effectiveness of instructional procedures in mod-

ifying or changing student attitudes. (Post-test)

Development of the Preliminary Inventory

 

Based on the review of the literature and existing
driver attitude scales, the following universe of content
was postulated: (1) Laws, (2) Enforcement, (3) Licensing,
(4) Alcohol, (5) Speeding, (6) Accidents, (7) Equipment,

(8) Emotions, (9) Courtesy, and (10) Driver education.

Sixty complete sentence statements of varying degrees of
favorability and unfavorability were initially formulated.
However, after the editing process, only fifty were retained.
These statements were subjected to further scrutiny by sev-
eral individuals in the field of driver and traffic safety
education to ensure that the terminology was within the read-
ing and comprehension level of the average twelve year old.

Suggested revisions were made and the fifty state-
ments were placed in the Likert five-response format, em-
ploying Thurstone's instructions designed for use by a
judging group. The preliminary draft of the inventory was

then mailed to 287 individuals from three levels of driver

and traff
departmen

high scho

Statistic

prelimina
scale val
Of item i
factors ~
the orig
were the
conponer
t0 whiCl’
Of factc
OVEr th.‘
that We;
Of the

Obtaine

Stateme

51nd Cc

William John Medve

and traffic safety education responsibility: the state
departments of education, colleges and universities and

high schools.

Statistical Procedure

The responses of the 207 persons who returned the
preliminary form of the inventory were used to compute
scale values and interquartile range scores for the purpose
of item analysis. Low ambiguity values and high acceptance
factors were used as criteria for retaining thirty-three of
the original fifty statements. The remaining statements
were then analyzed by orthogonal and oblique principal
components factor analysis solutions to assess the extent
to which the postulated universe of content was independent
of factoring methods. Eight factors were judged to exist
over three of the four derived solutions and the two factors
that were not labeled were assumed to be logical components
of the Enforcement factor. Considerable evidence was thus
obtained which supported: (1) the classification of the
statements within each factor, (2) the validity of the
inventory, and (3) the appropriateness of obtaining sep-

arate subscale scores for the ten postulated factors.

Development of the Final Inventory

The final inventory employed a three-phase reSponse

and contained thirty statements proportionately distributed

over the te
developed 1
tration.
areas that
B or the P
extent of
sight or k
Cl
trative gt-
elicitatic
scoring p}
three and
An anSWer
the attai;
resPonses
by the ju

tors who

William John Medve

over the ten original factors. Two parallel forms were
deve10ped for the purpose of pre and post course adminis-
tration. Form A or the Pre-test was prescribed to ascertain
areas that may require instructional emphasis whereas Form
B or the Post-test was prOposed for use in determining the
extent of attitude change resulting from instruction, in-
sight or knowledge attainment.

Clear, concise student instructions and adminis-
trative guidelines were written, concentrating on the
elicitation of truthful responses. To facilitate the
scoring procedure, the statements were arranged in sets of
three and uniformly dispersed throughout the inventory.

An answer sheet and a scoring key were developed to enable

the attainment of sub-scores for each factor. The standard
responses and the validity of the inventory were determined
by the judgment of the 207 driver and traffic safety educa-

tors who reSponded to the preliminary draft of the inventory.

Concludinngtatement

 

As with any measuring device, the accuracy of the
inventory and the worth of its findings are dependent upon
proper administration and interpretation. This inventory,
in and of itself cannot solve the traffic accident problem.
However, it is hoped that it will enable driver educators
to organize and evaluate their courses in a more meaningful

and effective manner.

A DRIVI

in

A DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY DESIGNED TO ASCERTAIN

TOPICS REQUIRING INSTRUCTIONAL EMPHASIS

BY

William John Medve

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education

1969

[99/ 76/5
$2700

‘COpyright by
WILLIAM JOHN MEDVE

1970

knowledge
Special 1:
5 my cor;
invaluab 1

Nolan, Dr

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was made possible through the cooperation
of many individuals. Although it is not possible to ac-
knowledge all of them formally, the following deserve
special recognition. Dr. Robert Gustafson, the chairman
of my committee, whose suggestions and recommendations were
invaluable in developing the final product; Dr. Robert
Nolan, Dr. Robert Winborn and Dr. Charles Blackman, the
other committee members, who provided counsel and guidance
throughout the research project; Dr. William Mann, who
stimulated the initial interest which led to the undertaking
of the study; Dr. Nicholas Rayder, who gave unstintingly of
his time in providing direction in scaling methodology;

Mr. John Draper, who assisted in developing the programs
essential to the statistical procedures involved; and,

Dr. Russell Brumbaugh, who took time from his busy schedule
to administer the preliminary draft of the inventory to the
graduate students within his department.

With the exception of Dr. Brumbaugh from Eastern
Michigan University, all of the other individuals cited

were from Michigan State University.

iii

Chapter
I. THE
If
I]
P
D
C
II. RE\
1

III.

Chapter

I.

II.

III.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE PROBLEM O O O O O O O O O O O O C

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . .
Importance of the Study . . . . . .
Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . .
Definitions of Terms Used . . . . .
Driving Attitudes . . . . . . . .
Attitude Inventory . . . . . . . .
Driving Responsibilities . . . . .
Overview of the Thesis . . . . . . .

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . .

Accident Analysis and Review . . . .
Studies of a general nature . . .
Studies involving psychological
techniques . . . . . . . . . . . .

Methods of Affecting Attitude Change
General information . . . . . . .
Studies using specific methods . .

Attitude Scales Used In Driver Education

Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A general overview . . . . . . . .
Critical analysis . . . . . . . .

Attitude Scale Methodology . . . . .
General information . . . . . . .
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . .

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRELIMINARY INVENTORY

Formulation of the Statements . . .
Construction of the Inventory . . .
Selection of the Judges . . . . . .
Distribution of the Inventory . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

Page

moxmmunbmi-I I—'

(D

mm

l4
19
20
24

30
31
35
37
38
41
49

51

51
56
57
58
58

3' '2‘.
.1. . Hun-r.—
W‘Ulnu—fi-L"

Chapter

 

IV. STAT:

So:
IteI
Fac

q
l

C,

Ch;
SLIP”.

V. DEVEL

 

 

 

Chapter

IV. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE DATA .

Source of Data . . . . . . . . .
Item Analysis . . . . . . . . .
Factor Analysis . . . . . . . .
Intercorrelation matrix . . .
Orthogonal rotation loadings .
Solution #1 . . . . . . . .
Solution #2 . . . . . . . .
Solution #3 . . . . . . . .
Oblique rotation loadings . .
Cluster Analysis . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .

V. DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINAL INVENTORY

Selection of Statements . . . .
Construction of the Inventory .
Format . . . . . . . . . . . .
Instructions . . . . . . . . .
Administrative Guidelines . . .
Scoring . . . . . . . . . . .
Interpretation . . . . . . . .
The Final Product . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . .
Structure of the Inventory . .
Administration . . . . . . .
Scoring . . . . . . . . . .
Interpretation of Results .
Pre-test . . . . . . . . . .
Post-test . . . . . . . . .
Validity .
Form A . . .
Form B . . . . . . . . . . . .
Answer Key .
Answer Sheet . . . . . . . . .
Elaborationcfi Invent ry Function
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .

C O O Q 0 O O I 0

VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . .

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem . . .
DevelOpment of the preliminary
inventory . . . . . . . . . .
Statistical procedure . . . .

Development of the final inventory

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . .
Recommendations . . . . . . . .

Page

60

60
60
68
69
69
72
73
75
79
84
87

89

89
89
89
90
91
92
93
95
95
95
96
98
99
99
100
100
101
104
107
108
109
110

113

113
113

113
114
114
116
117
120

Mn W. “1......—
l O
U "-

BIBLIOGRAPI

APPENDICES

Appendix
Appendis
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix

Appendix

Appendi s

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

Appendix A:

Appendis
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix

Appendis

B:
C:
D:
E:
F:

G:

Mann Personal Attitude Survey . . . .
Driver Attitude Check List . . . . . .
J-M Attitude Scale . . . . . . . . . .
Fletcher Attitude Test For Safe
Driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inventory Designed For Judging
Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanatory Letter Sent to the

Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and Institutions Representative
of the Judgment Group . . . . . . . .

vi

Page

122
132
132
137
139
143
146
151

152

Res;
Bas
Gro
Int.

Var.
F.

Orde

10.
11.

12.

LIST OF TABLES

Response Pattern of the 207 Judges . . . .
Basic Statistics for the Fifty Variables .
Grouping of Variables by Postulated Factors
Intercorrelation Matrix for 33 Variables .

Variable Correlations Within Postulated
Factors 0 O O O O C O O O O O C O C O O O

Quartimax and Varimax Rotated Factor
Loadings; Solution #1 . . . . . . . . . .

Quartimax and Varimax Rotated Factor
Loadings; Solution #2 . . . . . . . . . .

Quartimax and Varimax Rotated Factor
Loadings; Solution #3 . . . . . . . . . .

Oblique Rotated Factor Loadings . . . . . .
Factor Intercorrelations . . . . . . . . .
Factor Loading Matrix for 33 Variables . .

Ordered RrMatrix for the 33 Variables . . .

vii

Page
61
63
67

70

71

74

76

78
8O
83
85

86

'-
AV .Qnng
'4':

Introducti
Th
traffic fa
the past f
been made
roadway coj
expanded.
“0 nOticea]
fatalities
traVeled, ‘
gradUally ]
CIEaSQ. S'

prOI“intuit .

drivers in

 

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

Introduction

 

The progressive increase in the annual number of
traffic fatalities has received considerable attention in
the past few years. As a result, significant progress has
been made in promoting and improving safer vehicle and
roadway conditions and driver education programs have been
expanded. In spite of these improvements, there has been
no noticeable reduction in the number of motor vehicle
fatalities. Even the death rate per 100 million miles
traveled, which had formerly shown annual decreases, has
gradually plateaued and currently indicates a slight in-
crease. Statistics have further revealed that the most
prominent augmentation in fatalities has taken place among
drivers in the fifteen to twenty-four age range.1

Research has disclosed that approximately 90 per
cent of all traffic accidents may be attributed to some

form of human failure.2 It is thus indicated that external

 

lAutomotive Safety Foundation, ASF Report, Vol. 2,
No. 6, March, 1969.

2Clara G. Stratemeyer, Accident Research for Better
Safety Teaching, National Commission on Safety Education,
N.E.A., Washington, D.C., 1964.

l

 

 

 

- Ni—
; - v 'yM
1, - ‘
flawuw—w-‘v—

or environ
the basis
cational i
fect indiv
emphasis In
young driv
Dr
'nparting
driving sk
have been
Skill with
that even
about the
Skills, th
accidents
sequééntly,
one of the
T1".
meat that

4.

In:
‘u's.

MC
driving a1
in produc;

part, edm

attitudes

or environmental conditions, although important, are not
the basis of the problem. The solution apparently has edu-
cational implications, since education can influence or af—
fect individual attitudes and behavior patterns. Therefore,
emphasis must be placed on education with the accent on
young drivers.

Driver educators have done a commendable job of
imparting knowledge regarding traffic laws and teaching
driving skills. However, due to program limitations, they
have been able to do very little in fostering knowledge and
skill with desirable driving attitudes. It must be realized
that even though potential drivers may be well informed
about the hazards of driving and have excellent driving
skills, they will inevitably cause or be involved in traffic
accidents if they have undesirable driving attitudes. Con-
sequently, the develOpment of desirable attitudes should be
one of the basic objectives of driver education programs.

The objective of this study was to develOp an instru-
ment that could be used to evaluate student attitudes in order

to ascertain topics that may require instructional emphasis.

Importance of the Study

 

Most traffic safety authorities concur that good
driving attitudes are an extremely important consideration
in producing accident-free drivers. Yet, for the most
part, educational attempts at modifying or changing student

attitudes have been ignored because attitudes have generally

 

been class;-
provenents

and skill,

of attitude
are difficq
the current
their futur

value of th

 

total affec
they have 1!
safe drivin
are fortifi
If
a“Calderlts ,
grams that
patterns.
dESirable E
they Mg»: 1

Vic
eS. In

“ten deve lc

hay
e Prove]

been classified as one of the so-called intangibles. Im-
provements have been made in evaluating general knowledge
and skill, however, very little has been done in the area
of attitude measurement. There is no doubt that attitudes
are difficult to measure and that it is easier to evaluate
the current ability of the students than it is to measure
their future behavior patterns. Educators agree that the
value of the educational process is dependent upon the
total affect it has on the students and not merely how well
they have learned specific subject matter. Consequently,
safe driving can only be attained when knowledge and skill
are fortified with good driving attitudes.

If success is to be achieved in reducing traffic
accidents, the schools must provide driver education pro-
grams that are designed to influence student behavior
patterns. Driver educators cannot readily detect the un-
desirable attitudes which their students may have, hence,
they must resort to the use of appropriate measuring de—
vices. In the past few years, several attitude scales have
been develOped for this purpose. A few of these scales
have proven to be very useful, however, they are not em-
ployed extensively since: (1) their correlation with
actual behavior has not been established, (2) the available
scales are generally designed to evaluate the attitudes of
individual students, or (3) the application and interpre—
tation of the results obtained from these scales have not

been clearly defined.

W:
is pertim
of attemp'
of their :
desirable
be done t
they are
sought to

ascertain
Purpose c
\

attempt
dEVeIOpm.
of the m
can ende
must kno
PurpOSe
ventory
and inte
attitua.

Criving

With driver education currently under scrutiny, it
is pertinent that driver educators accept the responsibility
of attempting to identify the undesirable or vague beliefs
of their students in order to encourage them to develop
desirable attitudes relative to safe driving. Little can
be done to positively influence undesirable attitudes until
they are detected. Consequently, an instrument must be
sought to assess student attitudes for the purpose of

ascertaining topics which may require instructional emphasis.

Purpose of the Study

 

If driver education is to represent an honest
attempt at the reduction of traffic accidents, then the
development of desirable driving attitudes should be one
of the major program objectives. Before driver educators
can endeavor to change or modify student attitudes, they
must know where to place the necessary emphasis. It is the
purpose of this study to develOp a practical attitude in—
ventory which will be concise, relatively easy to administer
and interpret, and yet give some indication of student
attitudes as they relate to motor vehicle regulations and
driving practices.

The intended function of the inventory is not to
evaluate individual attitudes per se, but to use grouped

attitude scores to designate:

l .F—t—v

I . ...

—T

I

l. Approp
purpos
may be
their

2. The e
ifyin

E
inventori
students
ascertaiz

tional e:

Defini '.
\t.

1. Appropriate channels of instructional emphasis for the
purpose of changing or modifying student attitudes that
may be distorted in their expression or negative in
their effects. (Pre—test)

2. The effectiveness of instructional procedures in mod-
ifying or changing student attitudes. (Post-test)

Educators must recognize that although attitude
inventories represent only the verbalized attitudes their
students are willing to express, they can still be used to
ascertain phases of the program that may require instruc-

tional emphasis.

Definitions of Terms Used

 

Driving Attitudes.-—The term "driving attitudes"
as used in this study is the sum total of individual feel-
ings which influence the pattern of human behavior relating
to motor vehicle regulations and driving practices. Since
the definition can be rather extensive, it is necessary to
designate attitudes toward specific persons, situations,
places or things such as: laws, enforcement and accidents.

Attitude Inventory.--An "attitude inventory" deals
with a person's degree of negative or positive affect
associated with some psychological object. It usually
consists of a series of statements or phrases involving
several opinion items. An attitude inventory differs from

an opinionnaire in that the latter frequently deals with a

 

 

sponsibili

drivers wt
1y, safelj
tions suc
authority

drilling I

0‘; e r "7 i e 1‘.
\

Shouts 1
tiOn CO

iOrmat

attitUC
upOn :
affect

and (r.

develr
Outli:

Salec

single question and is a verbal expression of an attitude
whereas an attitude inventory involves a series of state-
ments consisting of several Opinions.

Driving Re5ponsibilities.--The term "driving re-
sponsibilities" comprises all the behavior patterns of
drivers which enable them to operate a motor vehicle legal-
ly, safely and efficiently. This would include considera-
tions such as adherence to traffic laws, respect for
authority, a regard for other users of the road and safe

driving practices.

Overview of the Thesis

 

This study is designed to develop an instrument
that can be used as a guide to determine the topics that
should be emphasized in the organization of a driver educa-
tion course. Consequently, the content is structured in a
format developed to fulfill the designated purpose.

In Chapter II, the pertinent literature relating to
attitudes is reviewed with the primary emphasis being placed
upon: (1) traffic accidents and attitudes, (2) methods of
affecting attitudinal change, (3) driver attitude scales,
and (4) attitude scale methodology.

Chapter III contains information recounting the
development of the preliminary inventory, while Chapter IV
outlines the statistical procedures that were followed to

select the items to be used in the final inventory.

 

T'
istrative
tudy is

nary, cor

it 15 RSI
attitude
selected

the foll

The two forms of the final inventory and the admin-
istrative guidelines are presented in Chapter V and the
study is culminated in Chapter VI which contains the sum-
mary, conclusions and recommendations.

In order to construct a driver attitude inventory,
it is necessary to comprehend the nature and development of
attitudes and their relationship to traffic accidents. A
selected review of the relevant literature is presented in

the following chapter.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

In order to disclose the background information
pertinent to the study, in a comprehensive manner, it was
necessary to divide this chapter into four sections. Sec-
tion 1 contains selected literature relating to accident
analysis and review. Section 2 is comprised of a group of
studies concerning methods of affecting attitudinal change,
Section 3 contains information about existent driver atti-
tude scales, and in Section 4, the literature pertaining

to attitude scale methodology is reviewed.

SECTION 1

Accident Analysis and Review

 

It is beyond the purpose and scope of this study to
report on the numerous investigations regarding the causes
of traffic accidents. Hence, a selected review has been
made only of the literature which had psychological impli-
cations. This section has two subdivisions. The first
presents studies of a general nature, while the second

reviews studies involving psychological techniques.

Studies of a general nature.--In the past decade,

 

numerous investigations have been conducted in the area of
accident causation. Most of these studies have been con-
cerned with accident-repeaters and accident-involved
drivers.

In three independent studies, LaShan,3 Penn,4 and
Rosenblatt,5 examined the characteristics of accident re-
peaters and arrived at similar conclusions. They described
this group as being emotionally unstable, impulsive, ego-
centric and aggressive. It was also expressed that their
subjects were generally disrespectful toward or frequently
even resentful of authority.

Similar studies have revealed that chronic violators
were also an education problem, since a large percentage of

the drivers examined were school drop-outs or individuals

with poor grades.6

 

3Lawrence LaShan, "Dynamics in Accident Prone Be-
havior," Psychiatry, 15:73-80, February, 1952.

 

4Robert Penn, "An Investigation of Methodological
and Psychological Problems Related to Accident Proneness"
(unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Institute of
Technology, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1956).

5Gerald Rosenblatt, "A Critical Examination of the
Accident Proneness Concept" (unpublished Master's thesis,
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, 1955).

6D. H. Schuster and J. P. Guilford, "An Analysis of
Accident Repeaters and Chronic Violator Drivers," Traffic
Project - Report No. 1, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, 1959. A. G. Arbons and J. E. Kerrich, "Acci-
dent Statistics and a Concept of Accident Proneness," Bio-
metric, 7:340-432, December, 1951; and Charles A. Drake,
"Accident Proneness: a Hypothesis," Character and Person-
ality, 8:335-341, June, 1940.

 

 

 

I
York Univ
the diffs
accident-
(D there
traffic \
upset by
pronounce
signs, t:

I
inent ty-
included
laws, (3
and sign
that acc

perCenta

traffic

 

10

In 1948, the Center for Safety Education at New
York University directed a clinical investigation to analyze
the differences between 252 accident-repeaters and 261
accident-free drivers. Some of the findings recorded were:
(1) there was a close relationship between accidents and
traffic violations, (2) chronic repeaters tended to be more
upset by frustration and annoyances, and (3) there was a
pronounced resistance to authority depicted by laws, stop
signs, traffic signals and the police.7

Other researchers have inferred that the most prom-
inent types of behavior demonstrated by accident-repeaters
included: (1) exceeding speed limits, (2) violating traffic
laws, (3) drunken driving, (4) failing to obey traffic signs
and signals, and (5) reckless driving. It was concluded
that accidents and laws were closely related, since a large
percentage of accidents involved one or more violations of

traffic laws.8

 

7New York University, Center for Safety Education,
"A Comparative Study of Accident Free and Accident Involved
Drivers" (published by Eno Foundation for Highway Traffic
Control, 1948).

8Harry R. DeSilva, Why We Have Automobile Accidents
(New York: J. Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1942); J. K. Boek,
"Automobile Accidents and Driving Behavior," Traffic Safety
Research Review, IV, No. 4 (December, 1958), 2—12; W.
Hadden and others, Accident Research (New York: Harper and
Row Publishers, 1964); and Leon Brod , "Personal Character-
istics of Chronic Violators and Accident Repeaters," Highway
Board Bulletin 152 (Driver Characteristics), 1957.

 

 

 

 

,' j
'a’Iflr
W

M] -'m,*

R
trucks an
human fac
roadway i
the accic
jects hac
tendency

to act i:
tudes, 1
more pro

sensory

Traffic

11

Rawson9 studied accidents involving drivers of
trucks and other commercial vehicles and concluded that the
human factor, rather than the environmental, vehicle or
roadway factors, was the primary cause of the majority of
the accidents reviewed. He denoted that most of his sub-
jects had undesirable attitudes as indicated by their
tendency to avoid reSponsibility, to resent authority and
to act impulsively.

10 that faulty atti-

It was also reported by Lykes
tudes, lack of emotional stability and poor adjustment were
more prone to cause motor vehicle accidents than poor
sensory or physical characteristics.

The Director of the Detroit Psychiatric Clinic for
Traffic Violators has expressed that most violators, at one
time or another, exhibited what he called "faulty attitu—
des." He justified his theory on the basis that many of
the offenders interviewed, had indicated that they frequent-
ly used their car as a weapon to avenge themselves for
wrongs or to compensate for feelings of inadequacy. It was
further hypothesized that the automobile was frequently
used as a means of temperamental expression or escape from

reality.11

 

9A. J. Rawson, "Accident Proneness," Psychosometric
Medicine, 6:88-94, January, 1944.

10Norman R. Lykes, Psychological Approach to Acci-
dents (New York: Vantage Press Inc.,’1954), pp. 129-35.

11

 

 

 

Alan Canty, Detroit Psychiatric Clinic Report,

 

1965.

. “Jar-v“

um

Mc
though acc
adequate s.

undesirabl.

 

 

 

0t}|

behavior p
speeding,
to some he
Tt
that altlm
contribut
associate
recent '1,
\-
vard SCh:
Automoti
:E‘Cc‘lée‘n

ltYr " In
122-12,:

12

McFarland and others have also suggested that al-
though accident repeaters may have sufficient knowledge and
adequate skills, they can usually be classified as having
undesirable attitudes.12

Other investigations have also revealed that the
behavior patterns evidenced in reckless driving, frequent
speeding, and driving while intoxicated were usually due
to some basic fault in the driver's attitude.13

The writings of Dumbar and Brodyl4 have maintained
that although the lack of knowledge and inadequate skills
contributed to some accidents, the principal causes were
associated with undesirable or faulty attitudes. More

16

recent investigations by BishOp15 and Brody have also

 

12Ross A. McFarland and others, "Human Variables in
Motor Vehicle Accidents - A Review of the Literature," Har-
vard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass., pp. 191-215;
Automotive News Staff, "Search for the Cause of Accidents,"
Automotive News, April 18, 1966, p. 14; and Alan A. McLean,
"Accident Proneness - A Clinical Approach to Injury-Liabil-
ity," Industrial Medicine and Surgery, March, 1955, pp.
122-126.

13Ross A. McFarland, "Why Drivers Have Accidents,"
Public Safety, Vol. 48, No. 4, April, 1956, p. 7; and D. E.
BilIion, Community Study of the Characteristics of Drivers
and Driver Behavior Related to Accident Experiences," Hi h-
yay Research Board Builetin 172 (Driver Characteristics and
Behavior Studies), 1958.

l4Flanders Dumbar and Leon Brody, Basic Aspects and
Applications of the Psychology of Safet , Center for Safety
Education, DIVision of Geaeral Education, New York Univer-
sity, 1959.

15Richard W. BishOp, "One-Car Accidents and the
Young Driver" (abstract of Doctoral thesis, New York Uni-
versity, Detroit Auto Club of Michigan, 1963).

16Leon Brody, "The Accident Phenomenon," Personnel
Administration, November—December, 1963.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

indicate

causes,

conducts
In one c
those pe
serve tc
accident
consists
the fire
while t3

Similar

jects he
attitudE
ClUded T

likEly l

13

indicated that traffic accidents have many underlying
causes, most of which are psychological in nature.

In the past few years, several studies have been
conducted to examine the driving records of young drivers.
In one of these studies, Rommell7 attempted to isolate
those personality characteristics and attitudes which might
serve to distinguish between young drivers involved in
accidents and those who were accident-free. His subjects
consisted of two groups of high school drivers. Those in
the first group had been involved in two or more accidents,
while the subjects in the second group, although having
similar driving experience, had not been in any accidents.

The results of this study disclosed that the sub-
jects having accidents tended to score high With regard to
attitudes conducive to unsafe driving. It was thus con-
cluded that students with undesirable attitudes were more
likely to manifest behavior which resulted in accidents.

18 showed that accident-

Another study by Birnbach
free students had better attitudes and knowledge of safe
driving practices than accident-repeaters. He also noted

a close relationship between accidents and violations.

 

17R. C. Rommel, "Personality Characteristics and
Attitudes of Youthful Accident-Repeater Drivers," Traffic
Safety Research Review, Vol. 54, No. 3, March, 1959, pp.
13-14.

 

l8Sidney B. Birnbach, "Personal Characteristics of
Traffic Accident Repeaters," Eno Foundation for Highway
Traffic Control, Saugatuck, Connecticut, 1948.

V'I" ‘Ar-"a'vw

1.

Re
to twenty
other age
18 per cer.
approximat

u
Ingh acci
younger E

through I

PaSt few
subjects
indicat.
£01 a l

tiltufi

SOlutic

14

Reviews of accident data have revealed that fifteen
to twenty-four year old drivers had more accidents than any
other age group. This group, which represents approximately
18 per cent of the driving population, was involved in

approximately 30 per cent of all traffic accidents.19

Marcus20 and his associates have attributed the
high accident rates of young drivers to the fact that
younger persons usually react to tensions and pressure

through motor reSponses.

Studies involving psychological techniques.--In the

 

past few years, the characteristics of the driver have been
subjected to closer scrutiny, for accident research has
indicated that faulty and unsafe driving practices account
for a large percentage of traffic accidents. Consequently,
attitudes have become a focal point in the search for a
solution to the accident problem.

21

A study was conducted by Case and others in which

two trained interviewers examined a group of three hundred

 

19National Safety Council, "1968 Motor Vehicle
Deaths Analyzed," Annual Report, March, 1969.

20Irwin Marcus and others, An Interdisciplinary
Approach to Accident Patterns in Children (ChildDevelopment
Publications, VoI} 25, No. 2, Purdue University, LaFayette,
Indiana, 1960).

21Harry W. Case and others, "A Study of Habitual
Traffic Violators" (unpublished study, Institute of Trans-
portation and Traffic Engineering, University of California,
Los Angeles, 1950).

 

 

 

' .
..‘-_..._,.._UL-

I .7
'._q_

‘1'” . .-,.

traffic 13

 

formal, ca
months in
lectual ca
exhibit ti

TI
cluded Sp
stop sign
of the 3‘;
traffic 2

police.

the Stud
need and
Sonnel.
Constiu
COmmit x

5e Sel‘ic

prOject

tiOns

15

traffic law violators. The interview procedure was in-
formal, carefully structured, standardized and was twelve
months in duration. It was designed to disclose the intel-
lectual capacity of the violators and to allow them to
exhibit their personality patterns.

The most frequent violations of the subjects in-
cluded speeding, running red lights, failing to stop at
stop signs and making imprOper turns. Although the majority
of the subjects expressed opinions in accordance with
traffic laws, they indicated negative feelings toward the
police.

The interviews disclosed that the individuals in
the study group seemed to have an awareness of both the
need and usefulness of traffic laws and enforcement per-
sonnel. The subjects also expressed an Opinion as to what
constituted a serious offense and showed a tendency to
commit violations other than those which they believed to
be serious.

Several investigators have resorted to the use of
projective instruments and psychological tests to describe
probable accident subjects. The results of these examina-
tions were congruent in finding repeat violators to be
usually aggressive, excessively active, adventuresome and

impulsive.22

 

22Earl D. Heath, "The Relationship Between Driving
Records, Selected Personality Characteristics and Biograph-
ical Data of Traffic Offenders and Non-Offenders"

‘A‘u—n— -_....__ «rifles-u“

0t
closed the
authority,
laws and a

welfare of

 

Br
0f the New
three groc
Personalit
categories
dIiVerS W
Um Probl
a Problem

\

.iunpubli s

new

a, York,
ddman FE

"Eadie ine

x\

16

Other studies by Conger23 and Newman24 have dis—
closed that accident-repeaters are usually defiant toward
authority, take unnecessary chances, show a disregard for
laws and are generally unconcerned about the rights and
welfare of other individuals.

Brody conducted a study in 1957 with the c00peration
of the New Jersey Accident Prevention Clinic.25 He compared
three groups of motorists on a number of psychological and
personality factors. The subjects fell into one of three
categories: chronic violators, accident repeaters and
drivers with good records. His main conclusion was that
the problem of safe, lawful, courteous driving was primarily

a problem of emotional make-up and social adequacy.

 

(unpublished Doctoral dissertation, New York University,
New York, 1957); Ronald C. Moore, and Ross A. McFarland,
"Human Factors in Highway Safety," New Englapd Journal of
Medicine, April-May, 1957, pp. 792-99, 837-45, 890-97; and
W. A. Tillman and G. E. Hobbs, "The Accident Prone Automo-
bile Driver: A Study of the Psychiatric and Social Back—
ground," American Journal of Psychiatry, November, 1949,
pp. 321-31.

23John J. Conger and others, "Personal and Inter-
personal Factors in Motor vehicle Accidents," American
Journal of Psychiatry, 113:1069-74, June, 1957.

24Gerald G. Newman and others, "A Pilot Study of
Drivers Incurring Automobile Accidents," American Journal
of Public Health, 48:1512-15, November, 1958.

25Leon Brody, "The Accident Phenomena," Personnel
Administration, November-December, 1963.

 

 

 

 

 

Research
students
I
examine t.
personali
ality Invi
who had n
of the su
nation an
TI
Coefficie,
dent invo
scales am
the Slibje.
PSYChOpat]

S .

examine t:

17

Research by Beamish and Malfetti,26

engaging high school
students as subjects, culminated with similar conclusions.

In 1948, an experiment was undertaken to empirically
examine the relationship between accident rates and the
personality of drivers. The Minnesota Multiphasic Person-
ality Inventory was administered to seventy male drivers
who had no less than two years of driving experience. All
of the subjects were interviewed to obtain personal infor-
mation and driving experience data.

The statistical analysis of the data produced a
coefficient of contingency of .41 for personality and acci-
dent involvement. The correlations found for the individual
scales and minor accidents of admitted fault indicated that
the subjects involved tended to have high T-scores in the

psychopathic deviate, hypo-mania and schiZOphrenic scales.27

28

Siebrecht employed his own attitude scale to

examine the driving attitudes of two hundred high school

 

26Jerome J. Beamish and L. Malfetti, "A Psycholog—
ical Comparison of Violator and Non-Violator Automobile
Drivers in the 16 to 19 Year Age Group," Traffic Safet
Research Review, Vol. 6, No. 1 (National Safety Puinca-
tions, March, 1962), pp. 12-15.

27Roger Brady, "The Relationship Between Accident
Rates and the Personality of Automobile Drivers" (prelim-
inary study, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Catholic
University of America, Washington, D.C., 1948).

28Elmer B. Siebrecht, “Attitude Scale for Measuring
Driver Attitudes" (published study, Center for Safety Ed-
ucation, New York University, 1941).

 

- . Jun-o!"—
~.~"._.—.—d—!

students
icant dif
grade lev
from the
that driv
driving e
A
using 150
though he
sentence
lowed the
he also c
driving —
age and e
;
ITEan attj
thoSe Of
and had 5
able to t
lege Stuc‘

sophomOre

18

students in grades nine through twelve. He noted signif-
icant differences between the mean scores of the different
grade levels with a progressive increase in group means
from the lower to the higher grades. It was also deduced
that driving attitudes improved with driver education and
driving experience.

A similar study was made by Conover in 1947,29
using 150 Iowa high school students as his subjects. Al-
though he employed verbal symbols rather than complete
sentence statements as used by Siebrecht, his results fol-
lowed the same pattern as Siebrecht's investigation. Hence,
he also concluded there was a strong indication that the
driving attitudes of high school students improved with

age and education.

30 disclosed the

Another investigation by Siebrecht
mean attitude scores of college students to be similar to
those of high school students who had taken driver education
and had some driving experience. His findings were compar-
able to those in his previous study, since upperclass col-

lege students had more favorable scores than freshmen or

sophomores. Consequently, Siebrecht confirmed his earlier

 

29John Conover, "Development of Certain Techniques
for the Measurement of Driver Attitudes“ (unpublished study,
Iowa State College, 1947).

30Elmer B. Siebrecht, Drivergttitudes : Techniques
of Study and Results Obtained, Driver Research Laboratory,
Iowa State College, 1955.

:_ . l jau-

conclusio:
education

A
to high s<
attitude 5
tion. He
scores of
tude Chang
thus indic
program ii

A
IOlIEd in

l9

conclusion that driving attitudes improved with age,
education and experience.

Agan31 administered the Conover Attitude Inventory
to high school students in an attempt to compare their
attitude scores before and after a course in driver educa-
tion. He found significant improvements in the post-test
scores of the 144 subjects taking part in the study. Atti-
tude changes were recorded in all of the cases studied,
thus indicating the effectiveness of a driver education
program in modifying student attitudes.

A similar study of post-high school students en-
rolled in a five week summer driver education course,

. . . 32
arrived at a concordant deCiSion.

SECTION 2

Methods of Affecting Attitude Change

The majority of the conclusions derived from current
accident research have denoted that the human factor, in
most cases improper attitudes, should be of major concern

in reducing accident rates. However, very few of the

 

31Raymond J. Agan, "Effect of Driver Education
Instruction on Learning Attitudes" (unpublished study, Iowa
State College, 1949).

32Elmer B. Siebrecht, "Siebrecht Attitude Scale for
Measuring Driver Attitudes" (published study, Center for
Safety Education, New York University, 1941).

. 'I

researcher
modifying
review of

attitude c

 

95;

 

others, ha
be an exce
much to be
attitude c
focused or
0f studen-

E
SChQQl St
ducefi onl
He diSClc
tiOn reqt
terial t1”

only whEI

\

Of the \f

5‘

20

researchers have recommended effective means of changing or
modifying the human variable. This section contains a
review of the literature relating to methods of affecting
attitude change.

General information.--Case33 and Hayes,34 among

 

others, have acknowledged the modification of attitudes to

be an exceedingly difficult process and concurred there is

much to be learned about effective procedures in affecting

attitude change. They recommended that attention should be
focused on the role of perception in changing the concepts

of students toward traffic safety.

Experiments conducted by Kelman35 with junior high
school students have demonstrated that change could be pro-
duced only when it paralleled personal advantages or needs.
He disclosed significant modification only when the situa-
tion required the students to deal directly with the ma-
terial themselves, and found lasting effects were secured

only when the students had rapport with the teacher.

 

33Harry Case, "Attitudes - What Are They? How Are
They Changed?" Traffic Safety, Vol. 31 (1950 Transactions
of the National Safety Conference), pp. 75-81.

34Arthur B. Hayes, "How to Improve Driver Attitudes,"
Driver Education Newsletter, 2:1-3, Fall, 1958.

35H. C. Kelman, "Attitude Change As A Function Of
Response Restriction," Human Relations, June, 1953, pp.
185—214.

 

 

A<
maintain '
goals or 1
accounted
the attit
ferent ch
cluded th
a total p
of a give
dares to

A
toward su
what is r
mite 0ft
Particula
all POlic
ShOuld ma

attitudes

21

36 individuals form and

According to McClintock,
maintain those attitudes which help them to achieve their
goals or motives. Negative attitudes, he theorized, can be
accounted for by two distinct personality syndromes. Since
the attitude source could be different in each case, dif-
ferent change techniques may have to be employed. He con-
cluded that no single procedure could be expected to move
a total population and that the reason for the maintenance
of a given attitude would be essential in devising proce-
dures to change it.

A number of studies have inferred that attitudes
toward such topics as laws and enforcement markedly affect
what is retained from class presentations on these subjects.
Quite often, a person who has a negative attitude toward a
particular policeman, reacts in much the same way towards
all policemen. Therefore, it was emphasized, teachers
should make an attempt to diagnose their students' negative

attitudes in order to deal with them more appropriately.37

 

36C. G. McClintock, "Personality Factors in Attitude
Change" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1956).

37Stannard J. Baker, "Effect of Enforcement and
Licensing on Driver Attitude," Traffic Safety, Vol. 31
(1950 Transactions of the NationalSafety Congress), pp.
29-39; Edward C. Fisher, "The Courts Responsibility Toward
Improving Driving Attitudes," Traffic Safety, 31:48-52,
1951; and Karl Menninger, "The Mental Attitude of Automo-
bile Drivers Toward Enforcement," National Safety Council
Transactions, Vol. 32, Part 2, 1943, pp. 7:10.

 

 

 

 

. ”on.”
U

L
when ther
internali
changes 0
overt act
men agree
not valid

A
teaching
learner' s
sition of
nation Or
attitudes
instructi.
Of dealin.

I.
rational ]

PrEmi S e S

22

38 39

Loft and Damon have evidenced attitude change
when there were definite indications of students having
internalized volutional messages as revealed by obvious
changes or alterations of their perceptions, affects and
overt actions, as well as their verbalized judgments. Both
men agreed that subjective teacher evaluations alone were
not valid measures of attitude change.

Allgaier4o has further elaborated on how effective
teaching can produce a more or less permanent change in the
learner's behavior. This change may range from the acqui-
sition of relatively simple skills, general terms of infor-
mation or a complete reversal of previously exhibited
attitudes or opinions. Well-planned and well-directed
instruction, he thus deduced, was the most effective method
of dealing with student attitudes.

It has also been written that the behavior of

rational persons can be controlled if the value and factual

premises upon which they base their decisions were

 

38Bernard I. Loft, "The Effects of Driver Education
on Driver Knowledge and Attitudes in Selected Public Secon—
dary Schools," Traffictgafety Research Review, Vol. 4, No.
2, June, 1960, pp. 12-15.

39Norman Damon, "Developing Driver Attitudes" (1959
National Safety Congress Transactions), Vol. 26, pp. 13-17.

40Earl Allgaier, "Psychology and the Education of
Road Users," American Automobile Association Publication,
A.A.A., Washington, D.C., 1959.

 

specified
room, nega
learn, tea

to change

heir atti
Ot
change in

that are a
necessary,
new or has
receive 1:}:
have to we
atiVElY Ea.

Situations

 

St]
algh SChOo]

23

specified for them. Since students may carry to the class—
room, negative attitudes about the material they are to
learn, teachers must function as persuaders in attempting
to change their minds and behavior patterns by changing
their attitudes.41
Other studies have reported the most effective
change in attitudes occurring: (1) under circumstances
that are ambiguous, (2) when standards of judgment are
necessary, or (3) when the content of the information is
new or has little or no pertinence to the individuals who
receive them. It was noted that since teachers did not
have to waste time unlearning their students, it was rel-
atively easy to develOp good attitudes in uncertain or new
situations.42
Strassner43 and Kerr44 have stated that students in

high school tend to establish action patterns and habits

which are likely to carry-over to later years. They

 

41Arthur L. Mahony, "Teaching for Attitudes Condu-
cive to Safe Driving" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
New York University, New York, 1957).

42L. W. Doob, "Some Factors Determining Change in
Attitudes," Journal of Abnormal agd Social Psychology, 35:
549—65, 1940; and Norman Damon, "Developing Driver Attitu-
des" (1959 National Safety Congress Transactions), Vol. 26,
pp. 13-17.

43Marland K. Strassner, Fundamentals of Safety Ed-
ucation (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1964), pp. 163.

44Willard Kerr, "Complimentary Theories of Safety,"
Psychology, 45:3—9, February, 1957.

 

fl-_.__. ' ' lac-unwoun-

believed I
I
guide stux
some atti‘.
that sincr
are self-:
this inte:
able attit.

Ad

 

develOpmer
tion that
the risks
resPonsibI
nodif‘lCat.

P
Q‘des that

thoughtfu

24

believed high school years presented an opportune time to
guide students in developing an understanding of and whole-
some attitudes toward traffic safety. It was also stressed
that since students enrolled in driver education classes
are self-motivated, the instructor should take advantage of
this interest to fortify good attitudes and modify undesir-
able attitudes.

According to Brody,4S the attitudes requiring
development are those which are concerned with the realiza-
tion that accidents are not an inevitable consequence of
the risks inherent in driving. He held driver educators
responsible for the fortification of good attitudes and
modification of the undesirable attitudes.

46 and Baldwin47

Pine have inferred that any techni-
ques that tend to control impulsive responses and encourage
thoughtful behavior would tend also to lessen accidents.
Studies usitgtgpecific methods.--Since the bulk of
the research relating to attitudes has reflected upon the

fact that attitudes are modified as a result of education

 

45Leon Brody, "Accidents and Attitudes," Basic
Aspects and Applications of the Psychology of Safety.
Center for Safety Education, New York University, 1959,
pp. 6-22.

46Jerome L. Pine and others, The Development of
Criterion for Driving Behavior, Teacher‘s College, Columbia
University, New York, 1965.

47David M. Baldwin, "Accident Causes and Counter
Measures," Traffic Engineering, March, 1966, pp. 31-33.

 

 

[

 

and matui

method t:

develope
tion, bu
should i

insure 1

have no
since t
cation
skills
IQCOgnf

attitu:

25

and maturation, education has been used as the primary
method to affect attitudinal change.

As viewed by Brody,48 desirable attitudes can be
developed through prOper education, not just driver educa-
tion, but all education. He emphasized that young drivers
should be taught to employ their knowledge and skills to
insure their own safety, as well as the safety of others.

Yost49 has noted that driver education programs
have not been very effective in changing student attitudes,
since too much attention has been focused on the identifi-
cation of specific knowledge to be acquired and on particular
skills to be developed. In his Opinion, little, if any,
recognition has been given to the importance of imprOper
attitudes and the need to change them.

It has also been suggested by Ojemann50 and Loft51

that merely teaching knowledge and skill is insufficient

 

48Brody, op. cit., p. 21.

49Charles P. Yost, "An Analysis of Graduate Theses
of School Safety in the U.S. from 1925 to 1950" (published
Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, 1956).

50Ralph H. Ojemann, "Tests and Evaluation Methods
Used in Driver and Safety Education," National Commission
on Safety Education, Washington, D.C., 1959, pp. 1-48.

51Bernard I. Loft, "The Effects of Driver Education
on Driver Knowledge and Attitudes in Selected Public Secon-
dary Schools of Indianapolis and Marin County" (unpublished
Master's thesis, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana,
1956).

 

 

'. ‘w'

for ti
drivel
greate

tions

educat

employ

sonal.

rJ "hi
'[I

1 'U
H
O
Q)

,.
O
(D
(f)

O

26

for the development of desirable driving attitudes. If
driver education is expected to produce safer drivers, then
greater concentration must be placed on perceptions, emo-
tions and attitudes.

McGuire52 has likewise cited the ineffectiveness of
educational procedures in reducing accidents. Only limited
success has been attained thus far because the approach
employed has been academic and technical rather than per-
sonal. Further achievement, he concluded, was dependent
upon the competence of driver educators in fortifying knowl-
edge and skill with desirable attitudes.

Recent reports have also prompted questions in
regards to the effectiveness of driver education in produc-
ing safer drivers. The National Commission on Safety
Education has stated that research attempts to justify
driver education solely on the basis of the driving records
of subjects with and subjects without the course, have been
inadequate and do not provide valid evidence that the re-
turns are commensurate with the investment. It was recom-
mended that greater concentration should be placed on
curriculum content and teaching methods which can effec-

tively influence the human factor or behavioral

 

52Frederick L. McGuire, "An Outline for a New
Approach to the Problem of Highway Accidents," U.S. Armed
Forces Journal, 7:1157-66, August, 1956.

 

 

27

characteristics judged to be pertinent to the safe Operation
of a motor vehicle.53

In one of the few studies conducted to evaluate the
effectiveness of different methods of changing attitudes,
Schreiber54 disclosed no lasting modification occurring in
driver behavior as a result of:' (1) discussions about
pertinent safety t0pics, (2) preparations for a special
"President's Safe Driving Day," (3) installation of a warn-
ing sign, and (4) the presence of a clearly marked police
vehicle. As a result, he concluded that driver educators
must seek more influential teaching methods and procedures
to induce attitude change.

Research by Malfetti55

noted scare techniques as an
ineffective means of changing behavior or modifying atti-
tudes. He recommended that driver educators should not
instill fear in their students but must stress self-preser-
vation and personal gain. In so doing, the emphasis should

be placed on possible injury and not on the gory results of

an accident.

 

53Traffic Safety. "What the 'Moynahan Report'
Really Said About Driver Education," June, 1968, pp. 36-38;
and "The N.E.A. Has Its Say," December, 1968, pp. 14-15.

54Robert J. Schreiber, "The Development of Proce-
dures for the Evaluating of Educational Methods Used in
Accident Prevention" (unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
Columbia University, New York, 1957).

55James Malfetti, "Scare Techniques and Traffic
Safety," Traffic Quarterly, April, 1961.

 

- 3*1- .. 3W11§flm

 

 

change
tary C
end.

in an)
as so:
a thre

resume

good a
he n01
impro;
discus

affect

the vj
mans
diSCuE

pQOlec

28

The National Safety Council56 checked for possible
changes in driver attitudes following a television documen-
tary depicting the hazards of driving on a holiday week-
end. The immediate effects appeared to be a general decrease
in anxiety levels and a tendency to externalize the danger
as something that applied to other drivers. However, after
a three week interval, the attitudes of the subjects had
resumed the pre-program status.

Sawers57 suggested the aid of lectures to reinforce

good attitudes or positively orient weak or vague ones, but

he noted that it was extremely difficult to modify or change
impr0per attitudes through lecture alone. He found group
discussions to be the most effective classroom procedure in

affecting change.

Research conducted in recent years strongly supports
the View that group dynamics may be the most convincing
means of changing or modifying improper attitudes. Group
discussions can stimulate group analysis of driving situa-
tions and enable the class members to profit from their

pooled experiences or reflections. For the best results,

 

56National Safety Council, The Effects of C.B.S.
Re orts "The Great Holida Massacre" on Attitudes Toward
SaEety and The NationaiSafety Council (Creative Research
Associates, Chicago, Illinois, 1961i, pp. 1-47.

57Kenneth Sawers, Group Discussion Techniques in

Driver Education, Center for Safety Education, New York
University, 1962.

 

 

 

 

the subj
SPECific

informa]

Wann-
'.‘.,,_.'M‘

interna]

in such

 

and gro
f‘
k'OnSEqu
Of the

expeCtE

Luange

driver

29

the subjects for discussion should be relatively real and
specific, and the teacher should establish a friendly,
informal atmosphere. Change is evidenced when the students
internalize the attitudes, beliefs and values of the group
in such a way that they look upon them as their own rather
than as something imposed upon them by others.58

Gardner59 supports the theory of group acceptance
and group recognition as motivation for most students.
Consequently, personal involvement of the individual members
of the class is essential in having them conform to the
expectations of the group.

The Department of Motor Vehicles in the District of
Columbia has also reported considerable success in inducing
change in attitudes through group discussions in their
driver improvement clinics.60

Several investigators have advocated the employment

of students' needs as a guide to attitude development.

Since motives are the chief "why" of behavior, and attitudes

 

58William Hackley and Lawrence Schlesinger, "Chang-
ing Driver Attitudes Through Group Discussion" (An Exper-
imental Study, George Washington University, Washington,
D.C., January, 1964).

591. C. Gardner, "The Effect of a Group of Social
Stimuli Upon Attitudes," Journal of Educational Psychology,
26:471-78, 1935.

60Richard Myrick, "Driver Improvement Clinic In-
duces Attitude Change by Group Discussions," Traffic Digest
and Review, 2:9-11, May, 1963.

 

 

 

30

influence behavior, educators must concentrate on motivation
to affect behavior change.61
In the past few years, the idea of programmed in-
struction has received considerable attention in its
endeavors to efficiently improve instructional methods in
driver education. Reports have been made which indicate
that programmed instruction has the potential of inducing
rapid and efficient learning as well as developing positive

attitudes toward the material being learned.62

SECTION 3

Attitude Scales Used In Driver
Education Programs

 

 

Since accident research has supported the fact that
good attitudes are an essential element of safe driving,
and educators have maintained that attitudes affect what
students learn and therefore what they retain from their

educational experiences, attitude measurement has been

 

61Helen Peak, "Attitudes and Motivation," Nebraska
S mposium on Motivation, University of Nebraska Press,
Lincoln, Nebraska, 1955, 149-189; Fred Schreier, Human
Motivation (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1957), pp.
240-52; and William Barlow, Centerinngraffic Safet Around
Driver's Motivations, AmericaniTraffic Association Founda-
tion, Washington, 1958.

62Edward H. Fisher and Lawrence Schlesinger, "Pro-
grammed Instruction for Driver Education," CALDEA Calendar,
10:5, January, 1963; and Lawrence Schlesinger and others,
"How Are We Devising Programmed Driver Instruction," Police
Chief, 19:14, September, 1962.

 

 

 

 

 

31

incorporated as a phase of most driver education programs.
This section contains information relating to some Of the
attitude scales that are currently being used.

A general overview.--Dr. Ojemann63 has reviewed the

 

field of attitude testing as it related to driving and

noted that attitudes were evaluated in numerous ways: the
"agree-with," "disagree-with" concept employed in the
Siebrecht scale, the "pleasing-displeasing" notion presented
by the Conover test, and, the "personality" adjustment
connotation. In his estimation, the Siebrecht and Conover
instruments have been reliable to a satisfactory extent,

but their correlation with actual driving behavior has not
been clearly established.

In 1941, Elmer B. Siebrecht64

constructed a scale
to measure driving attitudes. He formulated sixty state-
ments utilizing twelve factors which he considered to be
important in the safe Operation of a motor vehicle. The
factors he included were: (1) passing on curves and hills,

(2) driving as a privilege, (3) knowledge and skills, (4)

courtesy: (5) condition of drivers, (6) violations,

 

63Ralph H. Ojemann, Test and Evaluation Methods
Used in Driver and Safety Education, National Commiss1on
on Safety Education Publication, pp. 1- -48, 1959.

64Elmer B. Siebrecht, Siebrecht Attitude Scale for
Measuring Driver Attitudes (published Doctoral dissertation,
Center for Safety Education, New York University, 1941).

 

-. m,

"a-

 

 

free driv

scale was
"so-calle
031‘! thos
between 1

one hund:

COmphéixe
Pattern;
[74) agree
attitude
m'53I1‘ts fC
Yerbal

Complete
Sisted

ticket I

32

(7) enforcement Of traffic regulations, (8) speeding, (9)
responsibility, (10) condition of the automobile, (11)
cooperation, and (12) examination for a driver's license.

The desirable response to each statement was
standardized by 125 judges consisting of commissioners Of
motor vehicle departments, license examiners and accident-
free drivers of commercial fleets. The validity of the
scale was initially based upon the judgments of the 125
"so-called experts." However, the final scale retained
only those statements which differentiated significantly
between the mean scores Of high and low scoring groups of
one hundred high school students.

In its final form, the scale consisted of forty
complete sentence statements with the folloWing response
pattern: (1) strongly disagree, (2) disagree, (3) undecided,
(4) agree, and (5) strongly agree.

At a later date, Conover65 constructed a driver
attitude inventory in partial fulfillment of the require-
ments for a Master's Degree at Iowa State College. He used
verbal symbols in the form Of words and phrases rather than
complete sentences. The final form of the inventory con-
sisted of 150 words and phrases such as double parking,

ticket, speeding and policeman. In this test, the

 

65John Conover, "Development of Certain Techniques
for the Measurement of Driver Attitude" (unpublished
Master's thesis, Iowa State College, 1947).

' l’ a;
. m,_ .. i m

responder
marking c
pleasing ,

and (5)

Al
liann66 of

1
consisted
lowing rdl
sometimes
upon the
deviating
the score
attitudes

I
lished a
the WESte
This Chec
designed
employEeS
(

N 0CCas

of this C

\

erviCe'

, 6
List

‘ I

Put

 

33

respondents are requested to express their attitude by
marking one of the five following responses: (1) very
pleasing, (2) pleasing, (3) indifferent, (4) displeasing,
and (5) very displeasing.

A driver attitude survey was also developed by
Mann66 Of Michigan State University. His final survey
consisted of sixty-three sentences and employed the fol-
lowing response pattern: (1) always, (2) usually, (3)
sometimes, (4) rarely, and (5) never. Scoring is based
upon the progressive assignment Of points for each response
deviating from that stipulated. Consequently, the higher
the score, the greater the indication of poor driving
attitudes. A copy of this scale is presented in Appendix A.

In 1965, the American Automobile Association pub-
lished a driver attitude checklist which was developed by
the Western Division of the New York Telephone Company.67
This checklist included twenty-five question-items and was
designed as a self-evaluation tool to be distributed to
employees. Responses are classified as: (l) frequently,

(2) occasionally, (3) rarely, and (4) never. A duplicate

Of this checklist can be seen in Appendix B.

 

66William Mann, "Mann Personal Attitude Survey"
(Highway Traffic Safety Center, Continuing Education
Service, Michigan State University, 1964).

67New York Telephone Company, Driver Attitude Check
List, published by American Automobile Association, OctOber
10, 1957.

 

SI

that have
vehicle p
struct sc
instrumen
several y

T

 

complete
administe

response

 

(N occas

fins seal

P.

‘

another S
tion stat
U) occa
designat

A COPY

a.
Lests '

ins trm
\

.‘YOQShi
,fi‘l‘tol/Yoéj‘.

gm

‘ANQtsit

 

34

Since there are very few driver attitude scales
that have been published, some driver educators and motor
vehicle personnel have taken it upon themselves to con-
struct scales to be used for their own purposes. Two such
instruments have circulated in the State Of New Jersey for
several years.

The J-M Attitude Scale,68

which consists of fifty
complete sentence statements, was apparently designed to be
administered to licensed drivers. It has a four pattern
response which includes: (1) habitually, (2) frequently,
(3) occasionally, and (4) only if an Officer is around.
This scale is reproduced in Appendix C.

The Fletcher Attitude Test for Safe Driving,69 is
another self-rating scale which employs twenty-five ques-
tion statements. Responses are listed as: (l) frequently,
(2) occasionally, and (3) rarely. Low total score is
designated as being indicative of good driving attitudes.

A copy of this test is presented in Appendix D.
Due to the dearth of acceptable driver attitude

tests, some investigators have resorted to the use of other

instruments. Research by Brady7O indicated the Minnesota

 

68Billy J. Jones and Russell G. Martin, "The J-M
Attitude Scale." Other information not available.

69Harry Fletcher, "Fletcher Attitude Test For Safe
Driving." Other information not available.

70Roger Brady, "A Preliminary Study Into the Rela-
tionship Between Accident Rates and the Personalities of
Automobile Drivers" (unpublished Master's thesis, Catholic
University of America, Washington, D.C., 1948).

35

Multiphasic Personality Inventory could be a valuable tool
in analyzing the attitudes of drivers. He recommended an
item analysis Of the M.M.P.I. in order to construct an
inventory which would be more adequate for use with driver
education students.

71 have stated that the person-

Beamish and Malfetti
ality trait of emotional stability as measured by the
Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Inventory, and mood as
measured by the Minnesota Counseling Inventory, seemed to
show a differentiation between violators and non-violators.

According to McGuire,72 it is not yet known which
type of testing devices can most accurately and most con-
sistently reveal the attitudinal patterns which lead to

unsafe driving behavior.

Critical anatysis.--Despite the current emphasis

 

on attitudes, some individuals have expressed that very
little can be done about attitudes in the brief duration
Of a driver education course. They have inferred that
driver educators should accept their students' attitudes
and apply them to the driving task assuming that they had

good attitudes on entering the course.

 

71J. J. Beamish and J. L. Malfetti, "A Psychological
Comparison Of‘ViOlator and Non-Violator Automobile Drivers
in the 16 to 19 Year Age Group," Traffic Safety Research
Review, Vol. 6, No. l, 1962, pp. 12-15.

72Frederick L. McGuire, "An Outline for a New
.Approach to the Problem of Highway Accidents," U.S. Armed
Services Medical Journal, 7:1157-66, August, 1956.

C

 

 

tempted t
have bee
few stan‘
form and

The basic

......:5;m

1 tations c

h
i

by severe

 

L The r
attit

pote:

 

2. many

 

10 it
unre‘
3. host

att

 

36

Conversely, those driver educators who have at-
tempted tO employ attitude measurement in their programs,
have been hindered by the fact that there are relatively
few standardized attitude scales available in published
form and those that are available, have their limitations.
The basic, fundamental, structural and administrative limi-
tations of current driver attitude scales have been denoted
by several authors as follows.73

1. The majority of the scales are designed to measure the
attitudes Of licensed drivers rather than those Of
potential drivers.

2. Many Of the available tests do not apply specifically
to the variables of the driving task, but incorporate
unrelated general attitudes or personality factors.

3. Most of the scales are intended to evaluate individual
attitudes rather than to reveal group attitudes for the
purpose of placing instructional emphasis.

4. The validity and reliability of many Of these instru-

ments are questionable.

 

73Andrew Ellis, "Recent Research with Personality
Inventories," Journal Of Psychology, 17:45-49, 1963; Robert
.M. Allen, Pgtsonality Assessment Ptocedures (New York:
Harper and Row Publishers, 1958); L. L. Thurstone, "Theory
Of Measurement," Psychological Review, 36:222-41, 1929;
Raymond Agan, "Effect of Driver Education Instruction on
JLearning Attitudes" (unpublished study, Iowa State College,
1947); and Ralph H. Ojemann, Tests and Evaluation Methods
USed in Driver and Safety Education, National COmmission on
Safety Education Publication, 1959.

 

S.

10.

Att

the

literatUI

. The s

. Mann:

it d
w

Many
in ex
The i
to c
Cons:
thin}

feel:

ratha

prov:
conf:
Some
Of St
may 1
guarg
Many

IECQ:

deSi:

 

5.

10.

37

Many of the items included are ambiguous and irrelevant
in evaluating driver attitudes.

The instructions provided are generally vague and tend
to confuse the subjects as well as the instructor.
Consequently, students respond in terms Of what they
think is desirable rather than express their actual
feelings.

The scales are employed as a means Of student evaluation
rather than as a tool to improve imprOper attitudes.
Manuals of administration and interpretation are not
provided or if provided, they are too vague or too
confusing.

Some scales are designed to be administered in terms

Of self-evaluation. Although the results thus Obtained
may help to stimulate class discussion, there is no
guarantee that crucial issues will be discussed.

Many of the attitude inventories do not conform to

recommended structural guidelines.

SECTION 4

Attitude Scale Methodology

 

In order to develop an attitude inventory to fulfill

the designated purpose, it was necessary to review the

literature relating to attitude scale construction. The

major areas of concern in this section pertain to

38

formulating and editing appropriate attitude statements and
the structural and format methods that may be employed.

General information.--Although the term attitude is
frequently used, it very seldom conveys the same meaning
for two or more individuals. Similarly, many psychologists
do not employ the same concept of attitudes in their writ-
ings. The following paragraph presents composite informa-
tion relating to the concept of attitude.

Attitudes have generally been referred to as a
person's disposition to respond in a certain way toward
specific persons, places, situations or things. Although
attitudes are common to all individuals, they are possessed
in different degrees, thus impelling a person to react in
ways that can be called favorable or unfavorable. Opinions
are relevant to attitudes, since they have been classified
as verbal expressions Of attitudes. Because fact can
change Opinion, attitudes are also subject to change.
However, their direction and strength are sufficiently
enduring to justify treating them as personality traits.
Although attitudes are not directly observable and measur-
able, they can be inferred from a person's reactions to
;particular stimuli. Hence, attitude scales or inventories
can be used as research tools or as instruments for exper-
.imental evaluation of educational objectives external to

‘the domain of knowledge and skills.74

 

74L. L. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measurement
SEf.Attitude, Chicago University Press, Chicago, Ill., 1929;

 

Dr,

methods:
nation of
attitude

would be '

 

  
 
 
  
   

selected
individu—

value.

 

39

Attitudes can be measured by the following three
methods: (1) direct questioning, (2) Observation and eval-
uation of behavior, or (3) administration of prepared
attitude scales. Of the three, a valid attitude scale
would be the most advantageous, since it provides a set Of
selected responses which can be presented to a group of
individuals and then be measured to Obtain a quantified
value.

75 if an investigator desires to

According to Payne,
acknowledge how his subjects feel about a particular psy-
chological Object, the most logical procedure would be to
ask them. However, he noted the following disadvantages of
the direct questioning method: (1) many individuals are
reluctant to publicly express their feelings or attitudes,
(2) the investigator must employ experienced interviewers,
and (3) the interview technique is too time consuming.

Since a good measure of a person's attitude is his

behavior in daily activities, direct Observation has been

 

B. F. Green, "Attitude Measurement," Handbook of Social
Ps cholo (Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-wesley, 1954), pp.
335-36 ; Andrew Ellis, "Recent Research With Personality
Inventories," Journal of Psychology, 17:44-49, 1963; H. A.
.Murray and others, Exploratibns in Personality (New York:
Oxford University Press, 1938); Bernard M. Bass and Irwin
.A. Berd, Objective Approaches to Personality Assessment
(New York: VanNostrand’Inc., 1954); and Allen L. Edwards,
Techniques_of Attttpde Scale'Construction (New York:
.Appleton-Century-Crofts, 19577.

755. L. Payne, The Art of Askinnguestions (Prince-
ton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1951).

"v. .'_“' v 51.5' ~m'm

 

another
has discl
(l) consr

react to

 

with largl

react cor.”
they are
I
A
the inter
inference
behavior
other tha
T
has been
instmmen
scale Con:
carefully

?.
«I

a“ att:

COHditiOnE

 

 

40

another approach used to investigate attitudes. Remmers76

has disclosed limitations Of this method also because:

(1) considerable time may be required before the subjects
react to the stimulus presented, (2) its use is not feasible
with large groups of subjects, and (3) the subjects may
react contrary to their actual feelings, if they suspect
they are being Observed.

As cited by Edwards,77 investigators using either
the interview or Observation technique must realize their
inferences may be incorrect simply because the responses or
behavior of their subjects may be determined by factors
other than the subjects feelings.

The development of attitude scales and inventories
has been stimulated by the need for a quick, convenient
instrument usable with large groups. A well constructed
scale consists of a number of statements which have been
carefully selected in accordance with certain criteria.

If an attitude inventory is administered under controlled
conditions and with standardized instructions, the responses
thus Obtained are usually more reliable than those resulting
from other methods. Although the primary limitation of

attitude scales involves the subjects fabrication Of

 

76H. H. Remmers, An Introduction to Opinion and
Attitude Measurement (New York: Harper and Row Publishers,
1954).

 

77A. L. Edwards, Techniques of Attitude Scale Con-

struction (New York: App eton-Century-CfOfts, Inc.,1957).

 

41

responses, this can be controlled through the explicit
explanation of procedure and purpose. Unfortunately, many
researchers have abused attitude scales, since they have
been inclined to draw conclusions from meager or inadequate
samples.

Cronbach78

has stated that the question of degree
to which a person's behavior in an identifiable situation
will represent behavior in real life has prompted research-

ers to construct unreliable attitude scales.

Methodology.--The most troublesome problem con-

 

fronting investigators desirous Of constructing attitude
scales, is that Of selecting the initial set of statements.
Wang, Edwards, and others have established criteria requi-
site for selecting items to be used in attitude scales.79
There appeared to be some consistency with regards to the
following recommendations:

1. The statements should be simple, clear and direct.

2. The number of statements that could be endorsed by

everybody or nobody, should be at a minimum.

 

78Lee L. Cronbach, Essentials Of Psycholo ical
Testing (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 19 0 .

79K. A. Wang, "Suggested Criteria for Writing Atti-
tude Statements," Journal of Social Psychology, 3:367-373,
1932; L. L. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measurement of
Attitude, Chicago University Press, Chicago, Iliinois, i929,
pp. 28-35; C. Bird, Social Psycholoc (New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts, 1940, pp. 11-17; and A. L. Edwards and F. P.
Kilpatrick, "A Technique for the Construction of Attitude
Scales," Journal Of Applied Psychology, 32:374-94, 1948.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Stats
prese
4. The e
endc:
atti‘

i Ambig

 

m

. Stat'

vari

\J
0

Fact

00

. Stat

avoid

\o
a

The t
the .

19- Each

‘TiQuld 1

Wile,“ S e

1?; deVE

attitu'

42

3. Statements that refer to the past rather than the
present, should be avoided.

4. The statements should be worded so that they can be
endorsed or rejected in accordance with the reSpondent's
attitudes.

5. Ambiguous statements should be avoided.

6. Statements should be representative Of the attitude
variables to be measured.

7. Factual statements should be avoided.

8. Statements that are irrelevant to the Object should be
avoided.

9. The terminology employed should be comprehensible to
the subjects.

10. Each statement should contain only one thought.

80 has also suggested that a minimum

Thurstone
should be left to the personal judgment of the investigator,
when selecting statements for the final scale.

There are two general methods that may be employed
in developing the final scale from an accumulated set Of
attitude statements. They include: (1) the use of judges

tO sort the statements, and (2) selections based on the

<iirect responses of the subjects.

 

80L. L. Thurstone, "Theory of Attitude Measurement,"
Psychological Review, 29:222-41, 1929.

is print
sort the;
members <
sorting r

I
affect a.
agreener.’
of the j;
quartilej
the lowes

is presei

 

 

 

 

indicate
that the I
function

psyChOiC):

43

In the judgment or Thurstone method, each statement
is printed on a separate card and judges are requested to
sort these statements on an eleven point continuum. The
members of the judging group are instructed to base their
sorting procedure on the degree of negative or positive
affect associated with each item, rather than their own
agreement or disagreement with the statement. The responses
of the judges are then used to compute scale and inter-
quartile-range values for each item. The statements with
the lowest values are retained for the final scale, which
is presented tO the desired subjects with instructions to
indicate their agreement with each item. It is assumed
that the agree-disagree responses of the subjects are a
function Of the degree Of affect associated with the
psychological object.

An attitude score for each subject can be found by
locating the median Of the scale values of the statements
with which he agreed. This score is assumed to be an indi-
cation Of the subject's location on the same psychological
continuum that was presented by the scaled statements. A
subject's score can be interpreted independent of the dis-
tribution of scores from a particular group of subjects.81

81L. L. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measurement
ot_Attitudes, Chicago University Press, Chicago, Illinois,
1929; P. R. Farnsworth, "Attitude Scale Construction and
Method of Equal-Appearing Intervals," Journal of Social
Psychology, 50:245-48, 1954; R. J. Longstreet,"AH_E§53r-
iment with the Thurstone Attitude Scale," School Review,
1935, pp. 43-50; and A. L. Edwards, Techniques of Attitude

Scale Construction (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,
1957).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘ ' u 'rk‘ ”it,“
man.—

agreenen
The res?
judges c
deternir.

each sta

 

 

 

requires
items th
to study
subjects
be used.
rGSponse

(strongl

his its
which (
high Sc
that dc
SCOre -

Goasist

ls reta

44

The second method is based upon direct responses Of

agreement or disagreement with the attitude statements.
The response or Likert method does not resort to the use of
judges or scale values, since the investigator's assumptions
determine the extent Of favorableness or unfavorableness Of
each statement.

The procedure for constructing a Likert-type scale
requires the investigator to assemble a large number of
items that he considers relevant to the attitude he wishes
to study. These items are then administered tO a group of
subjects representative of those with whom the scale is to
be used. The subjects are requested to indicate their
response to each item by checking one of five categories
(strongly agree, agree, uncertain, disagree, strongly dis-
agree). The responses to the various items are scored in
such a way that a response indicative of the most favorable
attitude is given the highest score.

Each individual's total score is computed by adding
his item scores and the responses are analyzed to determine
‘which of the items discriminate most clearly between the
high score and the low scores on the total scale. Items
that do not show a substantial correlation with the total
score are eliminated to ensure that the scale is internally
consistent.

A set of the best twenty to twenty-five statements

is retained for the final scale which reverts to the

 

 

origin5

the fix

obtains

Unlike
.

ject 5

tion of

pare Th
Likert'
Likert

than Th
constru
It was

reliabl

EEthod,

Effort 1

scaling
\

for the

M835

ure:
1932; a1

0f the

Constr
1946, uc

45

original format. Weighted values are assigned to each of
the five possible responses and individual scores can be

obtained by summing the points received for each response.
Unlike the Thurstone method, the interpretation of a sub-
ject's score cannot be made independently of the distribu-

tion of scores of some defined group of subjects.82

Edwards and Kenny83

have conducted a study to com-
pare Thurstone's method of equal-appearing intervals and
Likert's method of summated ratings. They noted that the
Likert method was more comprehensive and less laborious
than Thurstone's method and that it took twice as long to
construct a Thurstone scale than it did the Likert scale.
It was also indicated that the Likert method provided more
reliable scores with fewer items than did the Thurstone
method.

The scale-discrimination technique was an early

effort by Edwards and Kilpatrick84 as a synthesis Of the

scaling and response methods for developing an attitude

 

82L. W. Ferguson, "A Study of the Likert Technique

for the Construction of Attitude Scales,“ Journal otjApplied
Psychology, 13:51-57, 1941; R. Likert, "A Technique for the
Measurement of Attitudes," Psyphological Archives, No. 140,
1932; and A. L. Edwards, Op. cit., pp. 149-69.

83A. L. Edwards and Katherine Kenny, "A Comparison
Of the Thurstone and Likert Techniques of Attitude Scale
Construction," Journal of Applied Psychology, 30:72-83,
1946.

 

84A. L. Edwards and F. F. Kilpatrick, "A Technique

for the Construction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Applied
Psychology, 32:374-84, 1948.

 

 

‘1‘." _._. "rut..-

 

scale. T1“-
procedure
discrimina
been used
ticality 1

Ir
been made
A few of ‘
following

I:
gator hyp
statement
item is g
marking t
most Stro
reversals
lation, i
smmed fO

G
IEVealed
achieved,
of reliaib

\

8
2m

\

V 8
soCGraxN‘Hi

Data I n

46

scale. This technique makes use of Thurstone's scaling
procedure and retains Likert's procedure for evaluating the
discriminatory power of individual items. Since it has not
been used extensively to date, its effectiveness and prac-
ticality have not been established.

In the past three decades, several attempts have
been made to develop more effective scaling instruments.
A few Of the better known methods will be discussed in the
following paragraphs.

In Guttman's85

scale analysis theory, the investi-
gator hypothesizes a variable and a number Of descriptive
statements are written that represent this variable. Each
item is given two or more alternative responses and subjects
marking the responses that indicate the desired quality
most strongly, receive the highest scores. The number of
reversals in responses that deviate from the perfect corre-
lation, is counted and the numbers of such errors are
summed for all items to arrive at a final attitude score.
Guilford's86 analysis Of Guttman's theory has
revealed that the criterion Of scalability can rarely be

achieved, even when total scores reach an acceptable level

Of reliability. He described this method as unrealistic

 

85L. Guttman, "A Basis for Scaling Qualitative
Data," American Sociological Review, Vol. 9, 1944.

86J. P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods (New Jersey:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, l9547i

 

 

and useles
wordings o:|
could be a

Th«
points alo
ing model.
of any sti
lated to t
endorse o]
of the re:
are quue

t0 the ir

47

and useless since it favors groups of items which are re-
wordings of the same content. Thus, the variable emphasized
could be a specific rather than a common factor.

The subjects and stimuli are both represented as

87 unfold-

points along a psychological continuum in Coombs
ing model. Coombs Operates on the premise that the distance
of any stimulus from a particular subject is directly re-
lated to the extent to which that subject is willing to
endorse or choose a particular stimulus. The consistency

of the respondents' judgments can be determined, since they
are requested to designate stimuli in rank order according
to their preferences.

According to some critics, this model is likely to
remain Of more theoretical than practical interest, inasmuch
as it is exceedingly stringent with no extraneous variations
permitted.88

Rating scales have also been employed in recent
years to evaluate individual reactions to given stimuli.
Although there are several kinds of rating scales, they

function in a similar way, since they all require the as-

signment of Objects by inspection. Although rating scales

 

87C. H. Coombs, A Theory Of Data (New York: John
Wiley and Sons, 1964).

88E. M. Shaw and J. M. Wright, Scales for ttg_
Measurement of Attitudes (New Jersey: McGraw-Hill Book
CO., 1967).

 

 

 

 

are eaSY
raters be
require q
precision

S
ture mode
atively I
applied t

scales . 9 O

A
in recent
attitude

T
technique
attitude
exPressed
0cCasion
HanQ ’ a
reflected
COHSequEn
\

8.

9 l

9 .
tude

W

48

are easy to administer, they necessitate well-trained
raters because they are subject to constant errors and
require quantitative Observations with some degree Of
precision and Objectivity.89

Semantic differential, Lazarsfeld's latent struc-
ture model, multidimensional scaling and others are rel-
atively recent in origin, therefore, they have not been
applied to any great extent in the development of attitude
scales.90

Although Opinion polling has become fairly prominent
in recent years, it has its limitations since it involves
attitude measurement in only the most rudimentary sense.9l

Those who are familiar with psychological scaling
techniques, have concurred that regardless of method, an
attitude can only measure the feelings that are actually
expressed. It must be realized that the subjects may on
occasion intentionally conceal their true attitudes.
Hence, a valid indication of their attitudes may not be

reflected to an appreciable degree in the scale results.

Consequently, it is important that precautions be taken

 

89J. P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods (New Jersey:
McGraw-Hill Book CO., 1954), pp. 15-24.

90

 

Shaw and Wright, Op. cit., pp. 127-29.

91H. H. Remmers, Introduction_to Opinion and Atti-
tude Testing(New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1954).

 

 

 

to minlml

expressix

Summary

degree of
psycholog
plex inte
increasin
able driv
traffic a
Cited fau
Hounced r
tiOn of t
A
PEEK/antic
Problem,
been Very
desirable
tildes We:
non‘exist

49

to minimize the conditions preventing the subjects from

expressing their true feelings.92

Summary

The review Of the literature has presented some
degree of consistency relative to accident causation and
psychological factors. Although accidents involve a com-
plex interaction Of many variables, there appears to be an
increasing amount of evidence which suggests that undesir-
able driving attitudes are the underlying causes Of most
traffic accidents. Research studies with accident repeaters
cited faulty attitudes as being accountable for the pro-
nounced resentment of authority and the intentional viola-
tion of traffic laws.

Although several writers concurred that accident
prevention and attitude change were basically an educational
problem, they also inferred that driver educators have not
been very effective in fortifying knowledge and skills with
desirable attitudes. Efforts to change and modify atti-
tudes were generally described as being inappropriate or
non-existent. Dogmatic and direct teaching, drives and

slogans, and shock and fear campaigns were noted to have

 

92L. L. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measurement

Of Attitude, Chicago University Press, Chicago, Illinois,
1929, pp. 19-20; and R. Likert, "A Technique for the Meas-
urement of Attitudes," Archives of Psychology, No. 140,
1932.

 

 

 

50

sone:momentary value, but accomplished no lasting results
in changing attitudes. It was indicated that programmed
instruction and group dynamics may be the most effective
means for developing or modifying attitudes.

Most researchers acknowledged the value of practical
driver attitude scales as instruments to divulge attitudinal
patterns which may lead to unsafe driving behavior. How-
ever, there are relatively few standardized scales avail-
ablxa in published form and those which are available have
many limitations. The scales reviewed were apparently
designed to evaluate individual attitudes and meager at-
tempts have been made to adapt or standardize these scales
for the purpose of determining areas requiring instruc-
tional emphasis.

The literature concerning attitude scale method-
ology confirmed the possibility of measuring attitudes by
the Opinions individuals endorse. Several methods and
procedures were outlined and it was indicated that the
Likert technique was the most comprehensive and least
laborious.

Hence, the review of the literature has disclosed
the need, purpose and methodology for the construction Of

a Practical driver attitude inventory.

CHAPTER III

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRELIMINARY INVENTORY

Formulation of the Statements

In order to formulate the statements to be con-
tained in the proposed inventory, it was necessary to
determine the most apprOpriate factors to be considered.
Based on the review of the literature and the existing
driver attitude scales, the following universe Of content
was developed.

1. Traffic laws

2. Enforcement

3. Licensing procedures
4. Alcohol and narcotics
5. Speeding

6. Traffic accidents

7. Vehicle condition

8. Emotions

9. Courtesy
10. Driver education

Sixty complete sentence statements were written,
six for each of the ten factors in the universe. However,

nine of these statements were discarded as a result of the
51

editing Cf|
To facilit
mm additi
fifty iten
ments to r

Hence, 10

of the ten

 

balance of

Ti

considerat

. I
1. Driver
lng tr

2. ThOSe
deprly

3° It is

4- Traffi
Cient

When a

 

 

 

52

editing criteria suggested by Thurstone, Chave and others.

93

TO facilitate the construction Of the preliminary inventory,

one additional statement was eliminated, thus providing
fifty items with a proportional distribution of five state-
ments to represent each of the ten factors in the universe.
Hence, 10 per cent of the statements were devoted to each
of the ten factors. An attempt was also made to provide a
balance Of negatively and positively oriented items.

The following statements were retained for further
consideration:

Traffic laws

1. Drivers should be given some degree Of freedom in obey-
ing traffic laws.

2. Those who habitually violate traffic laws should be
deprived of the privilege to drive.

3. It is necessary to Obey stop signs at all times.

4. Traffic laws are necessary to promote the safe, effi-
cient flow of traffic.

5. When a driver is in a hurry, it is all right for him
to go through a red light if there is no traffic.

Enforcement

1. In most cases, the police enforce the law as it is
written.

 

93L. L. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measurement
Of Attitude, Chicago University Press, Chicago, Illinois,
I929; R. Likert, "A Technique for the Measurement of Atti-
tudes," Archives of Psycholo , NO. 140, 1932; K. A. Wang,
"Suggested Criteria fOr Wr1t1ng Attitude Statements,"
Journal of Socigl Psychology, 3:367-73, 1932; and A. L.
Edwards and F. P. Kilpatrick, "A Technique for the Con-
struction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Applied Psychol-
23!! 32:374-384, 1948.

 

 

 

53

Policemen are too strict in enforcing traffic laws.
The police should not be lenient with traffic violators.
Policemen should enforce all moving violations.

Policemen are more critical Of teenage drivers than
they are Of any other age group.

Licensing procedures

Drivers who habitually Violate traffic laws should have
their licenses revoked.

The driver licensing procedure is too difficult.
Drivers should be re-tested at designated intervals.

Prospective drivers should not be required to take a
visual examination.

The driving skill phase of the licensing examination
should be difficult but realistic.

Alcohol and narcotics

 

Alcoholic beverages and narcotics impair a person's
ability to drive.

Those persons who make a habit of driving while intox-
icated should be deprived of the privilege tO drive.

The laws governing drivers under the influence of
alcohol or narcotics are too strict.

Drivers should not be required to take a sobriety test
even if they are suspected of being under the influence
of alcoholic beverages.

If a person drinks alcoholic beverages or takes drugs,
he should not drive an automobile.

Speeding

 

Driving a car should give a feeling of dominance.
Drivers should not exceed posted speed limits.

The driver should get the full benefit of a car's
potential speed whenever possible.

54

It is all right to speed on the open highway.

Speed limits help to promote the safe, efficient move-
ment Of traffic.

Traffic accidents

 

Careful drivers cause as many accidents as reckless
drivers.

Faulty driving behavior is a major cause of traffic
accidents.

Accidents do not happen by chance, they are caused.
Most traffic accidents cannot be avoided.

Middle-aged drivers are involved in more accidents than
teenagers.

Vehicle condition

 

A car with defective brakes should not be driven until
the proper adjustments have been made.

Motor vehicle inspections are a waste of time.
It is dangerous to drive with tread-bare tires.

Extra equipment should be put on a car to attract
attention.

Defective cars should be kept Off the highway.

Emotions

 

Driving is a good way to forget daily problems.

It is natural for a driver to get nervous in heavy
traffic.

A person should not drive when he is extremely angry
about something.

Cautious drivers do not get impatient in heavy traffic.

The car horn should be used freely in clearing the road
of slow drivers.

 

 

2.
30
4.
5.
l.
2.
3.
4.
5' PIOSpe
proved
Th
seventy-tw

Stuaents f

 

55

Courtesy

 

Most courteous drivers are not good drivers.

When conditions permit, drivers should stop to assist
motorists who have vehicle difficulties.

Courtesy is a good driving practice.
Driving courtesy is a reflection Of a person's character.

Courtesy is not a necessary element of safe driving.

Driver education

 

Most parents are qualified to teach their teenagers how
to drive.

Driver and traffic safety education courses can help to
prepare better qualified drivers.

Skill is the most important factor in the safe operation
of a motor vehicle.

The major goal of a driver and traffic safety education
course should be to train teenagers to secure a driver's
license.

Prospective drivers should be required to take an ap-
proved course in driver and traffic safety education.

The fifty statements were then distributed to

seventy-two graduate driver and traffic safety education

students from Michigan State University and Eastern Michigan

University for further analysis. As a result of their

suggestions, some minor changes were made and the statements

*were subjected to further scrutiny and refinement by a

three man committee representing the Counseling and Per-

sonnel Services, Highway Traffic Safety Center and Police

Iniministration Departments of Michigan State University.

56

Recommended revisions were made and Thorndike's94 text was

used as a reference to ensure that all the terms employed
were within the reading and comprehension level of the

average twelve year old.

Construction of the Inventory

Having developed fifty statements relevant to the
measurement of driving attitudes, it was decided to use a
synthesis of the Thurstone and Likert techniques in con-
structing the preliminary form of the inventory.

Thurstone's95 method of using judgments as a basis
for determining scale values Of the statements upon a des-
ignated psychological continuum was used in conjunction
with his instructions specifying that judgments be based
upon expressions indicating desirable attitudes rather than
the judges' own agreement or disagreement with the state-
ments.

The statements were arranged in the Likert96 format

and the following five category response was employed: (1)

strongly agree, (2) agree, (3) uncertain, (4) disagree,

 

94E. L. Thorndike and Irving Lorgue, The Teacher's
Word Book, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York,
I944.

 

95L. L. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measurement
pt Attitudes, Chicago University Press, Chicago, Illinois,
1920.

 

 

96R. Likert, "A Technique for the Measurement of
Attitudes," Archives of Psychology, NO. 140, 1932.

 

57

and, (5) strongly disagree. The "strongly agree" category
denoted the most favorable statements and the "strongly
disagree" category represented the most unfavorable
statements.

The inventory requisite for the judging procedure

is presented in Appendix E.

Selection of the Judges

 

The primary purpose of this study was to develop an
inventory which would assist driver educators to ascertain
the areas of instruction that should be emphasized to
foster the development of positive driving attitudes.
Consequently, the most logical individuals to judge the
degree of affect represented by the statements were driver
educators from three levels Of responsibility. The levels
that were selected included:

1. The supervisors of driver and traffic safety education
from the state departments of education of the fifty
states.

2. The directors Of driver and traffic safety education
from 117 colleges and universities offering three or

more courses in this field.97

 

97National Safety Council, Higher Education Section,
pgafetygEdpcation Courses in Colleges and Universities,
Chicago, Illinois, 1967.

3, One
teac
grou
book

drch

1
tion of t
Appendix
personal I

bers of t]

f!

58

3. One hundred and twenty high school driver education
teachers representing a minimum of ten states. This
group consisted of authors of driver education test-
books, personal-acquaintances and other recommended

driver educators.

Distribution of the InventOty

 

The distribution Of the inventory ensued the selec-
tion of the 287 judges. An "explanatory letter" as seen in
Appendix F, was written and with the exception of a few
personal deliveries, the inventory was mailed to the mem-

bers of the judging group.

Summary

Basic to the development Of the desired driver
attitude inventory were: (1) the selection of the apprOp-
riate universe of content, (2) the writing and editing Of
suitable statements, (3) the construction of the inventory,
(4) the selection Of the judges, and, (5) the distribution
Of the inventory.

The universe of content was selected and sixty
statements were written, six for each of the following
areas: (1) traffic laws, (2) enforcement, (3) licensing
procedures, (4) alcOhol and narcotics, (5) speeding, (6)
traffic accidents, (7) vehicle condition, (8) emotions, (9)

courtesy, and (10) driver education. As a consequence of

 

t‘ne editir
statements
construct:J
the Likert
levels of '
departmentI
and (3) h:
liminary ii
judging gi:

by the fif

 

59

the editing, scrutinizing and refining process, only fifty
statements were retained. The preliminary inventory was
constructed incorporating Thurstone's judgment method in
the Likert format. The judges were selected from three
levels Of driver education responsibility: (1) state
departments of education, (2) colleges and universities,
and (3) high schools. An explanatory letter and the pre-
liminary inventory were mailed to the 287 members Of the
judging group to determine the degree Of affect represented

by the fifty statements.

CHAPTER IV

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Source of Data

 

Requisite to the item analysis and factor analysis
procedures was the tabulation of the inventory responses.
The tabulation process was terminated four months from the
date the inventories were distributed. It was believed
that this time allotment was sufficient for those individ-
uals who intended to respond to the inventory. Seventy-two
per cent Of the inventories distributed, 207 Of 287, were
returned. Information regarding the states and institutions
representative of the inventories received are presented in
Appendix G. The response patterns of the 207 judges are

tabulated in Table 1.

Item Analysis

Median or scale values and interquartile range or
"Q" scores were used as criteria to determine the merits of

each statement contained in the preliminary inventory.98

4L

 

 

98A. L. Edwards, Techniques of Attitude Scale Con-
struction (New YOrk: Appleton-Century-Crofts Inc., l9575,
pp. @3-920

60

61

Table l.--Response pattern Of the 207 judges.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Response Categories

Var1ab1e Strongly Strongly

Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Disagree
1 4 44 22 67 70
2 157 49 1 0 0
3 142 '49 5 6 5
4 166 41 0 0 0
5 0 0 7 100 100
6 61 86 25 31 4
7 0 0 17 141 49
8 54 141 12 0 0
9 78 90 21 17 1
10 0 0 28 141 38
11 83 112 12 0 0
12 0 0 14 154 39
13 101 100 5 l 0
l4 5 18 25 92 67
15 89 94 18 6 0
16 148 30 27 l l
17 128 71 8 0 0
18 0 0 5 52 150
19 0 1 17 83 106
20 118 66 16 7 0
21 6 16 21 88 76
22 107 83 12 4 1
23 0 0 3 56 148
24 0 0 13 127 67
25 34 101 41 16 15
26 12 13 30 86 66
27 96 108 3 0 0
28 114 88 5 0 0
29 0 0 8 115 84
30 9 19 64 75 40
31 96 104 7 0 .0
32 0 0 2 98 107
33 149 54 3 l 0
34 4 9 18 82 94
35 105 86 11 3 2
36 0 0 14 101 92
37 4 25 20 99 59
38 142 61 4 0 0
39 15 106 27 45 14
40 0 0 6 108 93
41 0 2 9 69 127
42 42 128 35 0 2
43 154 51 2 0 0
44 109 61 37 0 0
45 0 0 5 75 127
46 2 11 36 96 62
47 136 42 29 0 0
48 0 0 16 143 -48
49 0 0 4 98 105
50 124 80 3 0 0

N = 207

The numbers within each response category represent the total

number Of judges making that reSponse.

 

62

Numerical values ranging from one for "strongly agree"
through five for "strongly disagree" were assigned to
facilitate the computation of the basic statistics for the
response data. The percentage of judges, who placed each
statement in the different categories, was used to calculate
the values of each statement upon the designated five point
psychological continuum. The numerical values representing
the basic statistical data are presented in Table 2.

The scale value for a given statement was designated
as the 50th percentile or median position assigned to it by
the 207 judges. Prime consideration was given to statements
which had the highest and lowest scale values, since the
strongly agree and strongly disagree limits were of major
concern.

The interquartile range was used to measure the
variation of the judgment distribution for each statement.
The "Q" scores contain the middle 50 per cent of the judg-
ments and were determined by computing the difference be-
tween the 75th and 25th percentiles. The mean "Q" score,
1.04, was used as the measure of delineation between good
and poor statements. Statements with scores larger than
1.04 were interpreted as indicating poor agreement among
the judges while smaller scores implied good agreement.
Disagreement among the judges as to the degree of the
attribute possessed by a given statement was interpreted
as an indication that there was something wrong with that

particular statement.

63

Table 2.--Basic statistics for the fifty variables.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Variable Range Q1 Median Q3 Mean SD 0

1 1-5 2.67 4.00 4.77 3.75 1.19 2.10
*2 1-3 0.83 1.16 1.49 1.25 0.44 0.66
*3 1-5 0.86 1.23 1.78 1.46 0.86 0.91
*4 1-2 0.82 1.12 1.44 1.20 0.40 0.62
*5 3-5 3.95 4.47 4.99 4.45 0.56 1.04

6 1-5 1.35 1.99 2.85 2.18 1.08 1.50
*7 3-5 3.74 4.11 4.48 4.16 0.54 0.74
*8 1-3 1.46 1.85 2.22 1.80 0.53 0.76

9 1-5 1.16 ‘1.78 2.36 1.91 0.94 1.20
*10 3-5 3.67 4.04 4.41 4.05 0.56 0.74
*11 1-3 1.12 1.68 2.15 1.66 0.58 1.03
*12 3-5 3.74 4.08 4.42 4.12 0.49 0.68
*13 1~4 1.04 1.53 2.08 1.55 0.57 1.04
14 1-5 3.54 4.10 4.73 3.97 0.97 1.19
15 1-4 1.08 1.65 2.21 1.72 0.74 1.13
*16 1-5 0.85 1.20 1.76 1.44 0.77 0.91
*17 1-3 0.90 1.31 1.89 1.42 0.57 0.99
*18 3-5 4.40 4.81 5.16 4.70 0.51 0.76
19 2-5 3.91 4.52 5.02 4.42 0.66 1.11
20 1-4 0.94 1.38 2.07 1.58 0.78 1.13
21 1-5 3.60 4.19 4.83 4.02 1.02 1.23
*22 1-5 0.98 1.47 1.98 1.59 0.73 1.00
*23 3-5 4.37 4.80 5.15 4.70 0.49 0.78
*24 3-5 3.80 4.21 4.73 4.26 0.56 0.93
25 1-5 1.68 2.19 3.01 2.41 1.08 1.33
26 1-5 3.39 4.06 4.72 3.87 1.11 1.33
*27 1-3 ‘1.04 1.57 2.05 1.55 0.53 1.01
*28 1-3 0.95 1.41 1.97 1.47 0.55 1.02
*29 3-5 '3.88 4.33 4.89 4.37 0.56 1.01
30 1-5 2.87 3.65 4.35 3.57 1.04 1.48
*31 1-3 1.04 1.57 2.08 1.57 0.56 1.04
*32 3-5 4.01 4.53 5.02 4.51 0.52 1.01
*33 1-4 0.85 1.19 1.64 1.30 0.52 0.79
34 1-5 3.75 4.38 4.95 4.22 0.92 1.20
35 1-5 1.00 1.49 2.10 1.61 0.75 1.10
*36 3-5 3.87 4.38 4.91 4.37 0.61 1.04
37 1-5 3.53 4.05 4.63 3.89 1.01 1.10
*38 1-3 0.86 1.23 1.72 1.33 0.51 0.86
39 1-5 1.85 2.34 3.65 2.69 1.08 1.80
*40 3-5 3.93 4.41 4.95 4.43 0.54 1.02
*41 2-5 4.09 4.69 5.10 4.55 0.63 1.01
*42 1-5 1.58 1.99 2.41 2.01 0.69 0.83
*43 1-3 0.84 1.17 1.54 1.27 0.46 0.70
44 1-3 0.98 1.45 2.27 1.65 0.76 1.29
*45 3-5 4.13 4.69 5.10 4.59 0.54 0.97
46 1-5 3.53 4.07 4.67 3.99 0.88 1.14
*47 1-3 0.88 1.26 1.92 1.48 0.73 1.04
*48 3-5 3.75 4.11 4.48 4.16 0.53. 0.73
*49 3-5 3.99 4.52 5.02 4.49 0.54 1.03
*50 1-3 0.91 .1.33 1.89 1.41 0.52 0.98

All numbers have been rounded to the nearest tenth. Variables

‘with * have mean "0” values of 1.04 or less.

 

64

Although both "scale" and "Q" values were used as
criteria for selecting statements to be considered for the
final form of the inventory, preference was given to state-
ments with low "Q" scores. The thirty-three statements

which follow were retained for further analysis.

Laws

 

1.**A driver who makes a habit of breaking traffic laws
should have his license taken away.

2. *It is not necessary to obey stop signs at all times.

3.**Traffic laws are necessary for the safe movement of
motor vehicles.

4. It is all right for drivers to go through red lights if
there is no traffic.

Enforcement

 

1.**Policemen are too strict with drivers who break traffic
laws.

2. *The police should be strict with drivers who purposely
break traffic laws.

3. Policemen are more strict with young drivers than with
any other age group.

Licensing

 

1. *Persons desiring a driver's license should pass a
general knowledge test before taking the road test.

2. The testing program for a driver's license is too
difficult.

3. *All licensed drivers should be re-tested at least every
four years.

Alcohol and narcotics

1. *Alcohol and narcotics can impair a person's driving
ability.

65
2.**Those who make a habit of driving when affected by
alcohol, should lose their driver's license.

3. *The laws concerning drivers who have been drinking
alcohol are too strict.

Speeding

1.**A person should not drive faster than the posted speed
limit.

2. *A person should get the full benefit of his car's
potential speed whenever possible.

3.**It is all right to go faster than the posted speed
limit on the open highway.

Accidents

 

1. Poor driving behavior is a major cause of traffic
accidents.

2.**Traffic accidents do not just happen; they are caused.

3. *Traffic accidents cannot be avoided on over-crowded
roads.

Vehicle condition

 

l. A car with bad brakes should not be driven until the
brakes have been repaired or replaced.

2. Motor vehicle inspections are a waste of time.

3.**It is dangerous to drive with badly worn tires.

Emotions

 

1. Driving provides a good way to forget daily problems.
2. A person should not drive when he is upset or angry.

3. The car horn should be used freely to clear the road
of slow drivers.

Courtesy

 

1. Most courteous drivers are not good drivers.

66
2.**When conditions permit, drivers should stop to help
motorists who have car trouble.
3. Courtesy is a good driving practice.

4.**Courtesy is a necessary part of safe driving.

Driver Education

1. *A driver education course can help a person to become
a better driver.

2. Skill is the most important factor in the safe operation
of a motor vehicle.

3. The major goal of driver education courses should be to
train teenagers to get a driver's license.

4. *A driver education course should be taken before getting
a driver's license.

Twenty statements were altered in varying degrees
from their original structure, to ensure that the terminol—
ogy was within the reading and comprehension level of the
average twelve year old. The statements preceded by single
asterisks were modified as a result of the reiterated sug—
gestions of the judges, while those with double asterisks
contain word changes that were recommended by two eighth
grade English teachers.

To facilitate the examination of the factor analysis
tables, the thirty-three variables were grouped according
to the postulated factors. This information is presented

in Table 3.

67

Table 3.--Grouping of variables by postulated factors.

J

 

 

 

 

Postulated Factors Variable Number Sequence
1. Laws 1, 2, 3, 4

2. Enforcement 5, 6, 7

3. Licensing 8, 9, 10

4. Alcohol 11, 12, 13

5. Speed 14, 15, 16

6. Accidents 17, 18, 19

7. Equipment 20, 21, 22

8. Emotions 23, 24, 25

9. Courtesy 26, 27, 28, 29
10. Driver Education 30, 31, 32, 33

 

 

 

68

Factor Analysis

99 form of factor analysis

The principal components
was selected as the means of examining the validity of the
postulated factors and to determine if the relationships
within each set of variables could be presented or repro-
duced with little error or loss of information from a group
of common factors smaller in number than the ten original
factors.

The varimax rotation of factor matrices which max-

100 and the quartimax rota—

tion which simplifies the distribution in each row,101 were

imizes the variance in columns,

undertaken to clarify and interpret the extracted factors.

Three solutions were executed with the Kiel-Wrigley Option

102

set at 5, 0 and 2 respectively and all operations were

executed on the I.B.M. 3600 at Michigan State University.

 

99Merrill Flood, "A Computational Procedure for the
Method of Principal Components," Psychometrika 5:169-72,
1940; and G. E. Burrough and H. W. Miller, “The Rotation of
Principal Components," Bi-annual Journal of Statistical
Psychology, 14:35-49, 1961.

100H. F. Kaiser, "The Varimax Criterion for Analytic
Rotation in Factor Analysis," Psychometrika, 23:187—200,
1958; . "Computer Program for Varimax Rotation in
Factor Analysis," Educational Psychology Measurement, 19:
413-420, 1959.

101Jack Neuhaus and Charles Wrigley, "The Quartimax
Method," Bi-annual Journal of Statistical Psychology, 7:81-
91, 1954.

102T. W. Anderson, "Asymptobic Theory for Principal-
Component Analysis," Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34:
122-48, 1963; and Harry H. Harmon, Modern Factor Analysis
(Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago—Press, 1968),
pp. 130-46.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

69

Intercorrelation matrix.--The computation of an

 

intercorrelation matrix for the thirty-three variables was
requisite to the execution of the varimax and quartimax
rotations. The data contained in Table 4 disclosed that
the intercorrelations were relatively low, ranging from
-.01 to -.59. The low correlations were attributed to the
low variances resulting from the excellent agreement among
the judges.

It was decided that only correlations of .25 or
larger would be accepted as indicative of item comparabil-
ity. The highest correlation -.59 was obtained for items
#28 and #29 which represented the Courtesy factor. All of
the variables contained in the Speed and Accident factors
had correlations of .25 or larger, as did two of the four
Driver Education items.

The Enforcement and License factors did not provide
any variables which met the prescribed limits. Items #4,
#5, #6, and #10 correlated .25 or larger with a few state-
ments representing other factors, but did not correlate
highly within their own set. Relatively low correlations
were obtained for items #2, #7, #8, #9, #11 and #27. The
correlation of variables within postulated factors can be
more readily observed in Table 5.

Orthogonal rotation leadings.--Both quartimax and
varimax rotations were executed for the three principal

component solutions and only those factors were considered

7O

.pwuuHEO coon m>mn mucHom HMEHomo can sued» unoumm: on» on omocsou coon m>ms nudges: HHd

 

MM NM HM 0M MN MN 5N MN MN vN MN NN HN ON MH MH NH MH MH vH MH NH HH OH m m h w m v M N H

 

o.H MMIVHIMN MNIMM oH MHIMNIMM MHIMH MNIMN NHIMN MN MNIMNIvN MNIMN ho MH ¢oanIMHIMH hleHIMH NH MH
o.H MM MHIMH VHIMOIMO vN «HIMH NHIHM NHIvN ONIMMIHN MH wHINN MMIMOIMHINOIVHIMQ HHIMH MN MNIHOIBHI
o.H HHINH no Mleo NN OHIMN MHIvH MHINH MHIMNIMH oH NHIMH melNOIMNlmo MOION MHINN vN vNImo eel
o.H hNINN «H MHIMNIMH NHIMN MNIMH MHIMH vN MHIMHIMH «NIMH NH Mo HOImH mele MHIthhN MH MN
o.H mmuhHlmv NM othH wNIhM oMIMN MMIMMIfiN OM mHImN MHIMHIMHIHOIMHIMH HNINH ho MNIMHIMNI
o.H @H MMIMNIow HHIMN lewN MleM MN MHIVHIMH vNIMH mo MH mo ho mele hOIHOIMH MH MH
o.H vHINNIOH MHIHH MOIOH OHIMH 5H MOIMHIHo MOIMH Ho HH melao OHIMOImoIoHIMH vo no
o.H 0N MNIVH MNIvN HNImo hNINNIMH vN hleN NOIMOIMcIMOIMHIHo hHIMH mo MHIMHIMHI
o.H MNIHM MHIMN MNIHN MNIMNIMN MN NNIvN HNINNIOHIMH MHIho OHINH MH MHI¢oINHI
o.H vNIhN MMION MHINM hN MNIvMIhN.cMION 9H vH ho MO weION OHIMOION MH MH
o.H MHIVH MNIMN hNIeM vN MN bHIHN MHIMOIVOIHO «HIcH ONIMN MH wNImo MHI
o.H HNIMN OHIvN MH NHIMHIMH OMI¢H 0H 5H Ho NH MHImo HHIvOIMN HN MN
o.H MMIvN NMIMMIHM MN HNIOM MHIOHIMNIwc MOIMH OHIMH HH MNIHHIhNI
o.H MHIVN MM MNIMOIMH OMIMH MH MH HNION MHIOH «NIMNIMH MH OH
o.H MMIoMIMH NH OHIMH MHIHoIMHlmo OHIMH MNiMH NN MHI¢o MHI
c.H Nv HMIMNIhH bNIMH NCIMH NOIQH MNImo MNIMHIMN MH MH
o.H MNIOMIMH MHIoN MH 5H HHIhH MHIHN MNIhHIMN HOIMN
o.H vM MNIhH MHIMHIONImo MQIMH HHIMN NN MHIHo MHI
o.H HelHH MolvHIBOIMO melho hQIMOIMOIGNIMOIHMt
o.H ONImo NN Ho Ho mo Ho HH MHIBOIMH NH HM
o.H MMIMHIHOImo hHINo NHIMH MH MHIMNIMNI
o.H MH 5H wouMN HHINH MHI¢NIMH oH HH
o.H MH MOINH Ho mo Mennonwo mo mo
o.H MOIvo HHINo MHIMo 0H ¢0Ivo
o.H mouse mo mo OH Ho HOIHoI
o.H motho MHIMHIMH mo MN
o.H MOINH mo mHIMOIMO
o.H MHINleN mo 5H
c.H Mo @HINOIMHI
o.H ONIMOIMHI
o.H mo OM
o.H wH
o.H

MM NM HM OM MN MN hN 0N MN vN MN NN HN 0N MH MH hH oH MH «H MH NH HH 0H m m h w m v M N H

 

 

 

mmflnmaum>

HNMQ‘MKOI‘QG

 

 

I

.moanmflum> mm.u0u xHuums GOHumHmuuoououcHun.¢ mHnma

 

71

Table 5.--Variab1e correlations within postulated factors.

 

 

Postulated Factors Variables Correlation

 

. Laws 1 and 3 .30
. Enforcement

1
2
3. Licensing
4
5

. Alcohol 12 and 13 .39
. Speed 14 and 15 .41
14 and 16 .25

15 and 16 .34

6. Accidents 1? and 18 .42
17 and 19 .29

18 and 19 .36

7. Equipment 20 and 21 .36
8. Emotions 24 and 25 .29
9. Courtesy 28 and 29 .59
10. Driver Education 31 and 32 .36
32 and 33 .33

 

 

 

 

 

Only those variables having correlations of .25
and larger are presented.

72

relevant which contained comparable loadings for both rota-
tions on the same variable. Guidelines specified by Reyburn
and Taylor103 were employed to interpret the factor loading
solutions.

Solution #1.--In the initial solution, the Kiel-

 

Wrigley Option was set at 5 and three quartimax and five
varimax factors were produced. The three factors examined
yielded the following results.

1. Although eleven variables were noted in Factor 1, only
item #28, Courtesy, produced both quartimax and varimax
loadings.

2. Factor 2 contained twenty-two variables of which eleven
contained double loadings. The highest loading was on
Accidents with all three items #17, #18 and #19 repre-
sented. Enforcement and Driver Education provided two
paired loadings, while Laws, Speed, Courtesy and Emo-
tions yielded one each.

3. Laws, Licensing, Alcohol and Driver Education were
equally represented in Factor 3 which loaded on ten
different variables.

4. Factors 4 and 5 yielded only varimax loadings on three

and five items respectively.

 

103H. A. Reyburn and J. G. Taylor, "On the Inter-
pretation of Common Factors: A Criticism and a Statement,"
Psychometrika, 8:53-64, 1943.

 

- mm“’_.-444-C.

‘--—--_.___—....Au_ _._ ..——~-

— m‘Wfi w“

73

Although this solution did not produce any pro-
nounced factors, it was indicated that a ten factor solution
would be feasible, since the first component of the prin-
cipal axis analysis had an Eigenvalue104 of 6.64 and nine
other values were larger than one. The data relevant to

this solution is tabulated in Table 6.

Solution #2.--Dependent upon the Eigenvalues ob—

 

tained for the first solution, the second solution was
executed with the Kiel-Wrigley Option set at 0, stipulating
the rotation of ten factors.

The results of this solution disclosed that there
was a greater consistency for paired quartimax and varimax
loadings within each of the ten rotated factors. The fol-
lowing factor representations were noted:'

1. Observing the loadings associated with Factor 1, it was
found that moderately high loadings were related to
Courtesy items #26, #28 and #29 with moderate loadings
for Accidents and Emotions. Item #21, Equipment, was
also represented.

2. Moderately high loadings were noted in Factor 2 for
items #5 and #6, Enforcement. Single Accidents and

Emotions items were also included within this factor.

 

104Larry Irwin, "A Method of Clustering Eigen-
values," Psychometrika, 31:11-13, 1966; and Harry Harmon,
Modern Factor Analysis (Chicago, Illinois: University of
Chicago Press, 1968), pp. 140-46.

 

 

74

Table 6.--Quartimax and varimax rotated factor loadings:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Solution No. 1-
Highest Factor Loadings
Postu-
lated Items 2 3 4
Factors
Q V Q V Q V V V
1 36 51
1 2 65 56
3 -46 -40
4 45 41
5 43 44
2 6 -31 -43
7 32 35
8 35 50
3 9 39 -49
10 -38 37
ll 31 47
4 12 -37 51
13 -58 -59
14 -34 ‘69
5 15 48 -707
lg 56 39
17 -66 -54
6 18 54 -59 -42
19 50 53
20 42 42
7 21 -42 53
22 36 43
23 56 55
8 24 58 -45'
25 52 -34
26 —56 -37
9 27 -31 -27
28 48 76
29 -74 51
30 41 39
31 53 60
1° 32 55 56
33 37 -49 ‘
Highest _ _ _ _
Loading 48 76 66 60 65 59 70 49
\PrOportion
of Variance 05 10 18 10 07 07 07 04

 

was set

Decimals have been omitted and all numbers have
been rounded to the nearest tenth.

at 5.

Kiel-Wrigley Option

 

3.

4.

10.

75

Factor 3 loaded on items #2 and #10, Laws and Licensing.
Speed was the only independent factor noted. This
finding was also supported by the intercorrelations
among the three variables in this set. Item #14 cor-
related .41 with item #15, item #15 correlated .34 with
item #16 and the smallest, although acceptable correla-
tion was .25 between items #14 and #16.

Factor 5 loaded equally on variables representing
Licensing and Equipment.

Moderate to moderately high loadings were obtained for
Factor 6 on items #4, #12 and #32, Laws, Alcohol and
Driver Education respectively.

Single items #3, #7 and #22 associated with the postu-
lated factors of Laws, Enforcement and Equipment were
noted in Factor 7.

Factor 8 included a single, but relatively high loading
-.75 for item #27, Courtesy.

A single but moderately high loading -.79 for item #11,
Licensing, was presented in Factor 9.

Single loadings were recorded for Laws, Licensing and
Driver Education in Factor 10.

The aforementioned information was derived from the

ciata outlined in Table 7.

Solution #3.--In an attempt to further isolate the

Enostulated factors, a third principal components' solution

:Mas executed in which the Kiel-Wrigley Option was set at 2.

 

76

.vououou oumz nuouonu oH vac o um you om3 coHuoo honHHleuHx

.I‘c int}.}..‘.

Ill]. 'x-‘4l5-I‘Kr 111.1.1...‘

 

.Aucou unmade: 0:» cu ooocsou some o>uc «Hogans HHu can wouUHEo coon o>mn mHMEHomo

 

mo

mo

vo

vo

vo

vo mo

mo

no

mo

no

mo

no

mo

vo

oo

oo

mo

oH

NH

mocmwum> mo
coHuHomoum

 

mm

we

own

oh!

Mb!

moi owl

Nhl

Vb!

Mhl

chi

ohl

Mhl

vb!

No

ohl

th

on

on

mmcHomoq
uuoemmm

 

ha

MMI

Hon

vv
Nb:

vb!

he

MM
NM
HM
om

oH

 

m5:

MBI

Mhl

owl

hhl
on

om!

MN
MN
hN
wN

 

NM

Nm

mMI
om

col
v0

MN
VN
MN

 

mv

mv

NM

oMI

mvl

NN
HN
oN

 

NM

ov

om
onl

mm
MHI

MH
oH
NH

 

ovl
ohl

Hon
Mhl
mo

oH
MH
VH

 

Mb:

vVI
no

vo

ovl

MH
NH
HH

 

hm

mo

Mb:

vb!

om:

oH

 

on-
mm

th
mm

 

Nv

MM

«MI

MMI

Nv

No

HNMV'IDWI‘CDQ

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

h

 

 

o

 

m

 

 

 

 

 

 

nucHonoq uouoom uuoanm

 

msouH

muouomm
wanna
unumom

 

 

 

 

.N .02 cOHuaHom «omsaonoH uouoom cououou xmawum> can xufiHuumaoun.h oHnma

77

The rotated factor loadings for this solution are presented

in Table 8.

Nine factors were derived, however, only seven

yielded paired quartimax and varimax loadings. The follow-

ing variable loadings were noted:

1.

Factor 1 loaded most consistently on the postulated
factor of Courtesy, since items #26, #28 and #29 had
moderate to high loadings. Moderate loadings were also
recorded for items #24 and #25, Emotions, while Acci-
dents and Equipment variables were also represented.

The loadings for this factor were identical to Factor 1
in solution two.

Moderate loadings were noted for two of three variables
for the postulated factors of Enforcement and Accidents.
Item #23, Emotions, also had paired quartimax and
varimax loadings.

Items #2 and #3, Laws, produced the highest loadings
for Factor 3. Single Licensing, Equipment and Driver
Education items were also noted.

Consistent with solution two, Factor 4 yielded moder-
ately high loadings for all three variables #14, #15
and #16 representing the postulated Speed factor; how-
ever, in this case, item #1, Laws, was also represented.
Moderately high loadings were noted in Factor 5 for

items #9 and #20, Licensing and Equipment.

-M .ou- r.._...— mun-y...” 4.

 

'78

I. I-. l P: I .

 

 

.N um.uom an: cofiudo awamfiusuamfis .sucmu
vacuum: 0:» on omocsou coon o>mc madness HHm can oouuwao coon o>mc mHmeHomo

 

vo vo vo mo no no mo no no no oo oo

oo

oo

no

OH

HH

mocmHum> mo
coHuHoooum

 

onl onl vnl on mo Hnl onl an nOI onl an ow

No

owl

we

on

on

mmmaomoq

umo£OMML

 

Mv
Hnl onl
ovl OMI
wv

vv

mv

MM
NM
HM
bm

OH

 

onl
vnl

an
on

nml

onl
an

owl

ON
ON
nN
OW

 

ow

ow

Ovl
Hm

owl
mo

MN
vN
MN

 

oo

Mm

OMI

NVI

NN
HN
ON

 

nm
owl

«o

av

Hm

OH
OH
nH

 

ovl Hvl
onl an
mm mm

OH
MH
VH

 

vvl
no mo
onl nv

Hvl

MH
NH
HH

 

on
mo an nOI
MM

ow

OH

 

nvl

owl
mm

onl
vm

 

owl MMI owl
vv
om

nM

HNMQ‘Q‘DFQO‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

O O n o m v

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nmchuoa Hannah uuoanm

mEOUH

muouomm
wanna
lsumom

 

 

 

 

.m .02 :oHunHom “umcacaoH uououu ooumuou

quHum> can quHuuaaoll.m OHQMB

 

79

Factor 6 produced moderate to moderately high loadings
for single items representing the postulated factors
Laws, Alcohol and Driver Education.

Although four items loaded on Factor 7, no matched
quartimax and varimax pairs were produced.

Item #31, Driver Education, was the single paired but
relatively low loading noted for Factor 8.

Only a single varimax loading for item #11, Alcohol,
was recorded under Factor 9.

Oblique rotation loadings.—-Since the three ortho-

 

gonal rotations of the principal components axis did not

produce distinct, acceptable factors, an oblique rotation

was also executed. The factor loadings for this solution

are presented in Table 9.

The derived oblique solutions obtained produced the

eight comparable common factors which follow:

1.

Although Factor 1 loaded on seven variables, the highest
loadings were on three of four Courtesy items, #26, #28
and #29. It seemed reasonable therefore to name this
factor Courtesy.

Factor 2 loaded only on the three Speeding variables;
hence, it was obvious that this factor represented

Speeding.

3. The highest loadings for Factor 3 were on Enforcement

items #5 and #6; however, moderately high loadings were

also presented for Accidents and Emotions variables.

flh-_“‘fl‘

 

80

Table 9.--Oblique rotated factor loadings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highest Factor Loadings
Postulated
Factors Items Factors
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 86
l 2 -48
Laws 3 5 7
4 -73
5 87
Enforgem t 6 ‘96
en 7 _50
3 3 81
Licensi 9 99
“g 10 94
4 ll - g9
12 97
Alcohol 13 -65
5 14 -89
s d 15 94
pee 16 74
6 17 71
- 18 60
Acc1dents 19 79
7 2° -68
Equipment g; '53 _93
3 23 72
- 24 85
Emotions 25 _59
26 -87
9 27 —86
Courtesy 28 93
29 -96
10 739 87
D ' 31 -83
river 32 -86
Education 33 64

 

 

Decimals have been omitted and all numbers have

been rounded to the nearest tenth.

 

 

10.

81

Three loadings were noted for Factor 4, two of which
were on Alcohol variables, hence, this factor was named
Alcohol.

Factor 5 loaded on five variables, three (#1, #3 and
#4) represented the postulated Laws factor. It was
thus reasonable to identify this factor as Laws.

Of the two items represented in Factor 6, the highest
loading was on item #31, Driver Education, as a result
this factor was called Driver Education.

A very high loading .99 was noted for item #9, Licens-
ing, in Factor 7. Although an Equipment variable #20
also loaded -.68, it was feasible to name this factor
Licensing.

Two items loaded on Factor 8, #22, Equipment and #27,
Courtesy. Since statement #2 had the highest loading
-.93 and the Courtesy variable had a low correlation
with other items within its set, this factor was called
Equipment.

Factor 9 contained loadings on two variables, #2, Laws
and #10, Licensing, which had already been classified.
A moderately high loading was noted on Factor 10 for
item #11, Alcohol; however, the correlation of this
item with other Alcohol variables was relatively low.

In order to define the factors to be used in the

final inventory, variables were deemed to be relevant only

if they appeared on a distinguishable factor for at least

ah-opo-nnc-a-o -~-4 - - -

_ .. -- -'.

 

82

three of the four derived solutions. The following factors
were reasonably invariant over the factoring methods
employed:

1. Speeding

2. Courtesy

3. Licensing

4. Alcohol

5. Equipment

6. Driver education

7. Laws

8. Enforcement

Although Emotions and Accidents factors were not
named, they were strongly and logically represented in the
Enforcement factor.

The factor intercorrelations presented in Table 10
were computed to determine if the eight factors were ap-
propriately labelled.. Since the intercorrelations were
small, ranging from .25 to -.33, it was indicated that all
of the factors were relatively independent.

Of the eight factors listed, only the Speed factor
was linearly independent of other variables and factors.
Statements representing the Laws factor were found to load
on several of the extracted factors, but the extent and
direction of the associations varied with the factor and
the solution. It was thus indicated that several statements

representing other postulated factors were either confounded

.. -‘ ..,..,.. .¢-,_(. .4...— .'-D.v .q- «.-

_-_mn-~_. A-__ w.“fl—----4-“‘ ._ <

 

83

Table 10.--Factor intercorrelations.

 

 

Factor

1
2

 

10

 

 

l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1.00 .17 .08 -.04 .01 -.05 -.15 .12 .04 .04
.17 1.00 .01 -.07 .11 -.08 -.10 .07 -.03 .15
.08 .01 1.00 .03 .07 .02 .01 .06 .07 -.09
-.04 -.07 .03 1.00 -.14 .01 -.02 .05 .02 -.02
.01 .11 .07 -.14 1.00 -.05 -.04 .08 .09 -.05
-.05 -.08 .02 .01 -.05 1.00 .25 .04 -.18 .16
-.15 -.10 .01 -.02 -.04 .25 1.00 -.04 -.24 .19
.ll .07 .06 .05 .08 .04 -.04 1.00 .03 -.02
.04 -.03 .07 .02 .09 -.18 -.24 .03 1.00 -.33
.04 .15 -.09 -.02 -.05 .16 .19 -.02 -.33 1.00

 

 

All numbers have been rounded to the nearest

tenth.

- J‘a» -—a__.._.: .1 n.-. .- o

4‘”.~ —-0 A--.....‘

 

‘ fi—‘Q-Wr __1_

84

with Laws, or Laws were involved in most driver attitude
variables. Table 11 presents the factor loading matrix
which illustrates the heavy loadings of the Laws variables
#1, #2, #3 and #4 on other items.

The factor analysis data indicated that most of the
thirty-three statements had considerable discriminatory
ability and supported the classification of the items
according to the postulated factors. Consequently, suffi-
cient evidence was provided to retain the ten original
factors for use in the final form of the inventory.

Cluster analysis.--In order to maintain a propor-
tional distribution of items to be included in the final
inventory, three of the weakest statements were discarded.
An ordering or clustering program was developed to further
analyze the thirty-three statements in order to decide
which three would be omitted. Table 12 presents the data
relative to the Ordered R-Matrix for the thirty-three
variables.

The variables representing the postulated factors
of Laws, Courtesy and Driver Education were of major concern
since each of these factors contained four variables. Al-
though several clusters were noted, items #2, #7, #8, #9,
#11 and #27 did not fit into any of these clusters or cor-
relate .25 or larger with any other variables. Consequently,
items #2, Laws, and #27, Courtesy, were discarded, for these

statements were within the factors being examined. Item #30

 

 

'. . c. \O D . ... .lA;| 0.. .o.u?ll.lnfl Ill., l 7". .1.‘ . . {fit .‘dlllo...l

.OM. can» mme mums owooHocH mmcHomoH map HHm moch .ocHumHH 3ou
may :H Hammond uoc mum MM .02 nosounu OM .oz mmHanHm> .omoaHocH mum 30H comm How OM. m>onm mmcHomoH
on» tho .nucmu ummummc man on cooczou some m>mc mumnfidc HHw 6cm omuuHEo some m>mn mHmEHomo

 

 

 

 

 

 

85

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nv . «m MM
HOl nM nql NM OH
NM HM nv nml HM
Ov Owl OM
NleOl MN
le ov NO MN m
MM mOl nN
NM ovumvl ON
OM OM «Ml MN
NMl MM Om «N O
n¢l MN
MM: HMl Ov mv NN
MOI HN n
MMI Hm ON
Nel OH
OO OH O
MO NO nH
OM OMl OH
OMl OOIOM Owl OH O
HMI om ”Ml ‘MH
Hvl NO: MH
Hv NH Hv NH O
owl Hm HH
HMl OH
NM MMI MO an HM m M
vM mv Ha HM m
OMl Owl MM n
MM Oml Ovl NM O N
«Ml lOM .OMI m
NM HM nM le v
MM NMl OM Ov M H
NM MM nw OM N
. OM «w H
ON ON nN ON ON eN MN NN HN ON OH OH nH OH OH OH MH NH HH OH O m n O m e M N H muouomm
msmuH woumH
annuHum> lsumom

 

 

 

 

 

.mmHanum> MM you XHuuME mcHomoH nouommll.HH oHnma

.‘. A.. n l n! I: 1.. ll. .1 ,r 1|. . y... «r. t I bl..l1*.ll #. It l .l' filinflflllllu l I'll Illillllili’

.OmosHocH cum ON. can» HmOumH mcoHumHmuHoo nqu mmHQMHHm> OHco
.cmuUHEo :mwn o>mn mucHom HMEHomO can sucou umoummc we» on Omoaaou swan m>mn mumnfioc HHd

 

O n O O. oH HH.N ON NN OM ON nN v NH MH ON HN OH OH vH H M O OH OH nH MN HM NM MM VN ON ON

 

86

O

n

O

ON nN O
ON OH
HH

N
nN . ON nM Mv ON
ON OM ON ON nN ON NN

ON ON ON nN ON nN OM
ON ON ON ON ON ON HM ON ON ON NM ON
nN

ON ON v
OM ON MM NH

ON OM OM OM OM ON nN ON OM ON MH
ON ON OM. OM OM OM ON

ON ON OM.OM HM ON nN ON NM MM NM ON MM OM HN
ON HM VM ON HM ON ON OH
ON ON OM Hv HM OM ON ON OM OM OH
ON Hv HM nN OH

ON ON ON nN HM HM. OM H

ON nN ON OM ON ON M

ON O

ON OM ON ON ON OH

ON nN ON nN NM HM OM Nv nN ON. OM OM OH
ON ON OM MM ON OM ON ON Nv vM MM ON nN ON MM nH

nN ON HM ON ON nN vM ON MN
ON OM HM

ON MM NM ON MM OM MM NM

ON ON . ON ON ON ON ON MM OM OM ON MM
ON nN ON OM MM ON vM nN NM nN OM O¢ ov vN
nM ON OM ON OM ov OO ON
MO ON nN NM ON OM OM OM ON OM MM ov OO ON

 

 

O n O O OH HH N ON NN OM ON nN O NH MH ON HN OH OH «H H M O OH OH nH MN HM NM MM vN ON ON

 

 

ucHanum>

 

 

 

.mmanunum> mm on» non xwuumsum noumcuoul.ma manna

87

correlated .28 with item #33, but did not correlate with
any other variables within its set, hence, item #30 was

also excluded.

Summary

The responses of the 207 judges who returned the
preliminary inventory were tabulated and their judgments
were used as a basis of determining the scale values and
"Q" scores of the fifty statements upon the five point
psychological continuum. The mean "Q" score of 1.04 was
used as the upper limit in selecting the thirty-three
statements that were retained for further analysis.

Three orthogonal and one oblique factor analysis
principal components solutions were executed to assess the
extent to which the ten postulated driver attitude factors
were independent of factoring methods. Eight common factors
were judged to exist over three of the four derived solu—
tions. They were: (1) Speeding, (2) Courtesy, (3) Licens-
ing, (4) Alcohol, (5) Equipment, (6) Laws, (7) Driver Ed-
ucation and (8) Enforcement. Although Emotions and Acci-
dents factors were not classified, they were logically
represented in the Enforcement factor. Statements repre-
senting the postulated Law factor were found to load on
several of the other factors, hence it was implied that
Laws were a component part of most driver attitude var-

iables. There was no evidence that driving attitudes

88

existed as a single general characteristic, therefore
justifying the use of the ten postulated factors in the
final form of the inventory.

It was decided that the final inventory would con-
sist of thirty items with a proportional distribution of
three statements for each of the ten factors. Cluster
analysis was used to select the best items in terms of the
highest intercorrelations between variables within each

factor.

CHAPTER V
DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINAL INVENTORY

Selection of Statements

The thirty items to be included in the final in-
ventory were selected in terms of item analysis, inter-
correlation analysis and cluster analysis. Primary
consideration was given to:

Content: Three statements were retained to rep-
resent each of the ten postulated factors.

Scale value: A balanced distribution of favorable

 

and unfavorable items was maintained.
Q score: Only the best statements were included
as determined by their index of ambiguity.

Intercorrelated matrix: The variables were chosen

 

in terms of the highest correlations between items within

each set.

Construction of the Inventory

Format.--Since the function of the final inventory
was to assess student attitudes toward motor vehicle laws
and driving practices for the purpose of placing instruc-
tional emphasis, only three response categories were deemed

necessary. They included "Agree," "Uncertain" and

89

’h—__.___._w_h

 

 

 

90

"Disagree." With the exception of the "Uncertain" cate-
gory, the basic format was similar to that prescribed by
Thurstone. The need for a neutral response was based on
the reasoning that vague or undeveloped attitudes were
more conducive to positive influence than expressed nega-
tive attitudes.

Two parallel forms of the inventory were con-

structed by rearranging the order of the thirty statements.

Instructions.—-It was necessary to develop two

 

sets of directions, one for the Pre-test and another for
the Post-test. The only difference between the two dealt
with the function of each inventory. The purpose of Form
A or the Pre-test was designated as obtaining information
that would be used to develop and organize the course con-
tent. Form B or the Post-test was introduced as a means
of evaluating the effectiveness of the driver education
course in meeting the students' needs and expectations.
Measures were taken to keep the instructions clear,
precise and comprehensive. An attempt was also made to
elicit truthful responses by the statement of purpose and
by stressing that: (1) there were no right or wrong an-
swers, (2) there was no grade involved, and (3) answers

should not be changed.

 

 

 

91

Administrative Guidelines

 

To insure the inventory was used as intended, it

was necessary to develop clear, detailed and comprehen-

sive administrative guidelines. These guidelines included

information relative to:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5

The function of the inventories
Recommended administrative procedures

The structure of the inventories

Standard responses and scoring techniques
Use and interpretation of the scores.

Concentration was placed upon eliciting truthful

responses from the students by stressing that the

instructor:

1. Clearly defines the purpose of each inventory.

2. Assures the students that their responses would in no
way affect their grades.

3. Acknowledges that there were actually no right or
wrong answers, since the extent of agreement or dis-
agreement with each statement reflected personal
Opinions.

4. Encourages the students not to change their answers,
for spontaneous responses usually express true
feelings.

. Illustrates the response procedure on the blackboard.

6. Gives the students the opportunity to ask questions

relating to purpose and instructions, but does not

 

92

permit questions during the response period.

7. Limits the response period to five minutes. This
would not include the time spent introducing and
explaining the inventory.

8. Expresses that signatures on the answer sheet were
Optional.

9. Does not inform the students that they will be re-
sponding to a similar inventory upon the conclusion

of the course.

Scoring.--The standard responses to the thirty
items and the validity of the inventory were determined
by the judgments of the 207 driver and traffic safety
education personnel who designated the responses that
were indicative of desirable driving attitudes.

An answer sheet and a scoring key were developed
to facilitate the scoring procedure. The answer sheet
was arranged in three columns so that a subscore for each
of the postulated factors could be obtained by scoring
across rows. The scoring key that was designed had four
,columns and ten rows. The first three columns represented
the standard responses to the thirty statements while the
fourth column provided a check-point for the ten factors
being examined .

It was stipulated that the answer sheets be scored
aacross rows, answers deviating from the standard responses

13a marked and all rows having two or more undesirable

.__.~_..-_—._,.._r._.__._..__~ ‘1‘ _. vr—‘v‘w'
4‘ .- -_ i--

 

 

93

answers be noted in the fourth column. A subscore for
the ten factors could be obtained by summing the number
of undesirable reSponses within each row. However, it
was recommended that only the factors which had two or
more undesirable responses should be recorded. After all
the answer sheets had been scored, a tally should be made

to determine the number of times each factor was checked.

Interpretation.--"Agree" responses are to be in-

 

terpreted as indicating that the students believed and
accepted a particular statement,while "Disagree" responses
imply that they disbelieved and rejected the statement.
If the student reSponses to a set of statements represent-
ing a given factor coincide with the standardized reSponses,
they associate positive affect or feeling with that factor
and can be classified as having desirable attitudes towards
it. Conversely, those students who associate negative
affect with a given factor can be said to have undesirable
attitudes toward the tOpic represented by that factor.
Uncertain responses are to be interpreted as implying that
the students neither accept nor reject certain statements
because they are undecided or doubtful about their feelings
towards the factor represented by the statement.

The summation of the subscore for each factor was
designated as the means of interpreting the results of
both inventories. For the Pre-test, it was believed that

factors which totaled six or more notations warranted

94

special consideration in the organization of the course
content. It was also emphasized that the number of "Un-
certain" responses be carefully noted since it is much
easier to develop desirable attitudes in uncertain or
new situations than it is to modify or change firmly es-
tablished attitudes.

The administrative guidelines stressed the con-
sideration of class scores for a given factor rather than
individual scores for the entire inventory. It was also
stated that the areas requiring special attention may vary
from one class to another, consequently, different t0pics
may have to be emphasized in different classes.

A comparison of the Pre-test and Post-test scores
for the same class can provide some indication as to the
effectiveness of the instructional procedures in modify-
ing or changing undesirable student attitudes. A consid—
erable decrease in the number of factors that are recorded
in the undesirable classification implies that change has
taken place as a result of instruction, insight or know-
ledge attainment. If no change is noted between Pre-test
and Post-test subscores or if there is only a slight de-
crease in the total number of factors recorded, then it is
.indicated that more effective instructional techniques
should be sought and employed.

The recommended Administrative Guidelines, developed
:inventories, answer sheet and scoring key are presented on

the following pages.

 

 

95

The Final Product

MEDVE DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY
ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES

Introduction. If driver education programs are to be

 

effective in producing safer drivers, then the develop-
ment of desirable driving attitudes should be one of the
major program objectives. However, before driver educa-
tors can endeavor to change or modify student attitudes,
they must know where to place the necessary emphasis. The
inventories contained herein have been designed to assess
student attitudes toward motor vehicle regulations and
driving practices for the purpose of placing instructional

emphasis.

Structure of the Inventory. Two inventories are included

 

in this program. Form "A" is to be used as a Pre-test

and form "B" as a Post-test. Both inventories are intro-
duced with an elaborate explanation of purpose and detailed
instructions. Each inventory is composed of thirty state-
ments representing ten factors. Three statements apply

to each factor. The ten factors and their grouping sequence

is as follows:

 

Factors Statement Numbers
1. Traffic laws 1, 11, 21
2. Enforcement 2, 12, 22
3. Licensing 3, 13, 23
4. Alcohol and narcotics 4, 14, 24
5. Speeding 5, 15, 25
6. Accidents 6, 16, 26
7. Vehicle condition 7, 17, 27
8. Emotions 8, 18, 28
9. Courtesy 9, 19, 29
10. Driver education 10, 20, 30

96

The statements contained in both inventories are

identical, only the numbering sequence has been changed.

Administration. The two forms of the inventory have dis-

 

tinct functions.

1. Form A is to be administered during the initial meet-
ing of each class. The purpose of the Pre-test is to
ascertain areas that may require instructional emphasis
to change or modify student attitudes which may be
distorted in their expressions or negative in their
effects.

2. Form B should be administered during the last session
of the course. The purpose of the Post-test is to de-
termine if the response patterns of the students have
been modified or changed as a result of instruction,
insight, or knowledge attainment.

The main problem encountered in attempting to
measure attitudes is eliciting truthful responses from the
subjects. The desire to do well stimulates students to
respond in terms of what they believe to be correct rather
than express their own feelings. It must be realized that
the answers marked by the students represent only the
attitudes they are willing to express. Consequently, the
instructor should strive to create a classroom environment
which is conducive to honest responses. Truthful responses
can be secured more readily when:

1. The purpose of the inventory is clearly defined.

a) The expressed intention of the Pre-test should be
to obtain information that will be used as a guide
to develop the course content.*

b) The reason for the Post-test should be noted as the

evaluation of the effectiveness of the driver edu-
cation program.

——_—4--—-_-— —— _.. ...___-..-_—_. _.__._ -_____.-~. _. _._-——“_. _-_‘ '._._..._._-- - .— .-

97

Students are assured that their responses will in no
way affect their grades. It is recommended that this
inventory be used to secure group scores rather than
to evaluate individual students.

The instructor acknowledges that there are no right
or wrong answers, since the extent of agreement or
disagreement with each statement reflects personal
opinions.

The students are encouraged not to change their an—
swers, for spontaneous responses usually express true
feelings.

Instructions are clear and precise. To assure student
understanding, it is recommended that the instructor
illustrate the response procedure on the blackboard.
Responses are expressed as Agree, Uncertain, and
Disagree.

Students are given the opportunity to ask questions
relating to purpose and instructions. They should
not be permitted to read the statements in advance
and no questions should be permitted during the re-
sponse period. The students must rely on their own
interpretation of the statements included in the
inventory.

The actual response period is limited to five minutes.
To insure spontaneous responses, no more than five
minutes should be allotted for the students to answer
the thirty statements. The command to begin should
be given after the preliminary information and in-
structions.have been discussed and all questions have
been answered.

Student signatures on the answer sheet are optional.
If the examiner has given an explicit explanation of
purpose, most students will not be reluctant to sign
their answer sheets.

The students are not informed that they will be re-
sponding to a similar inventory at a later date.

A well prepared examiner should be able to admini—

ster the inventory in ten minutes. This does not include

the question and answer period that may ensue the collec-

tion of the answer sheets.

._-- ‘4.

 

 

98

Scoring. The responses to the thirty statements were
standardized by 207 judges from three levels of responsi-
bility:

1. Supervisors of driver and traffic safety education
from thirty-eight state departments of education.

2. Directors of driver and traffic safety education from
eighty-six colleges and universities.

3. Eighty-three high school driver education instructors
from ten states.

The standard responses are expressed as follows:

Statement Response Statement Response Statement Response

1 Agree 11 Disagree 21 Agree

2 Disagree 12 Agree 22 Disagree
3 Agree 13 Disagree 23 Agree

4 Agree 14 Disagree 24 Agree

5 Disagree 15 Agree 25 Disagree
6 Agree 16 Disagree 26 Agree

7 Agree 17 Disagree 27 Agree

8 Disagree l8 Agree 28 Disagree
9 Agree 19 Disagree 29 Agree
10 Disagree 20 Agree 30 Disagree

An answer sheet and a scoring key are provided to
facilitate the scoring procedure. The answer key has
four columns and ten rows. The first three columns des-
ignate the standard responses to the thirty statements
while the fourth column provides a check-point for the
ten factors being examined.

Scoring should be done across rows and the answers
{deviating from the stipulated standard responses should
be marked. All rows which have two or more undesirable

answers should be noted. For example:

 

.99

Scoring Key

Standard Responses Factors
1. G) 11. O 21. 6) ® Laws
2 . O 12 . ® 22 . O O Enforcement

3. ® 13. ® 23. 0 ® Licensing

The marked statements deviate from the standard
responses. Factors Number 1 . . . Laws, and Number 3
. . . Licensing, have two undesirable responses, hence
the number representing these factors is recorded on the
answer sheet.

The score for a given factor can be obtained by
summing the number of undesirable responses within its
row. However, only the factors which have two or more
responses deviating from the stipulated standard responses
should be recorded. After all the answer sheets have been
scored, a tally should be made to determine the number of
times each factor was checked. The total number recorded
for each factor will be indicative of the areas that may

require instructional emphasis.
Interpretation of Results

Pre-test.--Factors which total six or more nota-

 

tions warrant special consideration in the organization
of the course content. The number of uncertain responses

should be carefully noted, since it is much easier to

100

develOp desirable attitudes in uncertain or new situa-
tions than it is to modify or change firmly established
attitudes.

Class scores for a given factor should be consid-
ered rather than individual scores for the entire inven-
tory. It must also be realized that the areas requiring
special attention may vary from one class to another.
Hence, it may be necessary to emphasize different topics

in different classes.

Post-test.--A comparison of the Pre-test and

 

Post-test scores for the same class, can provide some
indication as to the effectiveness of instructional pro-
cedures in modifying or changing undesirable student
attitudes. A considerable decrease in the number of
factors that are recorded implies that change has taken
place as a result of instruction, insight or knowledge
attainment. If there is no change or only a slight de-
crease in the total number of factors noted, then it is
indicated that more effective instructional techniques

should be sought and employed.

Validity.--The validity of the inventory was de-

 

termined by the judgments of the 207 driver and traffic
safety education personnel who designated the responses
that were indicative of desirable driving attitudes. The
final form of the inventory contains only those statements

which were mutually agreeable to the judging group.

101

MEDVE DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY

Form A

Introduction: The following statements relate to feelings

 

and attitudes toward traffic laws and driving practices.
There are no right or wrong answers, since the extent of
agreement or disagreement with each statement reflects
personal opinions. The answers will not be graded, as the
purpose of this inventory is to obtain information that

will be used to develop and organize the course content.

Instructions: Read each statement carefully and express

 

your feelings by darkening the code letter representing
your response in the proper column on the answer sheet
provided. For example, if you Agree with statement number
1, you should darken the letter "A" in the first column of
the answer sheet . . . 1. fi'U D. Likewise, if you Disagree
with statement number 1, you should darken the letter "D"
. . . 1. A Uéfi; If you are Uncertain, then darken the
letter "U" . . . 1. A439.

WOrk quickly, but carefully. Respond to all state-
ments. Do not change any of your answers, since your first
reaction to each statement is of major concern.

The response code is as follows:

A = Agree
U = Uncertain
D = Disagree

EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS HONESTLY, FOR YOUR RESPONSES

WILL INFLUENCE THE ORGANIZATION OF THE COURSE CONTENT.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

102

Traffic laws are necessary for the safe movement of
motor vehicles.

Policemen are more strict with young drivers than
with any other age group.

All licensed drivers should be re-tested at least
every four years.

Alcohol and narcotics can impair a person's driving
ability.

It is all right to go faster than the posted speed
limit on the open highway.

Traffic accidents do not just happen; they are caused.
It is dangerous to drive with badly worn tires.

The car horn should be used freely to clear the road
of slow drivers.

Courtesy is a good driving practice.

The major goal of driver education courses should be
to train teenagers to get a driver's license.

It is all right for drivers to go through red lights
if there is no traffic.

The police should be strict with drivers who purposely
break traffic laws. '

The testing program for a driver's license is too
difficult.

The laws concerning drivers who have been drinking
alcohol are too strict.

A person should not drive faster than the posted speed
limits.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

103

Traffic accidents cannot be avoided on over-crowded
roads.

Motor vehicle inspections are a waste of time.
A person should not drive when he is upset or angry.
Most courteous drivers are not good drivers.

A driver education course should be taken before
getting a driver's license.

A driver who makes a habit of breaking traffic laws
should have his license taken away.

Policemen are too strict with drivers who break traffic
laws.

Persons desiring a driver's license should pass a
general knowledge test before taking the road test.

Those who make a habit of driving when affected by
alcohol should lose their driver's license.

A driver should get the full benefit of his car's
potential Speed whenever possible.

Poor driving behavior is a major cause of traffic
accidents.

A car with bad brakes should not be driven until the
brakes have been repaired or replaced.

Driving provides a good way to forget daily problems.
Courtesy is a necessary part of safe driving.

Skill is the most important factor in the safe opera-
tion of a motor vehicle.

104

MEDVE DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY
Form B

Introduction: The following statements relate to feelings

 

and attitudes toward traffic laws and driving practices.
There are no right or wrong answers, since the extent of
agreement or disagreement with each statement reflects
personal opinions. The answers will not be graded, as the
purpose of this inventory is to evaluate the effectiveness

of the driver education course in meeting your expectations.

Instructions: Read each statement carefully and express

 

your feelings by darkening the code letter representing
your response in the proper column on the answer sheet
provided. For example, if you Agree with statement number
1, you should darken the letter "A" in the first column of
the answer sheet . . . 1.:é5U D. Likewise, if you Disagree
with statement number 1, you should darken the letter "D"
. . . 1. A Uiéu If you are Uncertain, then darken the
letter "U" . . . 1. A00.

WOrk quickly, but carefully. Respond to all state-
ments. Do not change any of your answers, since your first
reaction to each statement is of major concern.

The response code is as follows:

A = Agree
U = Uncertain
D = Disagree

EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS HONESTLY, FOR ONLY TRUTHFUL

RESPONSES CAN HELP TO IMPROVE THE DRIVER EDUCATION PROGRAM.

10.

ll.

12.

l3.

14.

15.

105

A driver who makes a habit of breaking traffic laws
should have his license taken away.

Policemen are too strict with drivers who break
traffic laws.

Persons desiring a driver's license should pass a
general knowledge test before taking the road test.

Those who make a habit of driving when affected by
alcohol should lose their driver's license.

A driver should get the full benefit of his car's
potential speed whenever possible.

Poor driving behavior is a major cause of traffic
accidents.

A car with bad brakes should not be driven until the
brakes have been repaired or replaced.

Driving provides a good way to forget daily problems.
Courtesy is a necessary part of safe driving.

Skill is the most important factor in the safe Opera-
tion of a motor vehicle.

It is all right for drivers to go through red lights
if there is no traffic.

The police should be strict with drivers who purposely
break traffic laws.

The testing program for a driver's license is too
difficult.

The laws concerning drivers who have been drinking
alcohol are too strict.

A person should not drive faster than the posted Speed
limits.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

106

Traffic accidents cannot be avoided on over-crowded
roads.

Motor vehicle inspections are a waste of time.
A person should not drive when he is upset or angry.
Most courteous drivers are not good drivers.

A driver education course should be taken before get-
ting a driver's license.

Traffic laws are necessary for the safe movement of
motor vehicles.

Policemen are more strict with young drivers than
with any other age group.

All licensed drivers should be re-tested at least
every four years.

Alcohol and narcotics can impair a person's driving
ability.

It is all right to go faster than the posted speed
limit on the open highway.

Traffic accidents do not just happen; they are caused.
It is dangerous to drive with badly worn tires.

The car horn should be used freely to clear the road
of slow drivers.

Courtesy is a good driving practice.

The major goal of the driver education courses should
be to train teenagers to get a driver's license.

107
MEDVE DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY
ANSWER KEY

Forms A and B

Instructions

Scoring should be done across rows and the answers
deviating from the stipulated standard responses should be
noted. All rows which have two or more undesirable answers
should be marked by placing the number representing the

factor in the space provided.

STANDARD RESPONSES FACTORS_
Laws

1.. 11. a 21.” 1.6

Enforcement

2.‘ 12.@ ' 21% 2.6

Licensing

3. "T: 13.® 23. 3.6

Alcohol

4.“. 14.® 24. 4.6
’ , Speedin'
5.© 15.6 25.® 5.6

Accidents
6.0 16.6 26. 6 . 6.6

Vehicle
7.’ 17.6 2mg 7.6

Emotions

8.0, 18.6 28.3@ 8.‘
l, Courtes
9;, 19.® 29.6 9.‘

Driver Ed.

1mg ' 2o..@ 3o.® 10.0

 

108

ANSWER SHEET

MEDVE DRIVER ATTITUDE INVENTORY

Name Class Period Date

 

 

Directions: Express your personal feelings by darkening
the letters which represent your desired re5ponses. The
response pattern is as follows:

A = Agree

U Uncertain

D = Disagree

 

Statement ReSponse Statement Re5ponse Statement Response
1. A U D 11. A U D 21. A U D
2. A U D 12. A U D 22. A U D
3. A U D 13. A U D 23. A U D
4, A U D 14. A U D 24. A U D
5. A U D 15. A U D 25. A U D
6. A U D 16. A U D 26. A U D
7. A U D 17. A U D 27. A U D
8. A U D 18. A U D 28. A U D
9. A U D 19. A U D 29. A U D

10. A U D 20. A U D 30. A U D

 

 

109

 

Elaboration of Inventory Function

The primary function of the Pre-test was to give
the driver education instructor some indication of existent
student attitudes toward motor vehicle regulations and
driving practices, thereby enabling him to place the ap-
prOpriate instructional emphasis in his courses. Since
the inventory functions to disclose undesirable or vague
driving attitudes, it can assist the instructor to:

l. Ascertain the entry behavior of his students.

2. Associate expressed student Opinions with the desired
terminal behavior.

3. Orient his instruction to areas in which undesirable
or uncertain driving attitudes may exist.

4. Openly discuss and analyze undesirable or unclear
attitudes.

5. Employ instructional techniques which fortify knowledge
and skill with desirable attitudes.

The Post-test should be used to determine the
effectiveness of instructional procedures in modifying
or changing student attitudes toward motor vehicle regu-
lations and driving practices. The attitudes expressed
by the students in a given class after their exposure to
the course content should be of major concern. Many
times a change in student responses may be associated with
the course content and program emphasis and should be

evaluated in these terms.

110

A comparison of the subscale scores for pre and
post inventory administration can provide some indication
that:

1. Modification or change of undesirable student attitudes
has occurred.

2. Desirable attitudes have been developed in weak or
vague areas.

3. The driver education program has given the students
some basic information which enabled them to re-assess,
modify or change their attitudes.

4. The instructional techniques employed have or have not
been effective in affecting the development of desir-
able driving attitudes.

It must be realized that the accuracy of the in-
ventory and the worth of its findings are dependent upon
pr0per administration and interpretation. This inventory
in and of itself cannot solve the traffic accident prob-
lem, however, it is hoped that it will enable driver
educators to organize and evaluate the course content in

a more meaningful and effective manner.

Summary

This chapter contains the information relevant to
the deve10pment of the proposed product of the study.
In its final form the inventory consisted of

thirty complete sentence statements requiring either an

111

agree, uncertain or disagree response. Three statements
were retained to represent each of the ten postulated
factors and an attempt was made to maintain a balance of
negatively and positively oriented items. Two parallel
forms of the inventory were developed for the purpose of
pre and post course administration. Form A or the Pre-
test was designed to measure student attitudes toward the
ten factors represented by the inventory in order to as-
certain areas that may require instructional emphasis.
The Post-test or Form B was intended as a comparative
instrument to examine the extent of attitude modification
as a result of instruction, insight or knowledge attainment.
Clear, concise student instructions and admini-
strative guidelines were written with emphasis being placed
upon the elicitation of truthful responses. The statements
were arranged in sequence so each number represented a
specific factor. Consequently, ten sets of statements
were formed which facilitated the scoring procedure. An
answer sheet and a scoring key were developed to fit both
forms of the inventory. Scoring was designed to be done
across rows in order to yield a subscore for each of the
ten factors. Thus the number of factors having two or
more incorrect responses could be noted and tallied. It
was recommended that factors having six or more notations
deserved special consideration in the placement of instruc-

tional emphasis. Concentration on group scores within

112

each of the ten areas of the universe was stressed and
no provisions were made to arrive at a total score for
the thirty statements.

The standard responses, as well as the validity
of the inventory, were determined by the judgments of the
207 driver education personnel.

The chapter was concluded with an elaboration of

inventory function.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary

Statement of the problem.--The primary objective

 

of this research project was to develop a driver attitude
inventory that could be used to assess student attitudes

for the purpose of placing instructional emphasis.

Deve10pment of thepreliminary inventory.--Based

 

on the review of the literature and existing driver at-
titude scales, the following universe of content was
postulated: (1) Laws, (2) Enforcement, (3) Licensing,

(4) Alcohol, (5) Speeding, (6) Accidents, (7) Equipment,
(8) Emotions, (9) Courtesy, and (10) Driver Education.
Sixty complete sentence statements of varying degrees of
favorability and unfavorability were initially formulated.
However, after the editing process, only fifty were re-
tained. These statements were subjected to further
scrutiny by several individuals in the field of driver
and traffic safety education to insure that the terminology
was within the reading and comprehension level of the
average twelve year old. Suggested revisions were made

and the fifty statements were placed in the Likert

113

114

five-response format, employing Thurstone's instructions
designed for use by a judging group. The preliminary in-
ventory was then mailed to 287 judges from three levels
of driver and traffic safety education responsibility:
the state departments of education, colleges and univer-

sities, and high schools.

Statistical procedure.--The responses of the 207

 

judges who returned the preliminary inventory were used
to compute scale values and interquartile range scores
for the purpose of item analysis. The mean "Q" score of
1.04 was used to discriminate between good and bad state-
ments, thus eliminating seventeen items. The response
data for the thirty-three remaining items were further
analyzed by orthogonal and oblique factor analysis solu-
tions to assess the extent to which the postulated driver
attitude factors were independent of factoring methods.
Eight factors were judged to exist over three of the four
derived solutions, and the two factors that were not
labelled were assumed to be logical components of the
enforcement factor. Consequently, it seemed feasible to
retain the ten postulated factors and to obtain separate

subscores for each of these factors.

Development of.the final inventory.--In its final

 

form, the inventory consisted of thirty statements pro-

portionately distributed over the ten postulated factors.

115

To maintain factoral validity, parallel forms of the in-
ventory were developed by rearranging the statements in
Form A or the Pre-test to constitute Form B or the Post-
test. Form A was designed to assess student attitudes,
in order to ascertain areas that may require instructional
emphasis, whereas Form B was proposed for use in deter-
mining the extent of attitude change as a result of in-
struction, insight or knowledge attainment.

Clear, concise student instructions and admini—
strative guidelines were written, emphasizing the elici-
tation of truthful responses. The students are requested
to express their feelings by checking one of three alter-
natives: agree, uncertain or disagree. To facilitate
the scoring procedure, an answer sheet and a scoring key
were developed, and the statements were uniformly dis-
persed throughout the inventory. A subscore for each
factor could be obtained by scoring across rows. It was
suggested that all factors having two or more incorrect
responses should be noted, and that those which had six
or more notations deserved instructional emphasis. No
provisions were made for arriving at a total score for
the inventory, since ratings were to be considered in
relation to the individual factors.

The validity of the inventory and the standardized
responses were determined by the judgments of the 207

driver and traffic safety education personnel.

I.

V

116

Conclusions

 

Within the limitations of this study, the follow-»

ing conclusions seem to be justified.

l.

The review of the literature disclosed the need for an
administratively feasible attitude inventory that could
be used to assess the attitudes of students for the
purpose of placing instructional emphasis.

The intercorrelations of the thirty—three items that
were retained as a result of the item analysisof the
original fifty statements, were relatively low, rang-
ing from -.01 to -.59. The low correlations were
attributed to the low variances resulting from the
excellent agreement of the 207 members of the judging
group.

Item and factor analysis evidence supported the classi-
fication of the thirty statements contained in the
final form of the inventory, according to the ten
original factors that were postulated. It was also
indicated that almost all of the postulated items had
considerable discriminatory ability.

The results of the three orthogonal and one oblique
factor analysis solutions led to the classification

of the following eight factors: (1) Speeding, (2)
Courtesy, (3) Licensing, (4) Alcohol, (5) Equipment,

(6) Laws, (7) Driver Education, and (8) Enforcement.

Y_.

117

Emotions and Accidents factors were not named: however,
they were logical components of the Enforcement factor.

5. The statistical findings indicated that driving atti-
tudes were a complex affair which could not be wholly
described by any single factor or variable. It was
thus assumed that attitudes towards the ten factors
were reflective of attitudes towards motor vehicle
regulations and driving practices, thereby supporting
the concept of obtaining separate subscores for each
of the ten factors.

6. The final form of the inventory was deemed relevant
to the purpose of the study since considerable evidence
was obtained which supported the classification of the
statements within each factor, the validity of the in-
ventory, and the appropriateness of obtaining separate

subscale scores for each factor included in the inventory.

Discussion

 

If driver education is to play an effective role in
the reduction of traffic accidents, courses should be de-
signed to equip the students with preliminary and theoreti-
cal knowledge of the personal and social implications
essential to the safe and efficient Operation of a motor
vehicle. Programs should be developed on the premise
that driving behavior is the sum total of an individual's

knowledge, skill and attitude. Knowledge about traffic

118

laws and driving practices must be imparted, good driving
skills must be taught and perfected, and most important,
knowledge and skill must be fortified with desirable
driving attitudes. Driver educators must realize that the
effectiveness of their program does not depend solely on
the amount of knowledge or proficiency the students pos-
sess on completing the course, but upon how well the in-
struction has equipped them to be safer drivers. Therefore,
greater concentration should be placed upon teaching
methods which can influence the behavioral characteristics
judged to be pertinent to safe motor vehicle operation.

Driver education teachers cannot be expected to change
the personalities of students, however, appropriate course
emphasis can have some affect on their terminal behavior.
Requisite to this end is the belief that it is possible
to modify undesirable attitudes. Driver educators must
recognize that even a small amount of attitude training
can be of great educational value if it is dispersed ef-
fectively throughout the driver education program.- If a
term or more of attitude-oriented instruction produces
only slight effects in changing or modifying undesirable
attitudes, it would still be a remunerative educational
endeavor.

Since the attitudes of students enrolled in a course
cannot be readily observed, teachers must resort to the

use of suitable measuring devices. Unfortunately, most

119

of the available driver attitude scales have been designed
to evaluate student attitudes per se rather than to serve
as instructional guidelines. The inventories contained
herein have been developed for instructional purposes.

Both forms are designed to assess student attitudes towards
motor vehicle laws and driving practices. The Pre-test

can be used to ascertain undesirable driving attitudes
while the Post-test was proposed for use in determining

the effectiveness of instructional procedures in affecting
attitude change.

The illusion that an inventory of this nature can an-
swer all the questions relating to the modification of
undesirable driver attitudes, should be avoided. As with
any instrument, the accuracy of the inventory and the
value of its results are dependent upon proper administra-
tion and interpretation. It should be understood that
this instrument can only record in a systematic fashion,
the responses of students to the sets of statements which
suggest in a loose sense, attitudes towards motor vehicle
laws and driving practices. The procured answers repre-
sent only the verbalized attitudes which the students are
willing to express. Hence, the instructor should strive
to deve10p a classroom environment which is conducive to
eliciting truthful responses. The scores obtained from
the inventoryshould not be used to evaluate individual
students but to ascertain areas that may require instruc-

tional emphasis.

120

Although the inventory cannot solve the traffic
accident problem, it is hoped that it will enable driver
educators to organize the course content so that it is
more conducive to the development of desirable driving

attitudes.

Recommendations

The review of the research relevant to this study
was very informative, but indicated a,need for more ex-
tensive and conclusive investigations in certain areas.
It was deduced that further research should include
studies which would:

1. Examine the personality characteristics of accident
repeaters to detect the most prevalent forms of un-
desirable driving attitudes.

2. Disclose the underlying causes of unsafe driving be-
havior so that driver educators can more readily help
their students to understand and modify attitudes
that can lead to accidents.

3. Ascertain the types of testing devices which can most
accurately and most consistently discern the per-
sonality characteristics and attitudinal patterns
leading to unsafe driving behavior.

4. Determine the effects of different types of driver
education programs (i.e. two-phase, three-phase, or

four-phase) on the attitudes of students.

121

5. Examine and classify classroom procedures according
to their effectiveness in affecting attitude change.

6. Relate attitude modification at different phases of
the driver education program to determine the learn-
ing experiences that were pertinent to the desired
terminal behavior.

If driver educators are to plan their programs
on a sound basis and not on suppositions, then there
must be continuous research of a high order to determine
the most apprOpriate teaching techniques that are con-

ducive to the development of desirable driving attitudes.

1"

x5

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books and Pamphlets

Allen, Robert. Personality Assessment Procedures. New
York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1958.

Allgaier, Earl. "Psychology and the Education of Road
Users." American Automobile Association Publica-
tion. Washington, D.C., 1959.

Barlow, William. Centering Traffic SafetyyAround Driver's
Motivations. Washington, D.C.: American Traffic
Association, 1958.

 

Bass, Bernard M. and Irwin A. Berd. Objective Approach to
Personality Assessment. New York: Van Nostrand
Ind., 1954.

 

Bird, C. Social Psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts, 1940.

 

Brody, Leon. "Accidents and Attitudes," Basic Aspects and

A lications of the Psychology of Safety, Center
for Safety Education. New York University, 1959.

 

Coombs, C. H. A Theory of Data. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1964.

 

Cronbach, Lee. Essentials of Psychological Testing. New
York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1960.

De Silva, Harry. Why We Have Automobile Accidents. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1942.

 

Dumbar, Flanders and Leon Brody. Basic Aspects and Appli-
cations of the Psychology of Safety. Center for
Safety Education, Division 0 General Education.
New York University, 1959.

Edwards, Allen. Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.

 

122

123

Green, B. F. “Attitude Measurement," Handbook of Social
Psychology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Addison-
Wes ey, 954.

Guilford, J. P. Psychometric Methods. New Jersey:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1954.

Gulliksen, H. and S. Hessick. Psychological Scaling Theory
and Applications. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1966}

 

 

Hadden, William and others. Accident Research. New York:
Harper and Row Publishers, 1964.

 

Harmon, Harry. Modern Factor Analysis. Chicago, Illinois:
University of Chicago Press, 1968.

 

Lykes, Norman. PsychologicalJApproach to Accidents. New
York: Vantage Press Inc., 1954.

Murray, H. A. and others. Explorations in Personality.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1938.

 

National Safety Council, Higher Education Section, Safety
Education_Courses in Colleges and Universities.
Chicago, Illinois: National Safety Counciljil967.

 

 

. "1968 Motor Vehicle Deaths Analyzed," Annual
Re ort. Chicago, Illinois: National Safety
Counc1l, March, 1969.

 

Oppenheim, A. N. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Meas-
urement. New York: Basic Books Inc., 1954.

 

Payne, S. L. The Art of Asking Questions. Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton Univer31ty Press, 1951.

 

Pine, Jerome L. and others. The Development of Criterion
for Driving Behavior. New York: Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1969.

 

 

Remmers, H. H. An Introduction to Opinion and Attitude
Measurement. New York: Harper and Row Publishers,
1954.

 

 

Rosenberg, M. J. and others. Attitude Organization and
Change. Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1960.

 

Schreier, Fred. Human Motivation. Glencoe, Illinois:
The Free Press, 1957.

124

Shaw, E. M. and J. M. Wright. Scales for the Measurement
of Attitudes. New Jersey: McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1967.

Stagner, R. Psychology of Personality. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Co., 1948.

 

Strasser, Marland. Fundamentals of Safety Education. New
York: The MacMillan Company, 1964.

Thorndike, E. L. and Irving Lorgue. The Teacher's Word
Book. New York: Teachers College, Columbia Uni-
versity, 1944.

 

Thurstone, L. L. and E. J. Chave. The Measurement of Atti-

tude. Chicago, Illinois: Chicago University Press,
I929.

Torgerson, W. S. Theory and Methods of Scaling. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 1 62.

Periodicals and Documents

 

Anderson, T. W. "Asymptobic Theory for Principal-Component
Analysis," Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 34:
122-48, 1963.

Arbons, A. G. and J. E. Kerrich. "Accident Statistics and
a Concept of Accident Proneness," Biometric, 7:340-
432, December, 1951.

 

Automotive News Staff. "Search for the Cause of Accidents,"
Automotive News. April 18, 1966.

Automotive Safety Foundation. ASF Re ort. Vol. 2, No. 6.
Washington, D.C.: Automot1ve Safety Foundation,
March, 1965.

Baker, Stannard. "Effect of Enforcement and Licensing on
Driver Attitude," Traffic Safety, 31:29-39, 1950.

 

Baldwin, David. "Accident Causes and Counter Measures,"
Traffic Engineerin , March, 1966, pp. 31-33.

Brody, Leon. "The Accident Phenomenon," Personnel Adminis-
tration, November-December, 1963.

 

125

Burrough, G. E. and H. W. Miller. “The Rotation of Prin-
cipal Components," Bi-annual Journal of Statistical
Psychology, 14:35-49, 1961.

 

 

Canty, Alan. DetroitIPsychiatric Clinic Report. Detroit,
Michigan, 1965.

Case, Harry. "Attitudes - What Are They? How Are They
Changed?" Traffic Safety, 31:75—81, 1950.

 

Conger, John J. and others. "Personal and Inter-Personal
Factors in Motor Vehicle Accidents," American
Journal of Psychiatry, 113:1069-74, June, 1957.

 

Damon, Norman. "Developing Driver Attitudes," National
Safety Congress Transactions, 26:13-17, I959.

 

 

Doob, L. W. "Some Factors Determining Change in Attitudes,"
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 35:549-
65, 1940.

Drake, Charles. "Accident Proneness: A Hypothesis," Char-
acter and Personality, 8:335-341, June, 1940.

Edwards, Allen and F. P. Kilpatrick. "A Technique for the
Construction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Applied
Psychology, 32:374-94, 1948.

 

 

. and Katherine Kenny. "A Comparison of the
Thurstone and Likert Techniques of Attitude Scale
Construction," Journal of Applied Psychology, 30:
72-83, 1946.

 

 

Farnsworth, P. R. "Attitude Scale Construction and Method
of Equal-Appearing Intervals," Journal of Social
Psychology, 50:245-48, 1954.

 

 

Flood, Merrill. "Computational Procedure for the Methods
of Principal Components," Psychometrika, 5:169-72,
1940.

 

Fisher, Edward. "The Courts Responsibility Toward Improving
Driving Attitudes," Traffic Safety, 31:48-52, 1951.

 

, and Lawrence Schlesinger. "Programmed Instruction
for Driver Education," CALDEA Calendar, 10:5,
January, 1963.

 

Guttman, L. "A Basis for Scaling Qualitative Data,"
American Sociological Review, Vol. 9, 1944.

 

126

Harris, Chester and Henry Kaiser. "Oblique Factor Analytic
Solutions by Orthogonal Transformations," Psycho-
metrika, 29:347—62, 1964.

Hayes, Arthur B. “How to Improve Driver Attitudes," Driver
Education Newsletter, 2:1-3, Fall, 1958.

Irwin, Larry. "A Method of Clustering Eigenvalues,"
Psychometrika, 31:11-13, 1966.

 

Kaiser, H. F. "The Varimax Criterion for Analytic Rotation
in Factor Analysis," Psychometrika, 23:187-200,
1958.
. "Computer Program for Varimax Rotation in Factor

 

Analysis," Educational Psychological Measurement,
19:413-420, 1959.

Kelman, H. C. "Attitude Change as a Function of Response
Restriction," Human Relations, pp. 185-214, June,
1953.

 

Kerr, Willard. "Complimentary Theories of Safety," Psy-
chology, 45:3-9, February, 1957.

LaShan, Lawrence. "Dynamics in Accident Prone Behavior,"
Psychiatry, 15:73-80, February, 1952.

Likert, Renis. "A Technique for the Measurement of Atti-
tudes," Psychological Archives, No. 140, 1932.

Malfetti, James. "Scare Techniques and Traffic Safety,"
Traffic Quarterly, April, 1961.

McFarland, Ross. "Why Drivers Have Accidents," Public
Safety, Vol. 48, No. 4, April, 1956, pp. 1-7.

McGuire, Frederick. "An Outline for a New Approach to the
Problem of Highway Accidents," U.S. Armed Forces
Journal, 7:1157-66, August, 1956.

Myrick, Richard. "Driver Improvement Clinic Induces Change
by Group Discussions," Traffic Digest and Review,
2:9-11, May, 1963.

Neuhaus, Jack and Charles Wrigley. "The Quartimax Method,"
Bi-annual Journal of Statistical Psychology, 7:81-
91, 1954.

Rawson, A. J. "Accident Proneness," Psychosometric Med-
icine, 6:88-94, January, 1944.

 

 

127

Reyburn, H. A. and J. G. Taylor. "On the Interpretation of
Common Factors: A Criticism and A Statement,"
Psychometrika, 8:53-64, 1943.

 

Schlesinger, Lawrence and others. "How Are We Devising
Programmed Driver Instruction," Police Chief, 19:
14, September, 1962.

 

Thurstone, L. L. "Theory of Attitude Measurement," Psy-
chological Review, 36:222-41, 1929.

 

Traffic Safety Staff. "What the 'Moynahan Report' Really
Said About Driver Education," Traffic Safety, June,
1968, pp. 36-38.

 

. "The N.E.A. Has Its Say," Traffic Safety,
December, 1968, pp. 14-15.

 

 

Van Linnep, D. J. "Psychological Factors in Driving,"
Traffic Quarterly, 6:483-98, October, 1952.

Wang, K. A. "Suggested Criteria for Writing Attitude
Statements," Journal of Social Psychology, 3:367-
373, 1932.

Research Reports and Other Sources

Agan, Raymond J. "Effect of Driver Education Instruction
on Learning Attitudes." Unpublished study, Iowa
State College, 1947.

Beamish, Jerome J. and L. Malfetti. "A Psychological Com-
parison of Violator and Non-Violator Automobile
Drivers in the 16 to 19 Year Age Group," Traffic
Safety Research Review, Vol. 6, No. 1, March, I962,
pp. I2-15.

Billion, D. E. "Community Study of the Characteristics of
Drivers and Driver Behavior Related to Accident
Experiences," Highway Research Board Bulletin 172:
Driver Characteristics and Behavior Studies, 1958.

Birnbach, Sydney. "Personal Characteristics of Traffic
Accident Repeaters." Saugatuck, Connecticut: Eno
Foundation for Highway Traffic Control, 1948.

Bishop, Richard. "One-Car Accidents and the Young Driver."
Abstract of Doctoral thesis, New York University,
New York, published by Detroit Auto Club of Mich-
igan, 1963.

128

Boek, J. K. "Automobile Accidents and Driving Behavior,"
Traffic Safety Research Review, Vol. 4, No. 4,
December, 1958, pp. 2-12.

 

Brady, Roger. "The Relationship Between Accident Rates and
the Personality of Automobile Drivers." Preliminary
study, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences,
Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.,
1948.

Brody, Leon. "Personal Characteristics of Chronic Violators
and Accident Repeaters," Highway Board Bulletin 152:
Driver Characteristics. Washington: Highway Board,
1957.

 

Case, Harry W. and others. "A Study of Habitual Traffic
Violators." Unpublished study, Institute of Trans-
portation and Traffic Engineering, University of
California, Los Angeles, 1950.

Conover, John. "Development of Certain Techniques for the
Measurement of Driver Attitudes." Unpublished
Master's thesis, Iowa State College, 1947.

Ellis, Andrew. "Recent Research With Personality Inven—
tories," Journal of Psychology, 17:45-49, 1963.

Ferguson, L. W. "A Study of the Likert Technique for the
Construction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Applied
Psychology, 13:51-57, 1941.

 

 

Fletcher, Harry. "Fletcher Attitude Test for Safe Driving,"
other information unknown.

Gardner, I. C. "The Effects of a Group of Social Stimuli .
Upon Attitudes," Journal of Educational Psychology,
26:471-78, 1935.

 

Hackley, William and Lawrence Schlesinger. “Changing
Attitudes Through Group Discussion." An experi—
mental study, George Washington University, Wash-
ington, D.C., January, 1964.

Heath, Earl D. "The Relationship Between Driving Records,
Selected Personality Characteristics and Biograph-
ical Data of Traffic Offenders and Non-Offenders."
Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, New York Uni-
versity, 1957.

Jones, Billy J. and Russell G. Martin. "The J-M Attitude
Scale," other information unknown.

129

Loft, Bernard. "The Effects of Driver Education on Driver
Knowledge and Attitudes in Selected Public Secondary
Schools," Traffic Safet Research Review, Vol. 4,
No. 2, June, 1960, pp. lZ-I

 

 

Longstreet, R. J. "An Experiment with the Thurstone Atti-
tude Scale," School Review, 1935, pp. 43-50.

 

Mahoney, Arthur. "Teaching for Attitudes Conducive to Safe
Driving." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, New
York University, New York, 1957.

Mann, William. "Mann Personal Attitude Survey." Highway
Traffic Center, Continuing Education Service, Mich-
igan State University, 1964.

Marcus, Irwin and others. "An Inter-Disciplinary Approach
to Accident Patterns in Children," Child Development
Publications, Vol. 25, No. 2, Purdue University,
LaFayette, Indiana, 1960.

 

 

McClintock, C. G. "Personality Factors in Attitude Change."
Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1956.

McFarland, Ross A. and others. “Human Variables in Motor
Vehicle Accidents: A Review of the Literature,"
Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachu-
setts, 1958.

McLean, Alan. "Accident Proneness: A Clinical Approach to
Injury-Liability," Industrial Medicine and Surgety,
March, 1955, pp. 122-26.

 

Menninger, Karl. "The Mental Attitude of Automobile Drivers
Toward Enforcement," National Safety Council Trans-
actions, Vol. 32, Part 2, 1943, pp. 7-10.

 

Moore, Ronald C. and Ross McFarland. "Human Factors in
Highway Safety," New England Journal of Medicine,

 

National Safety Council. The Effects of C.B.S. Reports
"The GreatHolidayMassacre11 on the Attitudes
prards Safety and the National Safety Council.
ChiCago, Illinois: Creative Research Associates,
1961.

 

 

 

Newman, Gerald G. and others. "A Pilot Study of Drivers
Incurring Automobile Accidents," American Journal
of Public Health, 48:1512-15, November, 1958.

 

 

130

New York Telephone Company. Driver Attitude Check List.
American Automobile Association, October 15, I957.

 

New York University, Center for Safety Education. "A Com-
parative Study of Accident Free and Accident
Involved Drivers," Eno Foundation for Highway
Traffic Control, 1948.

Ojemann, Ralph. "Tests and Evaluation Methods Used in
Driver and Safety Education." Natipnal Commission
on Safetnyducation, Washington, D.C., 1959, pp.
1-48.

 

 

Peak, Helen. "Attitudes and Motivation." Nebraska Sym-
posium on Motivation. Lincoln, Nebraska: Univer-
sity of Nebraska Press, 1955, pp. 149-189.

 

 

Penn, Robert. "An Investigation of Methodological and
Psychological Problems Related to Accident Prone-

ness." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie
Institute of Technology, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
1956.

Rommel, R. C. "Personality Characteristics and Attitudes

of Youthful Accident-Repeater Drivers," Traffic
Safety Research Review, Vol. 54, No. 3, March,
I959, pp. 13414.

 

Rosenblatt, Gerald. "A Critical Examination of the Accident
Proneness Concept." Unpublished Master's thesis,
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, 1955.

Sawers, Kenneth. Group Discussion Techniques in Driver
Education. Center for Safety Education, New York
University, 1962.

 

Schreiber, Robert. "The DevelOpment of Procedures for the
Evaluation of Educational Methods Used In Accident
Prevention." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,

Columbia University, New York, 1957.

Schuster, D. H. and J. P. Guilford. "An Analysis of Acci-
dent Repeaters and Chronic Violator Drivers,"
Traffic Project Report No. 1, University of Southern
California, 19599

Siebrecht, Elmer B. "Attitude Scale for Measuring Driver
Attitudes." Published study, Center for Safety
Education, New York University, 1941.

131

. Driver Attitudes, Techniques of Study and
Results Obthined. Driver Research Laboratory,
Iowa State College, 1955.

 

 

Stratemeyer, Clara G. Accident Research foeretter Safety
Teaching. National Commission on Safety Education.
Washington, D.C.: N.E.A., 1964.

 

Tillman, W. A. and G. E. Hobbs. "The Accident Prone Auto-
mobile Driver, A Study of the Psychiatric and
Social Background," American Journal of Psychiatry,
November, 1949, pp. 321-31.

 

Wear, Charles. "The Construction of Equivalent Forms of an
Attitude Scale," Research Quarterly, 26:110-113,
1955.

Yost, Charles. "An Analysis of Graduate Theses of School
Safety in the U.S. from 1925 to 1950." Published
Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, 1956.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

MANN PERSONAL ATTITUDE SURVEY

MONTH'S DRIVING
NAME AGE SEX EXPERIENCE

 

The following statements reflect your attitude and feelings
about yourself and your relations to others. There are no
right or wrong answers. Fill in on the answer sheet the
answer that reflects your feelings the best.

Do not mark on the test booklet:

A. always B. usually C. sometimes D. rarely E. never

1. I like (liked) to take part in organized extra-curric-
ular activities in school.

2. Young pe0ple are much better drivers than middle—aged
people.

3. Policemen are sincere in enforcing the laws.

4. My parents are reasonable in their relations with me.
5. My community is a happy place to live.

6. I put off until tomorrow things I should do today.

7. I like to daydream.while I am driving.

8. I feel full of pep when I get behind the wheel.

9. I live in a home that is happy.

10. If I see a police officer when I am driving I am more
careful.

11. Over-careful drivers cause more accidents than the so-
called reckless ones.

132

 

12.
13.

14.

15.
16.

17.

18.
19.
20.

21.

22.

23.

24.
25.

26.

27.

28.

29.
30.

31.

32.

33.

133

I enjoy being out late at night and sleeping mornings.
I get a feeling of real power when driving a car.

Courses in school are set up to meet the needs and
interest of the student.

I am concerned about the way my clothes look.
Slow drivers should be kept off the highways.

All young peOple should be required to take a course in
driver education.

Unsafe drivers should be deprived of the right to drive.
Accidents don't just happen; they are caused.
I like to get everything out of a car that it has in it.

The chief work of most policemen should be traffic
control.

My parents exert too much control over me.

The peOple in my community want the traffic laws
enforced.

I have been tempted to cheat on a test at school.
I get impatient when driving in heavy traffic.

There are times when it seems like everyone is against
me.

Old, defective cars should be kept off the road.

Drivers should be given more freedom in obeying traffic
signs.

PeOple should drive when they are angry.
Passing on hills and curves is exceedingly dangerous.

It is necessary to stop at "stOp" signs if no other
cars are in sight.

I like to put extras on my car to attract attention.

I am good at talking the police out of giving me a
traffic ticket.

34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.

40.

41.

42.
43.
44.
45.
46.

47.

48.
49.
50.
51.
52.

53.

54.

55.
56.

57.

134

Strong discipline in practice makes a better team.

I am (was) popular with most of the kids in my class.
Cops are rougher on teen-agers than on adults.

Teachers want to help students with their problems.

My father gets traffic tickets for moving violations.

I have as good table manners at home as when I eat out.

I have been wrong in an argument but wouldn't admit it
to my opponent.

The school should have the right to question the way I
drive.

I like to razz the team when it is losing.

I am proud of my reputation in the community.

I am considered a friendly person.

I like most of my school work.

Our family spends a great deal of time together.

Attitudes toward driving are more important than ability
to handle the car.

I like to take chances when I'm driving.
Traffic laws are set up to promote safety.
Courtesy toward other drivers is important.
I like a great deal of freedom.

I don't mind being told what to do.

My grades in school are (were) a good indication of my
ability.

I sometimes become concerned about what other peeple
think of me.

I find that older peOple tend to be too bossy.
I feel somewhat nervous when I drive a car.

I think courtesy towards others is a good reflection of
a person's character.

58.

59.

60.

61.
62.

63.

135

I get more fun out of driving a car than in any other
activity.

The police are only trying to do the job for which they
were hired.

My folks insist that I Spend most week-day evenings at
home.

I am considered a reliable person.
I like to help a person who is in trouble.
I am more courteous than the average driver.

How do you feel about answering these questions?
(Write on back of answer sheet)

APPENDIX B

Traffic Engineering & Safety Dept. October 10, 1957
American Automobile Association Reprint April 1965
1712 G Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C. 20006

"DRIVER ATTITUDE'CHECK'LIST
from
New York'Telephone Company
The Western Division of the New York Telephone Company has
been using a rather unique check list. At least, it will

remind drivers of a few things that make for bad attitude.
This test is reproduced below.

Read each question carefully and check the box which best
describes your attitude.

>1
H
>. H
H m
u c
c o
m -H >.
s m H H
o' m m 0
DO YOU’ 8 8 g a
______‘ m 0 a: Z
1. Use the suicide door? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2. Fail to signal when pulling from
the curb? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
3. Wonder how other drivers sometimes
get their license? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
4. Try hard to be the first away on
the green light? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

5. Get sore when traffic situations

90 wrong? 136 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

l6.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

137

Block other drivers out when they
try to get in line?

Park illegally if you think you
won't get caught?

Double park if it's only going to
take a minute?

Mumble to yourself when seeing a
traffic cop hiding and looking for
violators?

Drive after imbibing a couple drinks?

Get impatient when pedestrians don't
hurry across the street?

Fail to come to a "Complete Stop"
where traffic signs and signals
call for it?

Become peeved when the driver behind
you honks his horn?

Fail to give adequate warning before
backing?

Neglect to put on chains because of
the effort required?

Wait for the other driver to dim
high lights first?

Go back on the high beam, if the
other driver doesn't dim?

Pass up other motorists when they
are in trouble?

Fail to consider that the slow
pedestrian or driver may have a
physical handicap?

Seek revenge when other drivers
annoy you?

Take it for granted the other drivers
will obey the light first?

Try to scare the pedestrians with
your horn?

23.

24.

25.

138
Fail to acknowledge courtesy signals
for the other driver? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Think your "Driver Attitude" is worse
than your "Pedestrian Attitude." ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

Think the other driver considers you
a better-than-average driver? ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

 

 

To Get Your Score:

Use

1. Add checks in each column

2. Multiply by x1 x2 x3 x4

3. Write totals

4. Add Totals. This is your score

 

the following table to interpret your score:

80 - 100 Almost honor roll or you're lying like hell
65 - 79 Just getting by

40 - 64 Watch your step

25 - 40 Your attitude smells

Stock No. 3632
EA/emh

APPENDIX C

THE J - M ATTITUDE SCALE

by

Billy J. Jones
and

Russell G.

Directions:

correct answers for these statements.

Martin

Below is a series of statements about problems
related to the driving of motor vehicles.

There are no
This test is of

value only if the questions are answered truthfully.
the questions and then check the box under the answer you

feel actually fits your own driving habits.

YOU, AS THE DRIVER:

l.

2.

Come to a complete stop at stop

signs.

Properly signal intentions
ample time.

Dim lights at appropriate
times.

Sound your horn only when
necessary.

Observe no-passing zones.
StOp behind crosswalks.

Yield the right-of—way to
pedestrians.

139

in

Only
if of-
ficer

is
around

Occa-
sion-
ally

Fre-

quent-

1y

Read

Hab-
itu-
ally

11.

12.
13.

14.

15.

16.

17.
18.
19.

20.

21.

22.

23.
24.

25.

26.

27.

140
Control your emotions when something
"foolish" happens.
Drive in city traffic with dim lights.

Adjust your driving to assure safe pas-
sage of other vehicles passing you.

Carefully check traffic before pulling
out to pass another vehicle.

Observe a reasonable and proper speed.
Drive in the proper lanes.

Yield the right-of-way to emergency
vehicles.

Keep your vehicle in good mechanical
condition.

Await your proper time at a four way
stOp.

StOp behind school buses.
Slow down in school zones.
Yield right-of—way to turning vehicles.

Follow other vehicles at reasonable
distance.

Keep aware of changing conditions.

Do not drive after drinking or taking
drugs.

Are tolerant of other drivers errors.
Take time to park the vehicle properly.

Refrain from throwing refuse along
highway.

Practice the "Golden Rule."

Refrain from weaving in and out of
traffic.

 

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.
36.

37.

38.

39.
40.
41.
42.

43.

44.

45.

141

Cross on the amber light only if a Stop
would carry your vehicle past the
crosswalk.

Avoid annoying acts or remarks to other
peOple.

Avoid trying to impress other people
with your "Expert" driving.

Determine in advance, as far as pos-
sible, acts which would effect other
peOple.

Accept the mistakes of others good
naturedly.

Do not expose others to unnecessary
dangers.

Avoid condemning other drivers for acts
of which you are guilty of yourself.

Believe traffic laws benefit everybody.
Do you feel, "I know it all."

Do not believe that accidents always
happen to the other fellow.

Believe an officer is on the job to help
people, not only to make arrest.

Enter and leave car from curb side.
Avoid parking in a no parking area.
Make your turns from the prOper lanes.
Avoid driving when overly fatigued.

Do not park if it creates congestion
or a hazard.

Do not attempt to take advantage of
other drivers who are waiting at a
stOp light by skirting around them.

Avoid parking where pedestrians have
to walk around the vehicle.

 

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

142

Are not goaded into an unwise act by
others' careless driving or remarks.

Have a willingness to yield the right—
of-way, to avoid delay.

Wave on other drivers when you yield the
right-of—way to avoid traffic tie-ups.

Avoid bluffing other drivers in attempt-
ing to get the right-of—way.

Have a willingness to accept your re-
sponsibility as a driver.

10.

APPENDIX D

FLETCHER ATTITUDE TEST FOR SAFE DRIVING

fre- occa-
quent- sion-
ly ally rarely

Do you wonder how other drivers ever
managed to get operators' licenses?

Do you feel that you yourself are the
best judge of the speed at which you
should be permitted to drive?

Do you disregard a "No Parking" sign
or a fire hydrant area if you're only
going to be parked for a minute?

Do you disregard traffic lights at
night when the streets are practically
deserted?

Do you bluff your way through an
intersection, figuring that the other
driver will stop?

Do you let another car that's trying
to pass you get along side you and
then race it?

Do you feel that people are admiring
you as you drive down the street?

Do you try hard to be the first one
away when a red light turns green?

Do you want your friends to admire
the way you don't have to pay atten-
tion to the road when you're driving?

Do you brag about the times you broke
the law and didn't get caught?

143

 

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

144

Do you take chances in traffic "just for
the fun of it?"

When you.are at the wheel, do you insist
on your rights as a citizen?

When traffic situations go wrong, do you
get "sore?"

Do you figure there is no sense in giving
the other driver an "even break" if he
doesn't insist on it?

Do you hug the middle of the highway when
another driver tries to pass you?

Do you resent someone's being a hotter
driver than you are?

In your "book" is it the other driver who
is always wrong?

Do you "lean on the horn" to keep pedes-
trians out of your way?

In night driving, do you wait for the
approaching driver to dim his headlights
first?

If the driver coming toward you at night
doesn't dim his headlights, do you throw
yours back on the high beam?

Do you blow your horn if the driver ahead
doesn't start moving the instant the light
changes?

Do you speed just for the sense of power
you get when your foot presses down on the
gas pedal?

Do you disregard traffic laws when someone
or something has made you angry?

Do you feel that having the legal right-of-
way lets you out of having to share the
road?

Do you feel that traffic tickets should be
"fixed" if you know the "right" peOple?

145

Give yourself 4 points for each check under FREQUENTLY, 2
points for each check under OCCASIONALLY, and 1 point for
each check under RARELY, and add up your total score. The
LOWER your score - the BETTER your driving attitudes. If
you scored 60 or more, you'd better do something about
improving your attitudes. Sooner or later, they can get
you into trouble.

APPENDIX E

INVENTORY DESIGNED FOR JUDGING PROCEDURE

Instructions: The following statements relate to feelings
and attitudes toward traffic laws and driving responsibil-
ities. Read each statement carefully and circle the letter
which represents FAVORABLE or DESIRABLE driving attitudes.
For example, if you Strongly Agree that statement #1 . . .
i§5§esses a desirable driving attitude, you should circle

 

. Likewise, if you believe statement #1 . . . iooicates

an undesirable driving attitude, you should circle .

NOTE: MAKE A SINCERE EFFORT NOT TO PERMIT YOUR PERSONAL
FEELINGS OR BIASES TO INFLUENCE YOUR RESPONSES.

Response Pattern SA - Strongly Agree
A - Agree
U - Uncertain
D - Disagree
SD - Strongly Disagree

 

Statement Response

 

 

1. Drivers should be given some degree of
freedom in obeying traffic laws. SA, A, U, D, SD

2. Those who continually violate traffic
laws should have their driving priv-
ilege taken away. SA, A, U, D, SD

3. Unless otherwise directed by a police
officer, it is necessary to obey stop
signs at all times.. SA, A, U, D, SD

4. Traffic laws are necessary for the
safe and efficient movement of
traffic. SA, A, U, D, SD

5. It is all right for drivers to go

through red lights if there is no
traffic. SA, A, U, D, SD

146

Response Pattern:

147

m
w
I

 

- Agree

Disagree

UUG‘S’
I

Statement

 

6.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

In most cases, the police enforce the
law as it is written.

Policemen are too strict in enforcing
traffic laws.

The police should not be lenient with
traffic violators.

Policemen should enforce all moving
violations.

Policemen are more strict with young
drivers than they are with any other
age group.

Candidates for a driver's license
should be required to pass a general
knowledge test before taking the road
test.

Driver license tests are too
difficult.

Drivers should be re-tested
periodically.

Drivers should not be required to
take an eye test.

The road test for a driver's license
should be thorough.

Alcohol and narcotics reduce a
person's ability to drive.

Those who make a practice of driving
while under the influence of alcohol
should lose their driving privilege.

Traffic laws governing drivers under
the influence of alcohol or narcotics
are too strict.

Uncertain

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

Strongly Agree

Strongly Disagree

Response

 

A:

A:

A:

A:

A:

A:

U!

U:

Ur

Ur

U:

U:

D,

D:

D:

D:

D:

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

148

 

 

 

Response Pattern: SA - Strongly Agree
A - Agree
U - Uncertain
D - Disagree
SD - Strongly Disagree
Statement Response
19. Drivers should not be required to take
a breath test even if they are sus—
pected of being under the influence of
alcohol. SA, A, U, D,
20. A person should not drive an automo-
bile if he is under the influence of
alcohol or drugs. SA, A, U, D,
21. Driving a car should give a feeling
of power. SA, A, U, D,
22. Drivers should not exceed posted
speed limits. SA, A, U, D,
23. The driver should use the car's
capacity for speed and acceleration
whenever possible. SA, A, U, D,
24. It is all right to exceed the posted
Speed limit on the open highway. SA, A, U, D,
25. Speed limits are necessary to control
the safe movement of traffic. SA, A, U, D,
26. Cautious drivers cause as many acci—
dents as careless drivers. SA, A, U, D,
27. Poor driving behavior is the major
cause of traffic accidents. SA, A, U, D,
28. Traffic accidents do not happen by
chance, they are caused. SA, A, U, D,
29. Traffic accidents cannot be avoided. SA, A, U, D,
30. Middle-aged drivers are involved in
more accidents than young drivers. SA, A, U, D,
31. A car with bad brakes should not be
driven until they have been repaired
or replaced. SA, A, U, D,

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

Response Pattern:

149

 

- Agree

- Disagree

UUC>
I

Statement

 

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

Motor vehicle inspections are a waste
of time.

It is dangerous to drive with tread-
bare tires.

Decorative equipment should be put on
a car to attract attention.

Unsafe cars should be kept off the
highway.

Driving is a good way to forget daily
problems.

It is natural for drivers to get
nervous in heavy traffic.

A person should not drive when he is
upset or angry about something.

Cautious drivers do not get impatient
in heavy traffic.

The car horn should be used freely in
clearing the road of slow drivers.

Most courteous drivers are not good
drivers.

When conditions permit, drivers should

stOp to assist motorists who have
vehicle difficulties.

Courtesy is a good driving practice.

Driving courtesy is a good indication
of a person'a character.

Courtesy is not a necessary element of

safe driving.

Uncertain

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA - Strongly Agree

- Strongly Disagree

Response

 

A:

A:

A:

A:

A:

U,

U:

U:

D:

D,

D:

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

150

Response Pattern: SA - Strongly Agree

- Agree

- Disagree

DUO?
I

Statement

 

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

Most parents are qualified to teach
their teenagers how to drive.

Driver and traffic safety education
courses can help to prepare better
qualified drivers.

Skill is the most important require-
ment in the safe operation of a motor
vehicle.

The major goal of driver education
courses should be to train teenagers
to get a driver's license.

A driver and traffic safety education
course should be taken before getting
a driver's license.

Uncertain

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

SA,

- Strongly Disagree

Response

 

A:

A:

U,

U:

D:

SD

SD

SD

SD

SD

APPENDIX F

EXPLANATORY LETTER SENT TO THE JUDGES

Dear Sir:

I am in the process of developing an inventory de-
signed to measure the attitudes of driver education students
toward the responsibilities of driving a motor vehicle. The
primary purpose of this inventory will be to determine the
areas of instruction that should be emphasized to foster the
development of positive driving attitudes. The tentative
inventory consists of fifty statements which include five
items for each of the following areas: (1) Traffic laws,

(2) Enforcement, (3) Licensing, (4) Alcohol and narcotics,
(5) Speeding, (6) Traffic accidents, (7) Vehicle condition,
(8) Emotions, (9) Courtesy, and (10) Driver education.

I would appreciate your cooperation in scrutinizing
the statements that are presented and designating the re-
sponses that would be indicative of desirable driving atti-
tudes. I wish to emphasize that I am not examining your
attitudes, but requesting you to act as a judge in selecting
appropriate statements and responses to be used in the con-
struction of the final inventory. Consequently, it is impor-
tant that you make a sincere effort not to permit your
personal feelings or biases to influence your responses..

Kindly follow the instructions on the following page,
mark all items, indicate those that you feel are inappropriate
and provide comments that would help to improve the state-
ments. Your assistance in this matter will be greatly
appreciated.

Sincerely,
151

APPENDIX G

STATES AND INSTITUTIONS REPRESENTATIVE

State Departments

OF THE JUDGMENT GROUP

of Education

 

Inventories were received from thirty-eight state

departments of education of the

. Alabama

. Arizona

. California
. Colorado

. Delaware

. Florida

. Georgia

. Illinois

. Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Montana
Nevada

14.
15.
l6.
17.
18.
19.

High Schools

 

20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.

following states:

North Carolina
New Hampshire
New Jersey

New York
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas

Utah

Virginiaw
Vermont
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

38

Driver educators representing seventy-nine high

schools from ten states responded to the inventory.

Ap-

proximately 71 per cent of the eighty-three responses were

152

153

from New Jersey, New York, Michigan and Pennsylvania due to
the author's accessibility to and acquaintance with driver
educators from these states. The number of responses from

each state were as follows:

1. New Jersey (29) 6. Ohio (3)
2. Michigan (16) 7. Illinois (3)
3. New York (13) 8. North Carolina (2)
4. Pennsylvania (8) 9. Washington (2)
5. Wisconsin (5) 10. Florida (2)
n = 83

Colleges and Universities

 

Eighty-six colleges and universities from thirty-
five states returned inventories. Included in this group

were:

Arizona

1. Arizona State University
2. University of Arizona

California

3. Chico State College

4. Fresno State College

5. San Diego State College

6. Sacramento State College

7. San Francisco State College
8. San Jose State College

 

Colorado

 

9. Colorado State University

Connecticut

 

10. Central Connecticut State College
11. Southern Connecticut State College

District of Columbia
12. George Washington University

 

154

Florida

13. Florida State University
14. University of Florida
15. University of Miami

Georgia

16. Georgia Southern College
17. Savannah State College
18. University of Georgia

Idaho
19. University of Idaho

 

Illinois

20. Eastern Illinois University
21. Illinois State University
22. Northern Illinois University
23. Southern Illinois University
24. University of Illinois

25. Western Illinois University

Indiana

26. Ball State University
27. Indiana State University
28. Indiana University

29. Purdue University

Iowa

 

30. Iowa State University
31. Western College
Kansas

32. College of Emporia
33. Kansas State College of Pittsburgh
34. Kansas State University

Kentucky

35. Eastern Kentucky University
36. Murray State University
37. University of Kentucky

Louisiana

 

38. Louisiana State University

Maine

39. University of Maine

155

Maryland

40. Salisbury State College
41. University of Maryland

 

Michigan

 

42. Central Michigan University
43. Eastern Michigan University
44. Northern Michigan University
45. Wayne State University

46. Michigan State University

Minnesota

47. Bemidji State College
48. Concordia College

49. Mankato State College
50. University of Minnesota

 

Mississippi

 

51. Mississippi State University

Missouri

 

52. Northeast Missouri State College

Montana
53. University of Montana

Nebraska

54. Chadron State College
55. University of Nebraska

 

New York

 

56. Brooklyn College
57. Columbia University
58. New York University
59. Buffalo University
60. Oswego University

North Carolina

 

61. Agricultural and Technical College
62. East Carolina College

North Dakota
63. Mayville State College

 

Ohio
64. Kent State University

 

156

Oklahoma

66. Oklahoma State University
67. Southern State College

 

Pennsylvania

68. Clarion State College

69. Indiana University

70. Millersville State College
71. Pennsylvania State University
72. Slippery Rock State College
73. West Chester State College

 

South Dakota
74. Northern State College

 

Tennessee

 

75. University of Tennessee

Texas

 

76. Prairie View A. & M. College
77. University of Houston
Utah

79. University of Utah
80. Utah State University

 

Washington

 

81. Central Washington State College
82. Eastern Washington State College

West Virginia

 

83. West Virginia State College
84. West Virginia University

Wisconsin

 

85. University of Wisconsin
86. Wisconsin State University at River Falls

      

RIES

M'TITJ'I‘MINIJIIIQIIIflfijlllflillllflfljlwflfimI