不同但也相似?自行车和电动摩托车骑行者中的群内群外现象

IF 3.9 2区 工程技术 Q1 ERGONOMICS
Juliane Anke, Madlen Ringhand, Tibor Petzoldt
{"title":"不同但也相似?自行车和电动摩托车骑行者中的群内群外现象","authors":"Juliane Anke,&nbsp;Madlen Ringhand,&nbsp;Tibor Petzoldt","doi":"10.1016/j.jsr.2024.01.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><em>Problem:</em> In many countries, a new road user group, e-scooter riders, share the existing cycling infrastructure. The study aimed to investigate if an individual’s status as a cyclist or e-scooter rider affects their social identity and whether it results in ingroup favoritism or outgroup discrimination. <em>Method:</em> An online experiment involving 179 cyclists and 64 e–scooter riders was conducted, where they rated the behavior of ingroup or outgroup members in six traffic scenarios. <em>Results:</em> Participants rated dispositional attributions as more causally relevant than situational ones across all traffic scenarios. Cyclists and e–scooter riders were inclined to judge ingroup members' rule violations more harshly than those of outgroup members in terms of dispositional attribution ratings and punishment severity. For situational attributions, few indications of ingroup favoritism were observed for the e–scooter rider group. <em>Summary:</em> Findings suggest initial indications of considerate coexistence, from the perspective of social identity theory, between the two modes of transport, supporting current regulations on the use of cycling infrastructure by e–scooter riders. Indications of ingroup discrimination, however, suggest that safety campaigning may target to promote courtesy within the cyclist and e-scooter rider groups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Safety Research","volume":"89 ","pages":"Pages 331-342"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022437524000082/pdfft?md5=747dfe6a58dd112be3b6c83c01e03c6d&pid=1-s2.0-S0022437524000082-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Different but also alike? Ingroup-outgroup phenomena among cyclists and e-scooter riders\",\"authors\":\"Juliane Anke,&nbsp;Madlen Ringhand,&nbsp;Tibor Petzoldt\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jsr.2024.01.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><em>Problem:</em> In many countries, a new road user group, e-scooter riders, share the existing cycling infrastructure. The study aimed to investigate if an individual’s status as a cyclist or e-scooter rider affects their social identity and whether it results in ingroup favoritism or outgroup discrimination. <em>Method:</em> An online experiment involving 179 cyclists and 64 e–scooter riders was conducted, where they rated the behavior of ingroup or outgroup members in six traffic scenarios. <em>Results:</em> Participants rated dispositional attributions as more causally relevant than situational ones across all traffic scenarios. Cyclists and e–scooter riders were inclined to judge ingroup members' rule violations more harshly than those of outgroup members in terms of dispositional attribution ratings and punishment severity. For situational attributions, few indications of ingroup favoritism were observed for the e–scooter rider group. <em>Summary:</em> Findings suggest initial indications of considerate coexistence, from the perspective of social identity theory, between the two modes of transport, supporting current regulations on the use of cycling infrastructure by e–scooter riders. Indications of ingroup discrimination, however, suggest that safety campaigning may target to promote courtesy within the cyclist and e-scooter rider groups.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Safety Research\",\"volume\":\"89 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 331-342\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022437524000082/pdfft?md5=747dfe6a58dd112be3b6c83c01e03c6d&pid=1-s2.0-S0022437524000082-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Safety Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022437524000082\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ERGONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Safety Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022437524000082","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ERGONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

问题:在许多国家,新的道路使用者群体--电动摩托车骑行者--共享现有的自行车基础设施。本研究旨在调查个人的自行车或电动摩托车骑行者身份是否会影响其社会认同,以及是否会导致群体内偏好或群体外歧视。研究方法179名自行车骑行者和64名电动滑板车骑行者参加了在线实验,他们对六个交通场景中内群或外群成员的行为进行了评分。实验结果在所有交通场景中,参与者都认为处置性归因比情景性归因更具因果相关性。就处置归因评级和惩罚严重程度而言,骑自行车和电动摩托车的人倾向于对本群体成员的违规行为做出比外群体成员更严厉的判断。在情境归因方面,电动滑板车骑行者群体几乎没有观察到偏向本群体的迹象。总结:研究结果表明,从社会认同理论的角度来看,两种交通方式之间的共存有初步迹象,支持目前关于电动滑板车骑行者使用自行车基础设施的规定。然而,内群体歧视的迹象表明,安全宣传活动的目标可能是促进自行车和电动滑板车骑行者群体之间的礼让。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Different but also alike? Ingroup-outgroup phenomena among cyclists and e-scooter riders

Problem: In many countries, a new road user group, e-scooter riders, share the existing cycling infrastructure. The study aimed to investigate if an individual’s status as a cyclist or e-scooter rider affects their social identity and whether it results in ingroup favoritism or outgroup discrimination. Method: An online experiment involving 179 cyclists and 64 e–scooter riders was conducted, where they rated the behavior of ingroup or outgroup members in six traffic scenarios. Results: Participants rated dispositional attributions as more causally relevant than situational ones across all traffic scenarios. Cyclists and e–scooter riders were inclined to judge ingroup members' rule violations more harshly than those of outgroup members in terms of dispositional attribution ratings and punishment severity. For situational attributions, few indications of ingroup favoritism were observed for the e–scooter rider group. Summary: Findings suggest initial indications of considerate coexistence, from the perspective of social identity theory, between the two modes of transport, supporting current regulations on the use of cycling infrastructure by e–scooter riders. Indications of ingroup discrimination, however, suggest that safety campaigning may target to promote courtesy within the cyclist and e-scooter rider groups.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
174
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Safety Research is an interdisciplinary publication that provides for the exchange of ideas and scientific evidence capturing studies through research in all areas of safety and health, including traffic, workplace, home, and community. This forum invites research using rigorous methodologies, encourages translational research, and engages the global scientific community through various partnerships (e.g., this outreach includes highlighting some of the latest findings from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信