SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

Understanding Moral Justifications for Traffic Violations in Türkiye

Türkiye’de Trafik İhlallerinin Ahlaki Meşrulaştırılmasının İncelenmesi

Erkin Sarı(SELÇUK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EDEBİYAT FAKÜLTESİ, PSİKOLOJİ BÖLÜMÜ, PSİKOLOJİ PR.)0000-0002-2162-5558
Pages
105–123
Publication Date
2025-10-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Additionally, the findings indicated that legitimizing traffic violations was positively correlated with driver anger expression, driving anger, moral disengagement, and aggressive violations, while negatively associated with age, driving experience, and adaptive/constructive anger expression.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Despite the widespread presence of traffic laws and the imposition of sanctions for violations, noncompliance (e.g., overspeeding) remains a major factor contributing to accidents and fatalities on the roads.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research focuses on the moral reasoning strategies that support such violations, along with their relationships with a range of psychological factors among Turkish-speaking drivers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Additionally, the findings indicated that legitimizing traffic violations was positively correlated with driver anger expression, driving anger, moral disengagement, and aggressive violations, while negatively associated with age, driving experience, and adaptive/constructive anger expression.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ahlaki meşrulaştırma · trafik kural ihlalleri · trafikte ahlaki uzaklaşma

Abstract

Despite the widespread presence of traffic laws and the imposition of sanctions for violations, noncompliance (e.g., overspeeding) remains a major factor contributing to accidents and fatalities on the roads. Understanding the underlying reasons that lead drivers to violate traffic regulations is essential. The research focuses on the moral reasoning strategies that support such violations, along with their relationships with a range of psychological factors among Turkish-speaking drivers. In total, 261 (132 males, 127 females, two participants chose not to report; Mage = 37.46, SDage = 9.29) drivers participated in the current study. This study’s findings on how Turkish-speaking drivers legitimize traffic violations (i.e., moral disengagement) and related variables, as well as the adaptation of two scales (i.e., Driving Moral Disengagement Scale and Justifications of Traffic Violations Scale) into Turkish, indicate that both scales are valid and reliable tools in this context. Additionally, the findings indicated that legitimizing traffic violations was positively correlated with driver anger expression, driving anger, moral disengagement, and aggressive violations, while negatively associated with age, driving experience, and adaptive/constructive anger expression. This paper offers important insights into the factors influencing moral disengagement among Turkish driving context. These results can guide and inform future research efforts aimed at addressing existing gaps and enhancing road safety.

Özet

Trafik yasalarının yaygın olarak bulunmasına ve ihlaller için yaptırımların uygulanmasına rağmen, kurallara uymama (ör., aşırı hız yapmak) trafik kazaları ve ölümlere neden olan başlıca faktörlerden biri olmaya devam etmektedir. Bu nedenle, sürücülerin trafik kurallarını ihlal etmelerine yol açan temel nedenleri anlamak büyük önem taşımaktadır. Araştırma, Türkçe konuşan sürücüler arasında söz konusu ihlalleri destekleyen ahlaki akıl yürütme stratejileri ile bu stratejilerin çeşitli psikolojik faktörlerle olan ilişkilerine odaklanmaktadır. Toplamda 261 (132 erkek, 127 kadın, cinsiyetini belirtmek istemeyen iki katılımcı; Ortyaş = 37.46, SSyaş = 9.29) sürücü çalışmaya katılmıştır. Bu çalışmanın, Türkiye’deki sürücülerin trafik ihlallerini nasıl meşrulaştırdığını (yani ahlaki uzaklaşmayı) ve ilişkili değişkenleri, ayrıca iki ölçeğin (Trafikte Ahlaki Uzaklaşma Ölçeği ve Trafik Kurallarını İhlal Etmeyi Meşrulaştırma Ölçeği) Türkçeye uyarlanmasını ele alan bulguları (ör., doğrulayıcı faktör, güvenirlik ve korelasyon analizleri) her iki ölçeğin de bu bağlamda geçerli ve güvenilir ölçüm araçları olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca, trafik ihlallerini meşrulaştırmanın sürücü öfke ifadesi, sürücü öfkesi, ahlaki uzaklaşma ve saldırgan ihlallerle pozitif, yaş, sürücülük deneyimi ve adaptif/yapıcı öfke ifadesiyle negatif ilişkili olduğu saptanmıştır. Bu çalışma Türkiye’deki sürücülerde ahlaki uzaklaşmayı etkileyen faktörler hakkında önemli bilgiler sunmaktadır. Bu sonuçlar, mevcut eksikliklerin giderilmesine ve trafik güvenliğinin artırılmasına yönelik gelecekteki araştırma çabalarına rehberlik edebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Sarı, E. (2025). Understanding Moral Justifications for Traffic Violations in Türkiye. Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 105–123. https://doi.org/10.38002/tuad.1763082

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (93)

  1. Akşar, C., Alavcı, T., Tekin, M. E., & Tekeş, B. (2018). Cinsiyetçiliğin sürücü öfkesi ve sürücü öfke ifadesi ile ilişkisi. Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 69–87.
  2. Alharbi, R., Mosley, I., Miller, C., Hillel, S., & Lewis, V. (2019). Factors associated with physical, psychological and functional outcomes in adult trauma patients following Road Traffic Crash: A scoping literature review. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 3, 100061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2019.100061
  3. Austers, I., Jaunzeme, K., Dimdins, G., Muzikante, I., & Poļanska, E. (2025). Situational reflection as predictor of safe driving: Development and testing of the Driver Situational Reflection Scale (DSRS). Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 32, 101503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101503
  4. Arslantürk, G. (2024). İyiliğin ve kötülüğün psikolojisi. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
  5. Ayvaşık, H. B., Er, N., & Sümer, N. (2005). Traffic violations and errors: The effects of sensation seeking and attention. Driving Assessment Conference 2005. https://doi.org/10.17077/drivingassessment.1190
  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.
  7. Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L
  8. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364
  9. Baran, P., Zieliński, P., & Dziuda, Ł. (2021). Personality and temperament traits as predictors of conscious risky car driving. Safety Science, 142, 105361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105361
  10. Basiyd-Fellahi, H., Delhomme, P., & Cestac, J. (2025). Exploring the link between traffic violations and moral disengagement: A scoping review. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 31, 101438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101438
  11. Bautista, R., Sitges, E., & Tirado, S. (2015). Psychosocial predictors of compliance with speed limits and alcohol limits by spanish drivers: Modeling compliance of traffic rules. Laws, 4(3), 602–616. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws4030602
  12. Ben Laoula, E. M., Elfahim, O., el Midaoui, M., Youssfi, M., & Bouattane, O. (2023). Traffic violations analysis: Identifying risky areas and common violations. Heliyon, 9(9), e19058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19058
  13. Bıçaksız, P. (2019). Karanlık üçlü kişilik özellikleri ve sürücü davranışları arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi. Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 66–77.
  14. Bıçaksız, P. (2021). Kişilik özellikleri ve riskli sürücülük: Bir derleme çalışması. Güvenlik Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(1), 259–284. https://doi.org/10.28956/gbd.845119
  15. Budak, N., Öztürk, İ., Aslan, M., & Öz, B. (2021). How drivers’ risk perception changes while driving on familiar and unfamiliar roads: A comparison of female and male drivers. Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.38002/tuad.866934
  16. Cestac, J., Paran, F., & Delhomme, P. (2011). Young drivers’ sensation seeking, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control and their roles in predicting speeding intention: How risk-taking motivations evolve with gender and driving experience. Safety Science, 49(3), 424–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2010.10.007
  17. Chou, C.-P., & Bentler, P. M. (2002). Model modification in structural equation modeling by imposing constraints. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 41(2), 271–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9473(02)00097-X
  18. Chraif, M., Aniţei, M., Burtăverde, V., & Mihăilă, T. (2016). The link between personality, aggressive driving, and risky driving outcomes – testing a theoretical model. Journal of Risk Research, 19(6), 780–797. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2015.1042500
  19. Coşkun, M., Cingöz-Ulu, B., İlgün, Y., & Sarı, E. (2024). The role of moral foundations and moral disengagement in predicting moral courage: Evidence from a non-WEIRD context. Studia Psychologica, 66(2), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.31577/sp.2024.02.893
  20. Deery, H. A. (1999). Hazard and risk perception among young novice drivers. Journal of Safety Research, 30(4), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4375(99)00018-3
  21. Deffenbacher, J. L., Lynch, R. S., Oetting, E. R., & Swaim, R. C. (2002). The Driving Anger Expression Inventory: A measure of how people express their anger on the road. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40(6), 717–737. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00063-8
  22. Deffenbacher, J. L., Oetting, E. R., & Lynch, R. S. (1994). Development of a Driving Anger Scale. Psychological Reports, 74(1), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1994.74.1.83
  23. Demir, B., Demir, S., & Özkan, T. (2016). A contextual model of driving anger: A meta-analysis. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 42, 332–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.09.020
  24. Demir, M., Braga, A. A., & Apel, R. (2020). Effects of police body‐worn cameras on citizen compliance and cooperation: Findings from a quasi‐randomized controlled trial. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(3), 855–882. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12505
  25. Deniz, P., Lajunen, T., Özkan, T., & Gaygısız, E. (2021). Masculinity, femininity, and angry drivers: Masculinity and femininity as moderators between driver anger and anger expression style among young drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 161, 106347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106347
  26. Detert, J. R., Treviño, L. K., & Sweitzer, V. L. (2008). Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.374
  27. Ehsani, J. P., Li, K., Simons-Morton, B. G., Fox Tree-McGrath, C., Perlus, J. G., O’Brien, F., & Klauer, S. G. (2015). Conscientious personality and young drivers’ crash risk. Journal of Safety Research, 54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2015.06.015
  28. Elander, J., West, R., & French, D. (1993). Behavioral correlates of individual differences in road-traffic crash risk: An examination of methods and findings. Psychological Bulletin, 113(2), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.113.2.279
  29. Endriulaitienė, A., Šeibokaitė, L., Žardeckaitė-Matulaitienė, K., Markšaitytė, R., & Slavinskienė, J. (2018). Attitudes towards risky driving and Dark Triad personality traits in a group of learner drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 56, 362–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.05.017
  30. European Commission (2024). Road safety thematic report – Main factors causing fatal crashes. European Road Safety Observatory. Brussels, European Commission, Directorate General for Transport. https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a7428369-8eaf-4032-806e-ea08b46028c0_en?filename=ERSO-TR-MainCauses.pdf
  31. Eşiyok, B., Yasak, Y., & Korkusuz, İ. (2007). Anger expression on the road: Validity and reliability of the Driving Anger Expression Inventory. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 18(3).
  32. Evans, L. (2004). Traffic safety. Science Serving Society.
  33. FeldmanHall, O., Son, J.-Y., & Heffner, J. (2018). Norms and the flexibility of moral action. Personality Neuroscience, 1, e15. https://doi.org/10.1017/pen.2018.13
  34. Fida, R., Paciello, M., Tramontano, C., Fontaine, R. G., Barbaranelli, C., & Farnese, M. L. (2015). An Integrative Approach to Understanding Counterproductive Work Behavior: The Roles of Stressors, Negative Emotions, and Moral Disengagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(1), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2209-5
  35. Forward, S. E. (2006). The intention to commit driving violations – A qualitative study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 9(6), 412–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2006.02.003
  36. Gabbiadini, A., Andrighetto, L., & Volpato, C. (2012). Brief report: Does exposure to violent video games increase moral disengagement among adolescents? Journal of Adolescence, 35(5), 1403–1406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.06.001
  37. Gächter, S., Molleman, L., & Nosenzo, D. (2025). Why people follow rules. Nature Human Behaviour, 9(7), 1342–1354. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02196-4
  38. Gezici-Yalçın, M., Şenyurt, A. Y., Gültepe, B., ve Coşkun, H. (2016). Ahlâkî Uzaklaşma Ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Kalem Uluslararası Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 309-332.
  39. Gino, F., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Vicarious dishonesty: When psychological closeness creates distance from one’s moral compass. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.03.011
  40. Guggenheim, N., Taubman – Ben-Ari, O., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2020). The contribution of driving with friends to young drivers’ intention to take risks: An expansion of the theory of planned behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 139, 105489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105489
  41. Havârneanu, M. G., & Goliţă, A. (2010). Traffic norms between safety and perversity. Annals of the “Al. I. Cuza” University, Psychology series, 19(1), 65 82.
  42. Havârneanu, G. M., & Havârneanu, C. E. (2012). When norms turn perverse: Contextual irrationality vs. rational traffic violations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 15(2), 144–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2011.12.003
  43. Holman, A. C., & Popusoi, S. A. (2018). Avoiding blame when violating traffic rules: The development and validation of the Justifications of Traffic Violations Scale. Psychology, Crime & Law, 24(9), 873–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1442450
  44. Iversen, H., & Rundmo, T. (2002). Personality, risky driving and accident involvement among Norwegian drivers. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(8), 1251–1263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00010-7
  45. Jovanović, D., Lipovac, K., Stanojević, P., & Stanojević, D. (2011). The effects of personality traits on driving-related anger and aggressive behaviour in traffic among Serbian drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2010.09.005
  46. Kaçan-Bibican, B., Fındık, G., & Öz, B. (2023). Trafik Kazazedelerinin Deneyimlerinin İncelenmesi: Ölümün Kıyısında, Yaşamın Derinliğine Bir Bakış. AYNA Klinik Psikoloji Dergisi, 10(3), 489–516. https://doi.org/10.31682/ayna.1262910
  47. Kish-Gephart, J., Detert, J., Treviño, L. K., Baker, V., & Martin, S. (2014). Situational Moral Disengagement: Can the Effects of Self-Interest be Mitigated? Journal of Business Ethics, 125(2), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1909-6
  48. Kolburan, Ş. G., Tasa, H., & Erbay, E. Ö. (2019). Examining the relationship between empathy and anger expressions of the drivers. Health Sciences Quarterly, 3(5), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.26900/jsp.3.041
  49. Lajunen, T. ve Özkan, T. (2004). Kültür, güvenlik kültürü, Türkiye ve Avrupa’da trafikgüvenliği (Rapor No: SBB-3023). Ankara: Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu.
  50. Lajunen, T., & Summala, H. (1995). Driving experience, personality, and skill and safety-motive dimensions in drivers' self-assessments. Personality and Individual Differences, 19(3), 307–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00068-H
  51. Lawton, R., Parker, D., Manstead, A. S. R., & Stradling, S. G. (1997). The role of affect in predicting social behaviors: The case of road traffic violations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(14), 1258–1276. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb01805.x
  52. Lennon, A., & Watson, B. (2011). “Teaching them a lesson?” A qualitative exploration of underlying motivations for driver aggression. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(6), 2200–2208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.06.015
  53. Lucidi, F., Giannini, A. M., Sgalla, R., Mallia, L., Devoto, A., & Reichmann, S. (2010). Young novice driver subtypes: Relationship to driving violations, errors and lapses. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42(6), 1689–1696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.04.008
  54. Luo, X., Ge, Y., & Qu, W. (2023). The association between the Big Five personality traits and driving behaviors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 183, 106968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2023.106968
  55. Lv, R., Wang, Y., Zhang, C., & Ma, J. (2024). The role of anger rumination as a mediator in the relationship between driver moral disengagement and driving angry. Heliyon, 10(8), e29112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29112
  56. Machado, M. S., da Agra, C., & Cardoso, C. S. (2024). Are we always aggressive or only behind the wheel? Exploring differences and similarities through social information processing theory. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 104, 334–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.06.006
  57. Marasini, G., Caleffi, F., Machado, L. M. ve Pereira, B. M. (2022). Psychological consequences of motor vehicle accidents: A systematic review. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 89, 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2022.06.017
  58. Mateus Francisco, S., Costa Ferreira, P., Veiga Simão, A. M., & Salgado Pereira, N. (2024). Moral disengagement and empathy in cyberbullying: how they are related in reflection activities about a serious game. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 168. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01582-3
  59. Moore, C. (2015). Moral disengagement. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.018
  60. Nicolls, M., Truelove, V., & Stefanidis, K. B. (2024). Exploring the utility of a social norm approach in reducing younger drivers’ engagement in hand-held phone use while driving: A qualitative study. Journal of Safety Research, 90, 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2024.05.008
  61. Nordfjærn, T., & Şimşekoğlu, Ö. (2014). Empathy, conformity, and cultural factors related to aberrant driving behaviour in a sample of Urban Turkish drivers. Safety Science, 68, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.020
  62. O’Hern, S., Stephens, A. N., Young, K. L., & Koppel, S. (2020). Personality traits as predictors of cyclist behaviour. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 145, 105704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105704
  63. Oppenheim, I., Oron-Gilad, T., Parmet, Y., & Shinar, D. (2016). Can traffic violations be traced to gender-role, sensation seeking, demographics and driving exposure? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 43, 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.06.027
  64. Özkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2005). Masculinity, femininity, and the Bem Sex Role Inventory in Turkey. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 52(1-2), 103–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-1197-4
  65. Öztürk, İ., Fındık, G., & Özkan T. (2019). Trafik ortamında cinsiyet rollerinin sürücü davranışları ve sürüş becerileriyle ilişkisi. Trafik ve Ulaşım Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 78–92.
  66. Paciello, M., Fida, R., Cerniglia, L., Tramontano, C., & Cole, E. (2013). High cost helping scenario: The role of empathy, prosocial reasoning and moral disengagement on helping behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.004
  67. Penmetsa, P., & Pulugurtha, S. S. (2017). Risk drivers pose to themselves and other drivers by violating traffic rules. Traffic Injury Prevention, 18(1), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2016.1177637
  68. Reason, J., Manstead, A., Stradling, S., Baxter, J., & Campbell, K. (1990). Errors and violations on the roads: a real distinction? Ergonomics, 33(10–11), 1315–1332. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139008925335
  69. Rimmö, P.-A., & Åberg, L. (1999). On the distinction between violations and errors: sensation seeking associations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2(3), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(99)00013-3
  70. Schwebel, D. C., Severson, J., Ball, K. K., & Rizzo, M. (2006). Individual difference factors in risky driving: The roles of anger/hostility, conscientiousness, and sensation-seeking. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 38(4), 801–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.02.004
  71. Sheykhfard, A., Qin, X., Shaaban, K., & Koppel, S. (2022). An exploration of the role of driving experience on self-reported and real-world aberrant driving behaviors. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 178, 106873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2022.106873
  72. Shinar, D. (1998). Aggressive driving: the contribution of the drivers and the situation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 1(2), 137–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(99)00002-9
  73. Sümer, N. (2002). Trafik kazalarında sosyal psikolojik etmenler: Sürücü davranışları, becerileri ve sosyal politik çevre. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 5(9-10), 1-36.
  74. Swann, A., Lennon, A., & Cleary, J. (2017). Development and preliminary validation of a scale of driving moral disengagement as a tool in the exploration of driving aggression. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 46, 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.01.011
  75. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using Multivariate Statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.
  76. Tao, D., Zhang, R., & Qu, X. (2017). The role of personality traits and driving experience in self-reported risky driving behaviors and accident risk among Chinese drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 99, 228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.12.009
  77. Taubman – Ben-Ari, O., Eherenfreund – Hager, A., & Prato, C. G. (2016). The value of self-report measures as indicators of driving behaviors among young drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 39, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.03.005
  78. Torres-Quintero, A., Palacios-Doncel, D. L., Dominguez-Torres, M. T., Gáfaro-Barrera, M. E., & Burbano-Valente, J. (2019). Masculinities at play. A sociocultural approach to the practices of risky riding among male motorcyclists in Valledupar, Colombia. Journal of Transport & Health, 14, 100599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.100599
  79. Töre, B., Kaçan-Bibican, B., & Özkan, T. (2022). Sürücü davranış ve becerilerinin kontrol odağıyla ilişkisinin iki farklı ölçüm ile incelenmesi. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 25(50). https://doi.org/10.31828/tpy1301996120221215m000050
  80. Trógolo, M. A., Ledesma, R., Medrano, L. A., & Dominguez-Lara, S. (2022). Peer pressure and risky driving: Development of a new scale. Journal of Safety Research, 82, 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2022.04.005
  81. Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. Yale University Press.
  82. van Kleef, G. A., Wanders, F., Stamkou, E., & Homan, A. C. (2015). The social dynamics of breaking the rules: antecedents and consequences of norm-violating behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.03.013
  83. Varet, F., Granié, M.-A., Carnis, L., Martinez, F., Pelé, M., & Piermattéo, A. (2021). The role of perceived legitimacy in understanding traffic rule compliance: A scoping review. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 159, 106299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106299
  84. Varet, F., Pelé, M., Carnis, L., Piermattéo, A., Martinez, F., & Granié, M.-A. (2024). Toward a multidimensional model of legitimacy: Validation of the Traffic Rules Perceived Legitimacy scale. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 30(2), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000416
  85. Watling, C. N. (2014). Sleepy driving and pulling over for a rest: Investigating individual factors that contribute to these driving behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.031
  86. World Health Organization (2023). Global status report on road safety 2023. https://www.who.int/teams/social-determinants-of-health/safety-and-mobility/global-status-report-on-road-safety-2023.
  87. Yagil, D. (1998). Gender and age-related differences in attitudes toward traffic laws and traffic violations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 1(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(98)00010-2
  88. Yagil, D. (2005). Drivers and traffic laws: A review of psychological theories and empirical research. In G. U. (Ed.), Traffic and transport psychology (pp. 487-503). Elsevier.
  89. Yalçın, E., & Aktaş, B. (2024). Disengagement from moral disengagement: A review of individual differences and interventions programs. Psikiyatride Güncel Yaklaşımlar, 16(1), 31–47. https://doi.org/10.18863/pgy.1223370
  90. Yasak, Y., Batıgün, A. D., & Eşiyok, B. (2016). Trafik ve stres: Stres ile trafikte öfke ifadesi arasındaki ilişkide sürücü öfke düşüncelerinin aracı rolü. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 31(78), 13–21.
  91. Yasak, Y., & Esiyok, B. (2009). Anger amongst Turkish drivers: Driving Anger Scale and its adapted, long and short version. Safety Science, 47(1), 138–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2008.02.003
  92. Zhang, Q., Ge, Y., Qu, W., Zhang, K., & Sun, X. (2018). The traffic climate in China: The mediating effect of traffic safety climate between personality and dangerous driving behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 113, 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.01.031
  93. Zhang, T., Chan, A. H. S., & Zhang, W. (2015). Dimensions of driving anger and their relationships with aberrant driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 81, 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.005