COGNITION AND EMOTION IN DRIVER BEHAVIOUR MODELS : SOME CRITICAL VIEWPOINTS

Several driver behaviour models have been proposed during the years, the first one in 1938 by Gibson and Crooks’ and their theoretical field-analysis of automobile driving. Since then, several authors have contributed to the understanding of driver behaviour by developing models. The most important are considered to be, chronologically: • Taylor on “Drivers’ galvanic skin responses and the risk of accidents” (1964) • Näätänen and Summalas’ “Zero-Risk Model” (1974) • Ajzen and Fishbeins’ “Theory of Reasoned Action” (1980) • Wilde’s “Theory of Risk Homeostasis”, (1982) • Fuller on “Driver behaviour as threat avoidance” (1984) • Evan’s on the role of feedback (1985) • Ajzen’s “Theory of Planned Behaviour” (1985) • Rothengatter on the role of pleasure (1988) One can hardly say that the task of modelling driver behaviour has reached any kind of consensus. Models address diverging aspects, several ‘favourite’ issues and/or concepts are pursued, discussions and disagreement prevail. There is no break-through or “GUT” (“Great Unified Theory”) within the traffic safety research regarding the difficult task of modelling driver behaviour. In the present paper, it is argued that one of the main reasons for this “sad state of the art” is a lack of a thorough and comprehensive understanding of human cognition and emotion, i.e. how drivers think and feel, consciously, pre-consciously, unconsciously. There is no common understanding of driver behaviour that is based on recent achievements in cognitive psychology and neurobiology. In fact, Taylor’s early work of 1964 may be more in line with recent achievements in neurobiology than any other of the models listed above. The paper argues that no deep understanding of risk compensation will emerge unless recent developments in cognitive psychology and neurobiology are integrated in the modelling of driver behaviour. 14th ICTCT workshop proceedings car drivers