Determinants of Emotional Experiences in Traffic Situations ... - OPUS

The Emotional Spectrum in Traffic Situation 58!
2.3.2.2.3 Testing H3
In goal promoting situations positive emotions are more intense than in goal blocking situations.
In the first study even the outcomes of goal promoting situations tended to be (slightly) negative due
to the low contrast between promoted and blocked goals (every situation had at least one negative
aspect). The newly designed goal congruent situations generated entirely positive outcomes, and so
five emotions (happiness, satisfaction, amusement, relief and hope) could be analysed. In order to
reduce the complexity of the analysis, the first three emotions were combined. The mean correlation
between them over the course of the sixteen scenarios was r = .41 (p < .001) with a range of r = .28 to
.57 and a Cronbach’s-Alpha at α = .68. Therefore grand means and standard deviations for emotional
intensity were calculated, labelled as a “feel-good” construct of emotion and used for in-depth analysis
(Figure 9 and table 10). Naturally, those positive emotions were only present in goal-promoting
!
situations (F (1, 186) = 404.87; p < .001; η ! = .69) Furthermore, the blame factor affected the
occurrence of those emotions: The intensities of positive emotions were highest if the (positive)
change in the situation was because of the generic circumstances (e.g. perfect road conditions on a
highway or avoiding a traffic jam) (M = 1.43, SD = 1.70) and lowest if the participant actively
influenced the goal achievement of other drivers (e.g. due to considerate driving) (M = 0.40,
SD = 0.67). This constituted the only interaction effect for this emotional cluster (F (3, 558) = 296.04;
!
p < .001; η ! = .62) (Figure 9).
The same pattern of influence for situational variables could be observed for the emotion relief. The
means were highest in goal promoting situations with no specific persons involved (circumstanceblame)
(F (3, 558) = 171.21; p < .001; η ! = .48) with M = 2.57 (SD = 2.11) and M = 1.49 (SD = 1.98),
!
respectively (Figure 10). Furthermore, the higher mean in the arrival context (avoiding a traffic jam)
compared to the safety context (perfect road conditions) constituted a three-way interaction (F (3, 558)
= 29.91; p < .001; η ! ! = .14).
The emotion of hope was only influenced by the blame factor (F (3, 558) = 55.50; p < .001;
!
η ! = .23), with higher reported means in circumstance-blame situations (M = 0.38; SD = 1.05)
compared to all other variations of blame (M = 0.03; SD = 0.22) (Figure 11).