RESEARCH METHODOLOGY I

DRIVING RELATED STRESS AND COPING STRATEGIES

AMONG CAR DRIVERS AND RIDERS OF KARACHI

Synopsis

Submitted to Miss Sidra Shoaib

Submitted by Afiya Ibrahim

Kainat Zaheer

Uzair Riaz

Institute of Professional Psychology IPP

Bahria University, Karachi Campus

Table of Content Pg. No

Abstract 3
1. Introduction 4-6
1.1Overview 4
1.2Driver Stress 5
1.3Coping and Coping Strategies 6

2 Literature Review 6-7

2.1 Theoretical Framework 8-9

2.2 Problem Statement 10

2.3 Significance Rationale 10

2.4 Research Objective 11
2.5 Research Question 12
3 Research Methodology 12-12
3.1Research Design 12
3.2Participants 12
3.3Measures 12

4 Procedure 13
4.1Ethical Consideration 14
4.2Implications 15

5 Appendix 15-18

6 References 19
 Abstract

The continuous rise in number of automobiles on the road in Karachi leads to

frequent congestions and everyday distress for drivers. Drivers, to overcome the
accumulated stress use problem focused coping or emotion focused coping
strategies. Taking into consideration the Folkman’s and Lazauras Transactional
Cognitive Model, following study explores the prevalent coping techniques
employed by drivers during periods of congestion. Our sample comprises 200
randomly chosen drivers across Karachi, divided into two groups; 100 bikers and
100 car drivers. Driving behavior inventory-General (DBI-G) and Coping
Responses Inventory (CRI) were consulted to evaluate the effects of driving stress
and use of respective coping strategies.

Key words: Driving Stress, Congestion, Karachi, Coping Strategies

 1. INTRODUCTION:
1.1. Background:

Driving is an intricate task that requires complete concentration with calm attitude despite being
a highly stressful activity. Drivers are exposed to stressful driving situations from time to time,
even if they do not generally suffer from stress in everyday life, which especially increases
during congestion. Due to the accumulated stress, individuals on road tend to react in both
adaptive and maladaptive ways. Some examples of maladaptive responses include Tailgating,
aggression, verbal and physical fights and other inconsiderate behavior while some adaptive
responses include exercising deep breathing, eating or drinking something to overcome the
distress. Any sort of heightened emotions such as stress, aggression, anxiety act as forms of
cognitive distortions that can significantly impede the driver’s ability to timely spot and respond
to any of the alarming situation. This inability can result in accidents and catastrophic outcomes
such as fatal injuries, deaths or even damage to the property/vehicle. Also, this unavoidable
stress and tension can negatively impact the driver’s performance. Karachi is an industrial hub
and a major city and due to the economic activity, number of vehicles has also increased
continuously. It has increased from 0.4 million to over one million (government of Sindh (2011).
In recent times, there has been major growth of traffic load in this metropolitan city over the past
two decades. This drastic increase in the number of cars has exasperated different factors of road
life such as an increase in stress while driving. Moreover, the city’s overreliance on cars is
catching up to it and causing high levels of congestion. This rising traffic congestion is an
inescapable condition in large and growing metropolitan areas across the world. To see the
impact of both high and low level of congestion on driver’s state research was conducted in
which drivers were interviewed in high-congestion conditions. Those of high-congestion
conditions found to exhibit elevated levels of driver stress, including frustration, irritation, and
negative mood [Hennessy and Wiesenthal, 1997]. While even though high congestion might
aggravate driving stress but in the absence of congestion driving stress was still more or less
present, thus turning automobile driving as a salient source of everyday stress [Gulian et al.,
1990; Hennessy and Wiesenthal, 1997; Novaco et al., 1990]. From this, it can be deduced that
congestion has a significant relationship with driver’s state inducing multiple heightened
emotions including frustration, irritation, and negative mood. And despite the level (whether it be
high or low) of congestion, during the driving process, driver does experience stress.

1.2. Driver Stress:

As defined by Folkman & Lazarus, Stress is a particular relationship between the person and the
environment that is appraised by the person as taxing or exceeding his or her resources and
endangering his or her wellbeing. (Lazarus and Folkman's, 1984) while, Driver stress is defined
as subjectively perceived stress as reported by individuals who are drivers (E. GULIAN, G.
MATTHEWS, A. I. GLENDON, D. R. DAVIES and L. M. DEBNE (1989)). Yet this is a small
amount of stress that an individual faces each time when behind the wheel. The difference
between an accident involve and non-accident involved drivers includes a specific source of
stress (Slezer and Vinoker (1975). Lazarus transactional view of psychological stress explains it
as the result of environmental demands being appraised as taxing or exceeding the person's
resources (Coyne and Lazarus 1980, Lazarus and Launier 1978). This approach emphasizes
cognitive appraisal of events as determining level of stress response. From this perspective,
driver stress can be defined as the set of responses associated with the perception and evaluation
of driving as being demanding or dangerous relative to the individual's driving capabilities.
Transactional approach is the assumption that driver stress is likely to be a complex syndrome
determined by the interaction of situational and extraneous factors, rather than as any specific
source of driver stress, or as any particular manifestation of stress.
It is also seen that personality and other motivational factors can also affect the level of driving
stress one experiences while driving. Driver stress may also be mediated by personality and
motivational factors. This investigation considers two types of personality variables. First, we
consider beliefs about personal control which have been shown to be implicated in stress and
coping (Folkman 1984, Gatchel 1980, Miller 1979). Locus of control may greatly govern the
level of control one fells while driving, someone with an internal locus of control is found to be
more in control as he/she associate control with themselves in retrospect people with an external
locus of control may not feel in control while driving as they associated control with others or
allocate it to external factors thus having a lowered level of control on their surroundings. Driver
stress may also be mediated by personality and motivational factors. This investigation considers
two types of personality variables. First, we consider beliefs about personal control which have
been shown to be implicated in stress and coping (Folkman 1984, Gatchel 1980, Miller 1979).
Research on internality and externality, including driving behaviors suggests that externalization
is related to lack of caution and failure to take precautionary measures to avoid unfavorable
outcomes (Hoyt 1973, Phares 1976, Williams 1972).

1.3. Coping and Coping Strategies:

“Coping means to invest own conscious effort, to solve personal and interpersonal problems,
inorder to try to master, minimize or tolerate stress and conflict.” [Weiten &Lloyd, 2008]
Coping strategies refer to the specific efforts, both behavioural and psychological, that people
employ to master, tolerate, reduce, or minimize stressful events.

Two general coping strategies have been distinguished for the driver’s experiencing stress.
1. Problem-solving strategies: These are efforts to do something active to alleviate
stressful circumstances
2. Emotion-focused strategies: These involve efforts to regulate the emotional
consequences of stressful or potentially stressful events. Research indicates that people
use both types of strategies to combat most stressful events (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980).
The predominance of one type of strategy over another is determined, in part, by personal
style (e.g., some people cope more actively than others) and also by the type of stressful
event; for example, people typically employ problem-focused coping to deal with
potential controllable problems such as work-related problems and family-related
problems, whereas stressors perceived as less controllable, such as certain kinds of
physical health problems, prompt more emotion-focused coping.

An additional distinction that is often made in the coping literature is between active and
avoidant coping strategies. Active coping strategies are either behavioural or psychological
responses designed to change the nature of the stressor itself or how one thinks about it, whereas
avoidant coping strategies lead people into activities (such as alcohol use) or mental states (such
as withdrawal) that keep them from directly addressing stressful events. Generally speaking,
active coping strategies, whether behavioural or emotional, are thought to be better ways to deal
with stressful events, and avoidant coping strategies appear to be a psychological risk factor or
marker for adverse responses to stressful life events (Holahan & Moos, 1987).
While opposed to that, the situational hypothesis states that one elicits a reaction due to the
stimuli in his environment so it is not the internal struggle that elicits a response but the stimuli
in the environment that forces one to react. These stimuli may include factors like congestion,
inattention of other drivers and any other factors that might directly influence the driver.
For this current study, Emotional coping and Problem focused coping have been categorized to
distinguish between the most prevalent coping strategies used by the drivers.

Literature Review:
A simple explanation to the reactive nature of drivers is explained by the frustration aggression
hypothesis developed by Susanne Kaiser and Christopher Schlembach in 2016. The frustration
hypothesis states that aggression is a result of frustration caused by external or internal factors
yet other studies elaborate that not every experience of frustration leads to aggression and
aggression is not always a reaction of frustration (Dollar at al 1939). Even though there is a link
between aggression and frustration yet frustration is not the only factor that derives an aggressive
response while driving. This is supported by a research done in 1999 [Timo lajunen, Dianne
Parker and Heikki Summala]. Shinar’s (1998) specifically studied the external factors like traffic
jams and delays, the results show that driver aggression is caused by frustration because of traffic
congestion and delays. In conclusion frustration alone is not a strong enough motive to elicit an
aggressive response yet the level of frustration one feels may have an influence on aggressive
behaviour. This shows that one single factor is not enough to elicit an aggressive response thus
showing that aggressive behaviour while driving may not stem from one single point but it is
rather a mix of factors like mood, traffic or commute time.

Due to the ambiguous nature of the cause of aggression while driving Lazarus [1966], proposed that a
situation or event that might be perceived as taxing on personal resources may result in psychological
stress. A threshold if met due to any taxing event may elicit a reaction, even though this sounds simple
enough yet the depth in this topic comes in the fact that “what is perceived as taxing?” and if the factors
perceived as taxing are similar for every individual as most studies depict that when paired with another
factor like mental stress or situational stress make it a substantial factor in the increase in aggression. To
pinpoint these factors many different studies explore different type of factors.
Some studies assign it to a particular situation like congestion, drivers interviewed in high-congestion
conditions have been found to exhibit elevated levels of driver stress. A result of this is an increase in
agitation, irritation, and bad mood [Hennessy and Wiesenthal, 1997], other drivers not abiding by the
rules of driving and many other factors as small as temperature or sound may provoke aggression. Even
though these types of studies exhibit different factors that do effect aggression yet none of the situational
factors have a definitive role in causing aggression as an aggressive response is not seen every time the
situation takes place. These situations however do elicit reactions showing that individual differences or
thresholds may affect the rate of response of the individual.
In another study of Discomfort, affects and coping strategies, (Beatrice Cahour, 2008) the category
of uncomfortable situations during driving and their level of discomfort such as need of multiple
attention, loss of control and how people cope with disagreeable situation, and specifying the
types of coping such as internal, external and avoidance coping were considered. The study
concluded that discomfort is due to an attention load which is too high. The level of comfort and
discomfort gives us a direction to act accordingly, and theses states impacts on the social and
cognitive activities because there is an impact of emotions on activities such as, decision making,
action, creativity and planning. People use rationale and choose between emotional ways to
recognize positive and negative experiences. This study explores that emotions and
individualistic traits have an impact on how an individual reacts in a situation. A coping or
defense mechanism is involved in the type of coping method used by the individual. set of
variables may influence the onset of an increase in the levels of aggression due to this increase a
defense mechanism is deployed by the individual to cope with this disequilibrium caused by a
certain set of variables ranging from: temperature, noise pollution, pollution, personal factors
like bad mood and situational factors like bad drivers. The reaction may vary in intensity from
not very intense reactions like screaming, shouting and showing obscene hand gestures to very
intense reactions like tail gating, physical damage to vehicle and physical confrontation or abuse.
Theorists suggest that this is due to personal characteristics. In a Research on internality and
externality, including driving behaviors suggests that an individual with features of externality is
related to showing reduced caution and failure to take precautionary measures for his/her safety.
(Hoyt 1973, Phares 1976, Williams 1972).
From another perspective congestion can trigger aggression yet some road users seem to cope
better than others (Shiner and Compton, 2004) because their coping skills are different than
others. This difference in coping strategies is the element this research is based upon. It is our
individualistic traits that constrict our behavior as shown by the study conducted by Revista
Mexicana de Psicología and Enero (2009) a person is only as susceptible to anger or any other human
emotion as much as he is predisposed to. This theory is called the state-trail model it puts something as
complex as emotions like aggression to a basic source as personal characteristics. The theory states that
personal characteristics are the basis of emotion it is only in the biological theory of thresholds; one will
only feel the stimulus if it is of a significant level.
In another study conducted on the level of driver personality and stress experienced as factors
influencing behaviour on the road 2015, [K. Różanowski, O. Truszczyński, K. Filipczak & M. Madeyski].
According to the study, the nature of man and the way how he/she copes with stressful situations can
affect the driving. The findings helped to confirm the assumption about the essential relationship between
personality characteristics, the level of stress experienced, and the way of participating in the traffic.
Studies showed, among other things, that a high level of stress is associated with a tendency for people to
make mistakes. Therefore, pointing out the necessity of reducing the stress and tension of drivers is
necessary, which may lead to wrong decisions, and thus result in dangerous behaviour, and a decisive
influence on behaviour on the road. Thus in conclusion a reaction is only elicited when an individual
perceives a situation as a threat and determines a course of reaction, this course of action may be
classified as a defence mechanism and the type of defence mechanism used depend on individual
characteristics. To further elaborate on the type of coping strategies used and the prevalence of each, this
study aims to filter out prevalent coping strategies.

Theoretical Framework:
Using the transactional model of stress and coping by Folkman and Lazarus, which proposes that
stress is experienced as an appraisal (an evaluation) of the situation an individual find itself in.
The model suggests two stages of appraisal before feeling and responding to stress.
In primary appraisal, one evaluates the situation to decide if it is relevant. If one perceives it be
harming, the cognition process undergoes second process which is the secondary appraisal. In
these appraisals, individual decides if it has the ability to cope with the situation – usually by
examining the balance of situational demands (such as risk, uncertainty, difficulty) and perceived
resources (including things such as social support, expertise). When facing the driving stress
during congestion, driver faces multiple emotions such as aggression, frustration and anxiety.
According to the theory, if one feels demands outweigh resources, one faces negative stress and
engages in coping strategies. The transactional model of stress and coping argues that one either
adopts problem focused or emotion focused coping styles.
Problem focused approaches involve attempting to deal with the situation itself, trying to change
it into something more palatable. If the driver perceives the environment to be an appraisal,
meaning he faces any sort of heightened emotions he ultimately chooses either of the two coping
strategies.
In contrast, emotion focused approach involves changing relationship with the situation in a way
which reduces the stress it causes. This can involve denial, avoidance or cognitively re-framing
the meaning of the event. Whilst this doesn’t change the nature of the problem itself, it does
change the effects it has. Lazarus and Folkman suggest these sort of strategies include
disclaiming (denial), escape-avoidance, accepting responsibility or blame, exercising self-control
(of thoughts and behaviors related to the situation) and engaging in positive reappraisals (finding
a positive spin on the situation). Emotion-based coping may be particularly suitable to situations
which cannot actually be influenced in a meaningful way.

Congestion

Aggression Frustration Stress

Coping
Strategies
 Emotion Focused Problem Focused
Coping Coping

Problem Statement:
Drivers use coping mechanism to deal with driving stress. As different coping strategies are used by
different driver’s, pin pointing the prevalent coping strategy used by these drivers is imperative.
Significance Rationale:
The study intends to pinpoint the commonly used coping mechanism while driving to deal with
driving stresses. The coping response inventory (CRI) is an excellent determinant of the type of
coping used by drivers during driving this will give us a broad picture of how one deals with
situations when on the road. 100 bike riders and 100 car drivers were selected to filter out the
most commonly used coping mechanism by both car drivers and bike riders.
The study will attempt to differentiate and determine the prime coping responses used by the
sample to cope with a stressful situation.

Research Objectives:
The main objectives of this research are:
- To unearth the coping strategies of drivers and riders of Karachi
- To determine the level of Driving Related Stress
- to collect data on different coping mechanisms being employed by the populous.
Research Questions:
- What coping strategies are used by drivers in Karachi while driving during congestion?
- What trends in coping strategies are most prevalent among drivers?
- What impact does driving related stress has on coping strategies?

1. Research Methodology

Research Design
The present study follows a prevalence based correlation study that explores driving related
stress and coping strategies among car drivers and bike riders of Karachi. Purposive convenience
sampling technique is opted for data collection.

Participants

A total of 200 participants, aged 18 to 40 years with a valid driving licence, driving a two or a
four-wheeled motorized vehicle are chosen randomly. Criteria is free of gender specificity.

Inclusion Criteria:

Educated participants who are able to read and understand English are the part of inclusion
criteria.

Exclusion criteria:

Age ranges other than the one mentioned are excluded. Also, Heavy Vehicle drivers (trucks,
buses), and professional or commercial drivers are excluded from the sample.

Measures

Demographics:

Demographic information of the participants include; Age, Education, Gender, Vehicle type and
driving experience. (See Appendix A)

State Driving Behaviour Checklist:

It consists of 26 items developed from previous studies, [Hennessy, 1995; Hennessy and
Wiesenthal, 1997]. Several items were selected from those identified by Gulian et al. [1989] as
behaviours used to cope with drivers stress (Aggressive thoughts or behaviours, seeking
alternative actions, planning, and taking precautionary measures). Items were intended to tap
situation- specific driving behaviours used in distinct driving congestions. Items were sub
divided into six categories of similar behaviours; Driver aggression, (items 1,2,6,8 and 15)
Information seeking (items 19,20,22 and 25) Minor self-destruction items ( 4,7,11 and 26),
Relaxation techniques (items 12,13, and 16), Planning (items 3,18,21 and 23) and
Distraction( items 5, 9, 10, 14, 17, and 24). Category scoring consisted of summing the number
of behaviours used per category. (See appendix B)

Coping Response Inventory (CRI):

CRI consists of two subsets. Subset 1 contains a total of 10 items, each item can be scored from
0-3 (0 = no, 3 = yes, fairly often). This subset of the test provides information about how the
individual appraises the described problem. Subset 2 consists of 48 items. Each item has four
response options; 0-8, (0 = not at all, 8= fairly often). Items constitute 8 scales designed to
measure coping strategies. The first four scale evaluate coping styles based on the approach of
the problem (Logical Analysis, Positive Reappraisal, Seek Guidance, Problem solving). The
other four scales evaluate coping style based on Avoidance strategies (Cognitive Avoidance,
Resigned Acceptance, Seek alternative rewards, Emotional discharge). The first two indices in
each domain reflect cognitive coping responses, while the second two indices in each domain
reflect behavioural coping response.

The coping response inventory (CRI) has internal consistency validating its reliability. It also has
discriminant and predictive validity and Alpha coefficient is between 0.59 and 0.74 (Hernaudez,
Vigno and Kelly (2010)) and moos (1993).

Procedure:

Permission has been acquired from the author of the scale through E-mail for this study.
Informed consent will be gathered, maintaining confidentiality and anonymity. The participants
will inform about the right to withdraw at any time. Prior debriefing will be carried out before
handing the Questionnaire.

To gather information Drivers from parking lots outside malls, Universities, and Public
Restaurants of Karachi will be approached. State driving Behaviour Checklist will be
administered first to obtain the information on driver’s stress, in accordance with Coping
Responses Inventory (CRI).
For this study, all ethical considerations will be taken in account. Consent form will be used to
take permission from participants to provide necessary information regarding consent with the
details of this study. Confidentiality, Anonymity and the Right to Withdraw will be debriefed
prior the administration as well as in the consent form.

Implications:

Following study focuses on the important implications for road safety and prevention of road
accidents, particularly concerning aggressive behaviours as providing a possible underlying basis
for explaining why certain drivers tend to be involved in traffic violations. Also, it provides
resourceful coping strategies that aid in reduction of the stress and aggression experienced during
driving in conjunction with convenient, safe driving as a daily event.

Appendices:

Appendix A: demographic form

Appendix B: consent Form

 APPENDIX B

CONSENT FORM

PLEASE READ THIS DOCUMENT CAREFULLY YOUR SIGNATURE IS REQUIRED

FOR PATICIPATION

We students of BS Psychology, 7th semester from institute of professional psychology, Bahria

university Karachi campus wish to study the prevalence of driving related stress and coping
strategies among bike riders and car drivers of Karachi. Participants are required to fill out a
basic demographic form and two questionnaires. Your participation in this study is completely
voluntary and you may refuse to answer any question or choose to stop participating at any time

All the information you supply during research will be held in confidence and your name will not
appear in any report or publication of the research. Your data will be safely stored and only
researchers and research supervisor will have access to this information. Confidentiality will be
provided to the fullest extent possible.

If you agree to participate in the above-mentioned research then kindly fill out the following:

I ────────────────── consent to participate in the study conducted. I have

understood the nature of this study and wish to participate. I understand I may withdraw from
this research study at any time. I understand the information gained during the research may be
published in the form of a report or a general article, my personal results will not be identified in
any way in those publications. My signature below indicates my consent.

Participant’s Name:

Signature:

Date:
 APPENDIX A

DEMOGRAPHIC FORM:

NAME:

AGE:

GENDER:

EDUCATION:

VEHICLE TYPE:

DRIVING EXPERIENCE:
 APPENDIX C
State Driving Behavior Checklist

Please indicate whether you have employed the following behaviors during the past 5 min of this
particular commute.

1. Horn honking at other drivers out of frustration.

2. Purposely tailgating other drivers.

3. Talking on a CB radio to make alternate travel plans.

4. Nail biting.

5. Eating or drinking to pass time.

6. Flashing your high beams at another driver out of frustration.

7. Smoking.

8. Hand gestures at other drivers.

9. Daydreaming to pass time.

10. Fixing your hair and/or makeup.

11. Scratching.

12. Muscle relaxation techniques.

13. Meditating.

14. Listening to talk radio programs to pass the time.

15. Swearing at other drivers.

16. Purposeful breathing techniques.

17. Talking to passengers to pass time.

18. Planning “ON THE SPOT” alternate routes to travel.

19. Seeking the information provided by the changeable message signs.

20. Using a CB radio to gain access to traffic information.

21. Sticking to a prearranged plan of action (MADE PRIOR TO DRIVING) foredealing with
traffic.

22. Talking to passengers to gain information about the traffic situation.

23. Talking to passengers to plan alternate travel routes.

24. Listening to music to pass the time.

25. Consulting radio traffic reports.

26. Grinding your teeth.

 REFERENCES:

1. Lazarus, R.S. & Folkman.(1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Michigan. Springer
Press. 
2.  The Wear and Tear of Daily Stressors on Mental Health, University of California, 2013
3.  Aggression on the road as a function of stress, coping strategies and Driver style, Bar-
Ilan University, 2010
4.

https://www.kasbit.edu.pk/KBJVol_5/4%20Faiq%20Matin%20-%20FINDING%20FACTORS%20OF
%20TRAFFIC%20JAM%20IN%20KARACHI%20AND%20ITS%20IMPACT.pdf