Traffic as a social dilemma? Viewing road user behavior through a prosocial lens

Ibrahim Ozturk; Daniel Farrelly

doi:10.55329/mjpc6260

Authors

İbrahim Öztürk University of Leeds, the United Kingdom https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5113-1225
Daniel Farrelly University of Worcester, the United Kingdom https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1505-686X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55329/mjpc6260

Keywords:

prosociality, road users, social dilemma, traffic behavior

Abstract

Traffic serves as a context where road users engage in various interactions, with the outcomes of these bearing significant implications for the safety of all involved. While traditional research on road user behavior has predominantly focused on risky behaviors, there has been an increasing emphasis on prosocial, or positive, behaviors. This paper posits that the road environment constitutes a complex social dilemma, wherein individual self-interest frequently conflicts with collective safety and efficiency. By integrating theoretical insights from literature on altruism and prosociality, including distinctions between altruistic (self-sacrificing) and mutualistic (mutually beneficial) behaviors, we advocate for a more profound conceptual understanding of prosociality within traffic contexts. Future research directions are explored, encompassing practical interventions, such as the implications for automated vehicle technologies. Ultimately, the paper proposes that enhanced theoretical clarity regarding prosocial driving can substantially contribute to the development of more effective policies and safer road environments.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

İbrahim Öztürk, University of Leeds, the United Kingdom

İbrahim Öztürk serves as a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, and possesses a PhD in traffic and transport psychology from Middle East Technical University. His research primarily investigates driver behaviors, stereotypes in driving, traffic safety culture, and individual differences in driver behaviors, as well as the interaction between road users and vehicle technology across different cultures.

CRediT contribution: Conceptualization, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Daniel Farrelly, University of Worcester, the United Kingdom

Daniel Farrelly received his PhD in social psychology at Newcastle University. He is currently a principal lecturer at the University of Worcester. His research interests are in the social aspects of prosocial behavior, with a particular emphasis on their evolutionary perspectives. His research focuses on the applications of this to domains such as sustainability, pro-environmental behavior, and traffic behavior.

CRediT contribution: Conceptualization, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

References

Bhogal, M. S., Farrelly, D., & Galbraith, N. (2019). The role of prosocial behaviors in mate choice: A critical review of the literature. Current Psychology, 38, 1062-1075. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00308-8

Borau, S., Elgaaied-Gambier, L., & Barbarossa, C. (2021). The green mate appeal: Men’s pro-environmental consumption is an honest signal of commitment to their partner. Psychology & Marketing, 38, 266-285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21321

Boyd, R., Gintis, H., Bowles, S., & Richerson, P. J. (2003). The evolution of altruistic punishment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 3531-3535. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0630443100

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2011). A cooperative species: Human reciprocity and its evolution. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691151250.001.0001

Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Russell Sage Foundation. xv-550.

Cleij, D., de Zwart, R., & Jansen, R. J. (2025). Come together: an exploration on social driving behaviour of automated vehicles. Traffic Safety Research, 9, e000088-e000088. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55329/wgem5787

De Winter, J., & Dodou, D. (2010). The Driver Behaviour Questionnaire as a predictor of accidents: A meta-analysis. Journal of Safety Research, 41, 463-470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2010.10.007

Farrelly, D. (2013). Altruism as an indicator of good parenting quality in long term relationships: Further investigations using the mate preferences towards altruistic traits scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153, 395-398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2013.768595

Farrelly, D., & Bhogal, M. S. (2021). The value of pro-environmental behaviour in mate choice. Personality and Individual Differences, 179, 110964. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110964

Farrelly, D., Bhogal, M. S., & Badham, L. (2024). The email conservation task: Testing the validity of an online measure of direct pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 99, 102442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102442

Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415, 137-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/415137a

Gintis, H., Smith, E., & Bowles, S. (2001). Costly Signaling and Cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 213, 103-119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.2001.2406

Ge, Y., Cao, R., & Qu, W. (2025). I want to be nice, but I’m about to be late: The impact of social mindfulness and time pressure on prosocial driving. Traffic Injury Prevention, 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2025.2486578

Granié, M., Pannetier, M., & Guého, L. (2013). Developing a self-reporting method to measure pedestrian behaviors at all ages. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 50, 830-839. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.07.009

Harris, P. B., Houston, J. M., Vazquez, J. A., Smither, J. A., Harms, A., Dahlke, J. A., & Sachau, D. A. (2014). The Prosocial and Aggressive Driving Inventory (PADI): A self-report measure of safe and unsafe driving behaviors. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 72, 1-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.05.023

Haué, J. B., & Merlhiot, G. (2024). How do Automated Vehicles Influence Other Road Users and Sometimes Elicit Uncivil Behaviors?. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 374-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3640792.3675715

Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., McElreath, R., Alvard, M., Barr, A., Ensminger, J., Henrich, N. S., Hill, K., Gil-White, F., Gurven, M., Marlowe, F. W., Patton, J. Q., & Tracer, D. (2005). “Economic man” in cross-cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(6), 795-815. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05000142

Herrmann, B., Thöni, C., & Gächter, S. (2008). Antisocial Punishment Across Societies. Science, 319, 1362-1367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1153808

Jensen, K. (2016). Prosociality. Current Biology, 26, R748-R752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.07.025

Kaye, S., Rodwell, D., Watson-Brown, N., Rose, C., & Buckley, L. (2022). Road users’ engagement in prosocial and altruistic behaviors: A systematic review. Journal of Safety Research, 82, 342-351. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2022.06.010

Kim, S., Mehrotra, S., Akash, K., Misu, T., & Lee, J. D. (2024). Prosociality Matters: How Does Prosocial Behavior in Interdependent Situations Influence the Well-being and Cognition of Road Users?. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 395-404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3640792.3675710

Knobel, M., Hassenzahl, M., Männlein, S., Lamara, M., Schumann, J., Eckoldt, K., & Butz, A. (2013). Become a member of the last gentlemen: designing for prosocial driving. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, 60-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2513506.2513513

Lange, F. (2024). What is measured in pro-environmental behavior research?. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 98, 102381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102381

Larson, L. R., Stedman, R. C., Cooper, C. B., & Decker, D. J. (2015). Understanding the multi-dimensional structure of pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 112-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.004

Lewis, I., Rodwell, D., Gordon, N., & McDonald, M. (2025). Examining the effects of road safety advertising that encourages positive, prosocial driving behaviours. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 115, 103366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2025.103366

Li, Y., Zhang, X., Zeng, X., Qin, K., & Gao, Y. (2024). Influence mechanism of the urban traffic climate on prosocial driving behavior: The combined role of rational, affective and moral factors. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 104, 118-135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2024.05.022

Liu, P. (2024). Social interactions between automated vehicles and human drivers: A narrative review. Ergonomics, 1-20.

Markkula, G., Madigan, R., Nathanael, D., Portouli, E., Lee, Y. M., Dietrich, A., & Merat, N. (2020). Defining interactions: A conceptual framework for understanding interactive behaviour in human and automated road traffic. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 21, 728-752. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2020.1736686

Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2010). The environmental attitudes inventory: A valid and reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 80-94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.001

Nandavar, S., Lewis, I., & White, K. (2019). Understanding drivers’ altruistic driving decisions: A theoretically guided investigation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 62, 212-227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.12.017

Nowak, M. A. (2006). Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation. Science, 314, 1560-1563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1133755

Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (1998). Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature, 393, 573-577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/31225

Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (2005). Evolution of indirect reciprocity. Nature, 437, 1291-1298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04131

Özkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2005). A new addition to DBQ: Positive Driver Behaviours Scale. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 8, 355-368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2005.04.018

Öztürk, İ., & Öz, B. (2021). Investigating young male and female road users’ behaviour as pedestrians and drivers. Psikoloji Çalışmaları/Studies in Psychology, 41, 581-614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26650/SP2020-0045

Öztürk, İ., Tümer, E., & Öz, B. (2024). Exploring the relationship between traffic resilience and driver behaviors through traffic climate. Traffic Safety Research, 6, e000039-e000039. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55329/trjs3850

Palomo-Vélez, G., Tybur, J. M., & Van Vugt, M. (2021). Is green the new sexy? Romantic of conspicuous conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 73, 101530. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101530

Putnam, R. D. (1993). What makes democracy work?. National Civic Review, 82(2), 101-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ncr.4100820204

Quante, L., Stoll, T., Baumann, M., Diera, A., Földes-Cappellotto, N., Jipp, M., & Schießl, C. (2024). Measuring and Describing Cooperation Between Road Users—Results from CoMove. Cooperatively Interacting Vehicles: Methods and Effects of Automated Cooperation in Traffic, Cham: Springer International Publishing. 565-608. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60494-2_20

Reason, J., Manstead, A., Stradling, S., Baxter, J., & Campbell, K. (1990). Errors and violations on the roads: a real distinction?. Ergonomics, 33, 1315-1332. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139008925335

Romano, A., Saral, A. S., & Wu, J. (2022). Direct and indirect reciprocity among individuals and groups. Current Opinion in Psychology, 43, 254-259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.003

Scott-Phillips, T. C., Dickins, T. E., & West, S. A. (2011). Evolutionary Theory and the Ultimate–Proximate Distinction in the Human Behavioral Sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 38-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393528

Scott-Sharoni, S. T., Mehrotra, S., Salubre, K., Song, M., Misu, T., & Akash, K. (2024). Can we enhance prosocial behavior? Using post-ride feedback to improve micromobility interactions. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 294-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3640792.3675739

Sahin Ippoliti, H., Trilck, N., Koelle, M., & Boll, S. (2023). Please, Go Ahead! Fostering Prosocial Driving with Sympathy-Eliciting Automated Vehicle External Displays. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7(MHCI), 1-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3604265

Shen, B., Ge, Y., Qu, W., Sun, X., & Zhang, K. (2018). The different effects of personality on prosocial and aggressive driving behaviour in a Chinese sample. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 56, 268-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.04.019

Şimşekoğlu, Ö. (2015). How do attitudes, personality traits, and driver behaviors relate to pedestrian behaviors?: A Turkish case. Traffic Injury Prevention, 16, 84-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2014.880785

Sung, E. J., Chung, H., Kim, K., & You, J. (2019). Honk? Talk! Designing Driver-to-Driver Communication Methods for Social Driving. Companion Publication of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2019 Companion, 295-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3301019.3323913

Trivers, R. (1971). The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35-57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/406755

UN Decade of Sustainable Transport 2026-2035 (2026). UN Decade of Sustainable Transport 2026-2035, United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Useche, S. A., Alonso, F., Boyko, A., Buyvol, P., Castañeda, I., & Siebert, F. (2023). Cross-culturally approaching cycling safety from a behavioural perspective: A study in 19 countries. Transportation Research Procedia, 72, 4143-4150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2023.11.361

Useche, S. A., Montoro, L., Tomas, J. M., & Cendales, B. (2018). Validation of the Cycling Behavior Questionnaire: A tool for measuring cyclists' road behaviors. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 1021-1030. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.08.003

Vandroux, R., Granié, M., Jay, M., Sueur, C., & Pelé, M. (2022). The pedestrian behaviour scale: A systematic review of its validation around the world. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 165, 106509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106509

Vlasceanu, M., Doell, K. C., Bak-Coleman, J. B., Todorova, B., Berkebile-Weinberg, M. M., Grayson, S. J., & Lutz, A. E. (2024). Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries. Science Advances, 10, eadj5778. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/cr5at

Walker, I., Tapp, A., & Davis, A. (2023). Motonormativity: How social norms hide a major public health hazard. International Journal of Environment and Health, 11, 21-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJENVH.2023.10060994

Wallén Warner, H., Özkan, T., Lajunen, T., & Tzamalouka, G. (2011). Cross-cultural comparison of drivers’ tendency to commit different aberrant driving behaviours. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14, 390-399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2011.04.006

Ward, N. J., Finley, K., Otto, J., Kack, D., Gleason, R., & Lonsdale, T. (2020). Traffic safety culture and prosocial driver behavior for safer vehicle-bicyclist interactions. Journal of Safety Research, 75, 24-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2020.07.003

Wyss, A. M., Knoch, D., & Berger, S. (2022). When and how pro-environmental attitudes turn into behavior: The role of costs, benefits, and self-control. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 79, 101748. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101748

Xu, J., Liu, J., Qu, W., Ge, Y., Sun, X., & Zhang, K. (2018). Comparison of pedestrian behaviors between drivers and non-drivers in Chinese sample. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 1053-1060. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.05.034

Yılmaz, Ş., & Öz, B. (2025). Redefining positive driver behaviors: Development of the Multidimensional Positive Driver Behavior Questionnaire (M − PDBQ) and examining it in relation to driving and safety outcomes. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 113, 14-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2025.04.014

Yu, Z., Yu, T., Ge, Y., & Qu, W. (2023). The effect of perceived global stress and altruism on prosocial driving behavior, yielding behavior, and yielding attitude. Traffic Injury Prevention, 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2023.2191765

Zahavi, A. (1995). Altruism as a Handicap: The Limitations of Kin Selection and Reciprocity. Journal of Avian Biology, 26, 1-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3677205