Vairuotojų požiūris į nuobaudas : teisingumas, veiksmingumas, paskirtis ir jų psichologinės prielaidos : mokslo studija
The purpose of penalties for road traffic offenses is to deter drivers from committing traffic rule violations, punish for offenses that have already been committed, and change offender’s behavior in the future. However, it seems that penalties for traffic offenses are ineffective, as drivers often...
Đã lưu trong:
| Những tác giả chính: | , , |
|---|---|
| Định dạng: | Online |
| Ngôn ngữ: | Tiếng Litva |
| Được phát hành: |
Vytautas Magnus University
2026
|
| Những chủ đề: | |
| Truy cập trực tuyến: | https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/176308 |
| Các nhãn: |
Không có thẻ, Là người đầu tiên thẻ bản ghi này!
|
| Tóm tắt: | The purpose of penalties for road traffic offenses is to deter drivers from committing traffic rule violations, punish for offenses that have already been committed, and change offender’s behavior in the future. However, it seems that penalties for traffic offenses are ineffective, as drivers often violate the rules repeatedly; the rates of traffic accidents and deaths or injuries on Lithuanian roads remain one of the highest in the EU. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the perceived justice, purpose, and effectiveness of penalties between traffic offenders and regular drivers and to estimate the psychological antecedents (personality traits, perceptual errors) of these attitudes towards law enforcement. A convenience sample of 1,374 Lithuanian drivers participated in the study (56.3 percent males; mean age 32.74 years; average driving experience 12.39 years). 58.3 percent of participants had no penalties for traffic offenses during the last year, 24.2 percent reported monetary fines during the last year, and 17.5 percent had had their driving license suspended for a traffic offense at least once in their driving career. The perceived purpose of penalties for drunk-driving, speeding, and other road traffic offenses was assessed. A scale containing ten specific penalties for traffic offenses was developed to measure the perceived justice and effectiveness of penalties. In addition, the Dark Triad personality, the BIS and BAS, and the intentions to violate the road traffic rules in the next month were measured. Ethics approval for the study was granted by the Institutional Review Board (permission No. EKL-2021.01). The majority of drivers agreed that penalties for road traffic offenses were intended to punish the offender, fewer drivers thought that penalties were intended to change the behavior of road users, and the smallest number agreed that penalties were intended to collect taxes. About a half of all participants perceived the penalties for road traffic offenses to be just and the perceived effectiveness of penalties was slightly above average. Drivers who had not been fined for a traffic offense in the last year perceived the penalties as more just (less than too harsh) compared to drivers who have been fined for a traffic offense or have had their driving license suspended. No differences were found between these groups in terms of the effectiveness of penalties. Drivers perceived penalties as more effective in changing their own behavior (personal evaluation perspective) than to change behavior in general (general evaluation perspective). Personality traits were related to some components of attitudes towards penalties for traffic offenses. Dark personality traits were related to lower perceived effectiveness of penalties; BAS was related to lower evaluation of the justice of penalties; and BIS was related to higher perceived effectiveness of penalties. Intentions to violate the road traffic rules were more predicted by drivers’ perceptions of penalties and personality traits than by their experience of being penalized. |
|---|