Khair Jadaan | Mohammad Abojaradeh | Ashraf Shaqadan* | Dua Abojaradeh | Imad Alshalout
OPEN ACCESS
The major objective of this research paper is to investigate the Traffic Safety culture among Jordanian drivers, and to identify common aggressive behaviors, and its association to diverse social factors. An online survey questionnaire was distributed among drivers in Jordan; samples were collected in the Amman area in 2019. The data analysis of the survey was analyzed using the statistical program SPSS. The survey questions were based on methods found in the (AAA foundation’s Annual Traffic Safety Culture). It was found that drivers in Jordan have high exposure to traffic accidents, where one in eight drivers has been injured in a traffic accident, and nearly one in three Jordanians knows someone killed in an accident. 75% of participants consider aggressive driving as a very serious threat, 60% have honked the vehicles horn excessively within 30 days, 36% often failed to signal when turning or stopping. The most common behavior for drivers during the last 30 days according to the survey is “speeding through yellow light 85%, followed by lack of Seat belt use 80%, and followed by Mobile phone use while driving78%, and followed by Speeding on highways 61%. Male drivers were more aggressive, drivers were more exposed to car accidents, they were 1.3 times to get involved in a vehicle damage accident, and four times as female to get involved in a severe injury accident. In addition, significant differences in behavior were found among drivers when compared under surveillance of police and traffic cameras, and when there is no surveillance. 88% of drivers would never cross the red light, 60% would never use the mobile phone, and 75% would never speed if they knew there was a camera or if police were around. Preventive countermeasures were recommended to increase the safety culture awareness of drivers in Jordan.
road safety, safety culture, aggressive driving, driver behavior, traffic accident, Jordan
Traffic accidents are being recognized as a major growing problem worldwide. Approximately 1.3 million people are dying each year worldwide, declaring road traffic accidents a leading cause of death internationally [1].
Road traffic accidents in Jordan has drastically increased in recent years, leading to a relatively low level of road safety across the country. With the increase of population and fleet number, it developed into a more severe problem. Statistics show that by the end of the year 2019, the population was estimated at 10.55 million people, with a 5.8% yearly vehicle increase rate for the past five years. In 2019, a total of 161,511 traffic accidents occurred, causing a total of 643 fatal deaths, 792 serious injuries, and 10,159 mild injuries [2].
Many factors contribute to this problem and one of these factors is the driver's behavior and the driver’s culture. The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that 94% to 96% of all motor vehicle accidents are caused by human error [3]. Human factors like attention and cognitive ability have important influence on risk of accidents when operating machines like small vehicles or complex machinery like railway trains [4, 5].
In Jordan, culture plays an enormous role in driving behaviors; their behavior has no educated values and no safety basis. Unsafe and aggressive driving behaviors are common among drivers, are serious threats to their personal safety, and can lead to fatal accidents; thus, they have been commonly practicing these habits for the past years causing it to become part of their culture. In Jordan drivers demonstrate a “Do as I say, not as I do” attitude.
An important law in Jordan decreasing fatal accidents is that There is zero tolerance policy on drink driving in Jordan. No amount of alcohol found to be in the blood is legal. Rare cases of driving and drinking are reported. If you're found guilty of consuming alcohol while driving you can face a fine, driving ban, or even imprisonment.
1.1 Aggressive driving
Aggressive driving is defined by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as “the behavior of an individual who commits a combination of moving traffic offenses so as to endanger other persons or property.” also called “road rage”, its any dangerous and negative behavior drivers participate in. Aggressive driving includes when a driver is drunk (already making poor decisions), suffering from a mental breakdown or emotional strain, or simply just late and needs to get somewhere fast. 12,610 injuries and 218 murders have been associated with road rage over a seven years period in the United States (Safe Motorist). About 66% of traffic mortalities are caused by aggressive driving [3], Road rage has been responsible for about 300 deaths since 2013 (NHTSA). 50% of drivers respond to the reckless acts of other drivers with aggressive behavior themselves (American Psychology Association) According to the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, aggressive driving played a role in 56% of fatal accidents between 2003 and 2007, most of which were attributed to excessive speed [6].
The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has implemented the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, which identifies actions that would fall under the category of aggressive driving, including Tailgating, improper lane changing, driving on a road shoulder, prohibited Passing. driving the vehicle in a reckless, careless manner. Changing speeds suddenly without changing lanes, failure to yield right of way, and speedy driving.
1.2 Culture definition
Culture, in relation with traffic safety, is defined as “the beliefs, values, norms, and things people use, which guide their social interactions in everyday life.” (1) Therefore, culture is fundamentally social, giving the main formation of structure that we base our communications with others. Different countries have different cultures. We all belong to many groups defined by gender, geography, ethnicity, religion, education, profession, politics. Each group of people are considered to have their own culture, consisting of the common or major beliefs, values, and norms of its associates.
1.2.1 Safety culture
The definition of Safety culture is “the implicit shared values and beliefs that determine the way in which the society organizes and acts” (1) in ways that affect safety, where “society” may refer to the entire country of Jordan; Safety may refer to a precise setting such as traffic safety or to a wider perspective that considers risks of diseases or injuries. Safety culture can be measured by observing the value and primacy the society gives to safety through its actions and policies. Also by the society’s normally accepted behaviors, and by the society’s actions regarding individuals violating these behavioral norms.
Culture and standards have strong impacts on the behavior of individuals. The road is a social place where individuals from diverse social backgrounds gather and interact with other road users in their cultural framework (AAA).
In safety culture, it becomes possible to find that people carry out what they know has to be done not because they have to, but because they want to.
From this point of view we can define the road safety culture as “how people behave when no one is watching” (AAA). Through the survey questionnaire, we will see how drivers behave differently under surveillance.
This survey is based on the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, which addresses the safety culture in the United States, as it relates to traffic safety, by introducing a stable research and educational program [7, 8]. The AAA Foundation has initiated a program of performing periodic surveys of public awareness, behaviours, and attitudes related to traffic safety. The established practice is in Canada, Australia, and other countries. it focuses on using information gained from the surveys to evaluate public knowledge of traffic safety issues and support for countermeasures. To investigate where additional public education efforts may or may not be required. To recognise major trends in public opinion that might be a concern in the safety community.
The study done by AAA Foundation [8] for Traffic Safety in the year 2014 “Traffic Safety Culture Index (January 2015)”, The Survey was done in 2014 for 24 states across the United States; the sample included 11,641 panelists for ages 19 and older. The results showed that most people believe that traffic safety is a serious issue that warrants attention. They identify unsafe driver behaviors such as speeding, talking on the mobile phones, texting and emailing, and red light running as serious threats to their personal safety. Five in six drivers support their state embracing a vision to reduce the number of people killed in accidents to zero, and most support for traffic safety laws.
66% support-applying restrictions (such as night driving or passenger restrictions) to all new drivers for a period of time for all ages.
Almost 19% report having been involved in a car accident which had an injury that needs medical attention, including 10% who have been seriously injured in a car accident themselves. 28.6% of drivers reported having had a friend or relative who was seriously injured or killed in a car accident. Overall 38% report having been involved in a serious accident, having had a friend or relative seriously injured or killed in an accident, or both. 82.0% believe that they drive somewhat or much more carefully than other drivers on the roads they drive.
2 in 3 drivers say that drinking alcohol and driving is serious threat to their personal safety and 97% say that they personally consider it unacceptable.
One in 8 drivers report having driven after drinking within the past 12 months, 8% said they did so more than once. More than half of drivers reported that people driving after using illegal drugs are a very serious threat. More than 2 in 3 drivers report talking on a mobile phone while driving within the past 30 days; 62% percent report doing this on more than one occasion, and 29% say they talk on their phone while driving fairly often or regularly. 52% of drivers say that drivers talking on phones are a very serious threat to their personal safety 66% percent of drivers say that they consider it unacceptable (42.2% completely unacceptable) for a driver to talk on a hand-held cell phone while driving. 78.6% of drivers say that drivers text messaging or emailing are a very serious threat to their personal safety; 96% say that they personally consider it unacceptable. Nearly half of drivers say they have driven 15mph over the speed limit on a freeway in the past month and 14% say they did so fairly often or regularly. More than 43.8% of drivers say that speeding on residential streets is a very serious threat to their personal safety, and 32.2% say this about drivers speeding on freeways. (94.0%) of drivers consider it unacceptable for a driver to drive through a light that had already turned red when they could have stopped safely. (35.6%) admit to having driven through a light that had just turned red in the past 30 days when they could have stopped safely, 22.7% report having done this more than once. 88.0% say it is unacceptable for a driver to drive without wearing his or her seatbelt (75.0% say its completely unacceptable). Even with strong social disapproval, nearly 1 in 5 drivers reported having driven without wearing their seatbelt in the past 30 days.
A study done in Jordan in 2014 by Abojaradeh et al. [9] about driver’s behavior and its effects of traffic safety, “The Effect of Driver Behavior Mistakes on Traffic Safety”, the study involved a survey distributed among drivers in Amman, Jordan. The study focused on aggressive driving and its effects on traffic accidents. The aggressive behavior included tailgating, weaving through traffic, wrong passing, improper lane changes (without a signal), not yielding the right of way to other drivers, blocking others from passing. Refusal to extend cooperation to motorists unable to merge or change lanes due to traffic conditions, speedy driving resulting in tailgating, frequent and sudden lane changes. Running stop signs and red lights. It also focused on drivers’ behavior that can provoke other drivers. Such as: Flashing headlights, continuous horn honking. staring at another driver to show disapproval, yelling, and gesturing. The main findings of the study were that aggressive driving plays a main role in car accidents in Jordan, causing road rage and aggression. Aggressive driving is more popular in Jordan than Western Countries. In addition, bad road conditions and traffic factors lead to more aggressive driving. The highest driving behavior ranked as aggressive by Jordanians was forcing a car off the roadway, deliberate obstruction of passing vehicles, excessive speed, running red lights, and tailgating. Beeping the horn and flashing headlights is not considered as aggressive among Jordanians. The results of the regression model about causes of traffic accidents were 1. close following and tailgating, 2. lane violations and zigzag driving or passing, 3. being unfocused, and distraction, 4. yield violations for other vehicles and pedestrians, 5. sudden turning and stopping; 6. wrong u turning and backing, 7. speeding over the speed limit, 8. violations of traffic signs and signals including running on red light.
A study done by Abojaradeh in Jordan 2015 [10] about causes of accidents. “Evaluation of driver behavior mistakes and their effects on improving traffic safety in Jordan”. the study’s main aim was to find a solution to reduce the frequency and severity of accidents. using a questionnaire to determine the main causes for car accidents. the data from the survey questionnaire were used in forming the regression models, it was found that aggressive behavior increases the chance of exposure to accidents and that the main causes of traffic accidents, injuries, and fatalities are related to driver behavior.
A study done by Magableh et al. [11] addressed culture on road safety in Jordan. The aim of the study was to study the road safety culture in Jordan to examine whether cultural norms and prevailing traditions were associated with driver attitudes and self-reported road behavior.
The survey included 545 drivers. Results indicate that drivers blame themselves and the government similarly for poor road safety outcomes. Drivers gave themselves higher compliance rates with traffic law than they performed in reality. Drivers complained about the unfairness of traffic police when they fined different drivers. Drivers reported that they treated or challenged traffic police harshly when they did get fined. Jordanian drivers consist of more male drivers than females leading to high levels of masculinity and aggressive attitudes among drivers that affects their behavior and risk taking on roads. Their culture is also reflected in their driving style. These issues can be addressed by changing the attitudes of drivers by stimulating courteous driving styles and respect for all road users.
The Tennessee Traffic Safety Culture Survey in 2011 [12] was done in the Tennessee State by UT Center for Transportation Research. The study used a survey to measure the attitudes about traffic safety issues and driving habits. A Telephone survey of 928 people in 2011 was conducted to find the following: they believe that traffic accidents are the leading causes of death. 41% of drivers feel less safe to drive than 5 years ago, and they feel that the most dangerous is distracted drivers and using the mobile phone while driving. They are mostly threatened by texting while driving and drinking (alcohol) and driving. While 1 out 5 drivers admit to texting while driving in the past 12 months. They support drivers 75 years and older to pass a test before renewing their driver's license. Also they support requiring teenage drivers to complete a driving training program before receiving their drivers license.
A study done by Jadaan et al. [13] focuses on understanding the cultural factors affecting road safety improvement and the implementation of the Safe System approach. the need to develop strategies for implementation of a Safe System approach.
The Safe System approach aims to create a road system that accepts human error. This includes: People make mistakes, we need to share responsibility, and we need to strengthen all parts of the system. The study recommends that Jordan needs a culture change in its approach to road safety, by the public, politicians and all stakeholders. The road safety strategy includes school education, media communication through safety campaigns, enforcement through utilizing new technology, planning safer roads, reviewing the speed limit setting procedures, ensuring the safety of vehicles before sale, ensuring that older drivers than 70 go through a safety program and ensuring their eligibility to drive. Also for new drivers to review the testing procedures and increase the minimum age for licensing. Enforce the laws to prohibit using mobile phones while driving in order to decrease distracted driving.
Many factors may lead to have different safety culture in the United States than in Jordan, the United States is a developed country while Jordan is developing country. The US government is more concerned with protecting individual’s safety. They have a more scientific approach to selecting countermeasures, they can get support and funding for these measures from legislatures, and there is easier implementation due to fewer decision-makers. Also the community is more accepting of government interventions. The results of this study varied in several parts from other countries. Jordanian drivers are more aggressive and have higher tempers. They view the seatbelt as a hassle, most drivers don’t wear it occasionally. They also think about the traffic laws as constraints not as a safety measure. The traffic congestion and small width roads have a huge impact on drivers leading to more aggressive driving.
The study objectives are: 1) To study the relationship between the drivers behavior and their exposure to accidents, 2) To identify the most common aggressive driving behavior that causes traffic accidents based on the survey questionnaire, 3) To analyze the aggressive drivers behavior and how it relates it to gender, 4) To compare driver behavior change under surveillance and without surveillance such as speeding in presence of police or radar, running a red light with a traffic camera, 5) To find the most contributing factors that cause drivers to practice aggressive behaviors while driving and raise awareness for drivers that safety culture is something they need to change within themselves as individuals for safer roads in Jordan.
Online survey questionnaire was distributed to a random representative sample of 960 road users in Amman City with a total respondent rate of 95%, the questionnaire was made available in English and Arabic, and respondents were able to complete it in the language of their choice. The sample size was calculated using the distribution method to give 95% confidence level, with a margin error of 5%. Data analysis is done using Microsoft Excel and SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) to analyze the results and evaluate the relationship between drivers' culture while driving with the other social variables.
The sample data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS, and the sample size was calculated online using this equation [14].
Sample Size $= n =\frac{Z^2 \times \sigma^2}{E^2}$ (1)
It was assumed that the confidence level=95%, margin of error =5%, population in Jordan = 10.1 million, z-score =1.96.
where:
σ = Standard deviation
E= Margin of error
Z = Confidence interval
The required sample size calculated=385 samples, the sample of this study 630, therefore meets the requirements.
3.1 The sample
These percentages are expected to represent general characteristics of the total population of Jordan.
3.2 Survey questionnaire
There are three main parts in the survey: The first is general social information, and the second part is to see how the drivers perceive 20 violations “How much of a threat to your personal safety are?” and the third part is “How often have you done the following acts within the last 30 days.” With 12 questions, the last part consists of questions about the factors that increase aggressive driving and the recommendation for best Countermeasures that can improve the safety culture for Jordanian drivers.
Weights were given for each questions choices:
0= Female
1= male
1= Not a threat, 2= Minor threat, 3=Serious threat, 4=Very serious threat
1=never, 2=only once, 3=rarely, 4=fairly often, 5=regularly
4.1 Aggressive driving
Table 1. How much of a threat to your personal safety are?
|
How much of a threat to your personal safety are? |
Very serious threat % |
Somewhat Serious threat % |
Minor threat % |
Not a threat % |
I don’t know% |
Weighted mean |
||
|
1 |
Sleepy and fatigued drivers |
94 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
|
3.92 |
|
|
2 |
Driving under the influence or alcohol or drugs |
89 |
9 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
3.86 |
|
|
3 |
Driving with child unrestraint |
88 |
8 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
3.83 |
|
|
4 |
Drivers speeding on residential streets |
87 |
10 |
2 |
1 |
|
3.82 |
|
|
5 |
Drivers running red lights |
85 |
11 |
3 |
1 |
|
3.8 |
|
|
6 |
People driving aggressively |
75 |
19 |
4 |
1 |
|
3.7 |
|
|
7 |
Drivers text messaging or e-mailing |
60 |
30 |
9 |
1 |
|
3.51 |
|
|
8 |
Drivers speeding on highways |
55 |
36 |
7 |
2 |
|
3.46 |
|
|
9 |
Not Yielding for pedestrians |
51 |
37 |
10 |
1 |
|
3.39 |
|
|
10 |
Wrong lane usage |
46 |
40 |
11 |
1 |
1 |
3.39 |
|
|
11 |
Wrong lane passing and overtaking |
61 |
33 |
6 |
1 |
|
3.33 |
|
|
12 |
Not Yielding on a roundabout |
42 |
44 |
12 |
1 |
|
3.27 |
|
|
13 |
Talking on mobile phone while driving |
35 |
47 |
16 |
2 |
1 |
3.15 |
|
|
14 |
Close Following |
33 |
45 |
18 |
|
|
3.13 |
|
|
15 |
Driving Wrong way |
38 |
36 |
21 |
3 |
1 |
3.12 |
|
|
16 |
Turning without using signals |
34 |
44 |
18 |
3 |
|
3.1 |
|
|
17 |
Wrong turning and U-turn |
34 |
38 |
22 |
5 |
|
3.09 |
|
|
18 |
Tailgating |
36 |
35 |
22 |
5 |
|
3.02 |
|
|
19 |
Driving without wearing seatbelts |
25 |
36 |
30 |
7 |
1 |
2.8 |
|
|
20 |
Drivers honking their horns excessively |
9 |
24 |
39 |
25 |
3 |
2.19 |
|
Table 2. Behavior in the past 30 days, how often have you?
|
|
In the past 30 days, how often have you…? |
Regularly |
Fairly often |
Rarely |
Just once |
Never |
Weighted mean |
|
1 |
Speed to pass yellow light |
55 |
16 |
14 |
0 |
15 |
3.96 |
|
2 |
Drive without wearing a seatbelt |
10 |
18 |
35 |
16 |
20 |
2.9 |
|
3 |
Used your mobile phone while driving |
9 |
15 |
36 |
17 |
22 |
2.72 |
|
4 |
Driven over the speed limit on a highway where there are no police or radars |
5 |
13 |
39 |
4 |
39 |
2.4 |
|
5 |
Honked your horn excessively |
4 |
8 |
41 |
6 |
40 |
2.27 |
|
6 |
Smoking and driving |
18 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
64 |
2.05 |
|
7 |
Read or sent a text message or e-mail while you were driving |
2.5 |
10 |
29 |
5 |
54 |
2.01 |
|
8 |
Driven when you were so tired and sleepy |
3 |
4 |
31 |
11 |
49 |
2 |
|
9 |
Used mobile phone when police are around |
2 |
6 |
26 |
6 |
60 |
1.85 |
|
10 |
Turned or stopped without using signals |
3 |
6 |
22 |
5 |
64 |
1.8 |
|
11 |
Parked the car and closed the street on someone |
1 |
5 |
17 |
11 |
66 |
1.61 |
|
12 |
Driven over the speed limit on a highway when police radar is around |
6 |
2 |
19 |
3 |
74 |
1.54 |
|
13 |
Crossed the red light that has no camera |
0 |
2 |
14 |
7 |
76 |
1.4 |
|
14 |
Crossed the red light that has a camera |
0 |
0 |
7 |
4 |
88 |
1.2 |
As shown in Table 2, the weighted mean represents the most frequent behavior done in the past 30 days with a weighted mean of 3.96, the top behavior for drivers was speeding to pass a yellow light. This is very common in Jordan because of traffic congestion. In addition, most people do not like waiting on a red light. The second common violation is not wearing the seatbelt with 2.9. Drivers in Jordan have a hard time wearing the seatbelt; it is something they were never used to. Third was using a phone while driving, this behavior is very dangerous and can increase the risk to car accidents.
4.2 Speed, red light and phone
4.2.1 Mobile phone use and texting
More than three out of four drivers reported talking on the phone while driving in the past month, and one in four say they do so fairly often or regularly if no police is present, on the contrary in presence of police 60% of drivers would never use mobile phone while driving. 60% of drivers view texting and driving as a very serious threat to their own personal safety, but nearly 46% admit to texting or emailing while driving in the past month as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Mobile phone use with surveillance and without
|
In the past 30 days, how often have you…? Talked on a cell phone while you were driving |
Police or cameras surveillance |
Without police or cameras surveillance |
|
Never |
60 % |
22.0% |
|
Only once |
7.2% |
16.9% |
|
Rarely |
25.6% |
36.4% |
|
Fairly often |
5.5% |
15.5% |
|
Regularly |
2.3% |
9.0% |
As mentioned in the abstract section, it will be rather easy to follow these rules as long as you just replace the “content” here without modifying the "form".
4.3 Speeding
Speeding on Highways is common. More than half of drivers 60% say they have driven over the speed limit in the past month, and 55% consider it a very serious threat to speed on Main highways and 87% consider it very serious to speed in Residential areas. On the contrary, 73% say they have never driven over speed in presence of Police or radar in the past month as shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Speeding under surveillance vs. no surveillance
|
In the past 30 days, how often have you…? Driven over the speed limit |
Police or cameras surveillance |
Without police or cameras surveillance |
|
Never |
75% |
39.5% |
|
Only once |
4.3% |
4.3% |
|
Rarely |
18.5% |
38.4% |
|
Fairly often |
2.0% |
12.6% |
|
Regularly |
1.7% |
5.2% |
4.4 Red-light running
Most drivers 85% view it as very serious threat to drive through a traffic red light when they could have stopped safely; however, one out of five admit doing this in the past month if there was no police or no traffic cameras, and one out of ten would ever cross a red light if it has a camera (Table 5).
Table 5. Red light with surveillance and without
|
In the past 30 days, how often have you…? Driven through a red-light signal |
Presence of police or cameras |
Without police or cameras |
|
Never |
88.3% |
76.5% |
|
Only once |
4.6% |
7.2% |
|
Rarely |
6.6% |
14.3% |
|
Fairly often |
.6% |
1.4% |
|
Regularly |
0 |
.6% |
4.5 Statistical analysis
Data analysis was done using the SPSS program, correlation was done to include all the variables to see if there is any relationship between drivers behavior and social variables.
4.6 Factors affecting aggressive driving
There are many factors that contribute to driver’s behavior and these are some of the factors according to the participants of the survey.
4.7 Safety culture countermeasures
According to the survey, 56% participants strongly believe that the best thing to improve drivers behavior is by putting more traffic cameras and more surveillance. Moreover, 53% agree that more traffic laws and ticketing will help in improving the driver behavior, 48% believe that making the driving test harder will result in better drivers. 42% strongly support educational awareness for safe driving and 40% strongly support the social media safety awareness messages.
To integrate advanced technology including Intelligent transportation system (ITS) in vehicles before sale and on roads to allow drivers to develop safer habits. Like wearing the seat belt and n ot using mobile phones while driving.
Appendix 1. Survey Form Distributed on Drivers
[1] WHO. (2022). Road Traffic Injuries, Fact Sheets. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries, accessed on Mar. 12, 2022.
[2] Jordanian Traffic Institute JTI, Public Security Directorate PSD, Traffic Report. (2019). https://www.psd.gov.jo/images/docs/TrafficRep2019.pdf, accessed on Mar. 12, 2022.
[3] NHTSA. (2019). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersy, Washington Dc 20590. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving, accessed on Mar. 12, 2022.
[4] Alnhoud, O.T., Shaqadan, A., Alkassbeh, R. (2021). Developing framework for safety analysis and risk assessment in construction site environment in Jordan. Structural Integrity and Life, 21(2): 135-145.
[5] Al-Kasasbeh, R.T., Korenevskiy, N., Aikeyeva, A.A., Rodionova, S.N., Maksim, I., Alshamasim, M.S., Shaqadan, A. (2021). Biotech scheme for the prediction occupational disease of the railway locomotive crews. In: Kalra, J., Lightner, N.J., Taiar, R. (eds.), Advances in Human Factors and Ergonomics in Healthcare and Medical Devices. AHFE 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol. 263. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80744-3_29
[6] American Physiological Association (APA). (2014). The fast and the furious psychologists figure out who gets road rage and find ways to calm them down. https://www.apa.org/topics/anger/road-rage, accessed on Mar. 12, 2022.
[7] AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, 2014 Traffic Safety Culture Index. (2015). 607 14th Street, NW, Suite 201 Washington, DC 20005. www.aaafoundation.org, accessed on Mar. 12, 2022.
[8] AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. (2015). Improving Traffic Safety Culture in the United States: The Journey Forward. Washington, DC: AAA traffic-safety culture, 227240.
[9] Abojaradeh, M., Jrew, K., Abojaradeh, D. (2009). Traffic accidents regression prediction models in Amman Area. The 4th Conference of the Jordan Society for Scientific Research, Jordan.
[10] Abojaradeh, M. (2015). Evaluation of driver behavior mistakes and their effects on improving traffic safety in Jordan. Civil and Environmental Research, 7(3): 23-35.
[11] Magableh, F., Grzebieta, R., Job, R.F.S. (2013). The impact of culture on road safety in Jordan. Transport and Road Safety (TARS) Research, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
[12] 2011 Tennessee Traffic Safety Culture Survey UT Center, UT Center for Transportation Research and The Center for Applied Research and Evaluation.
[13] Jadaan, K., Zeater, S., Braizat, E., Msallam, M. (2012). A safe system approach for driving down the road toll. Sudan Engineering Society Journal, 58(1).
[14] Garber, N.J., Hoel, L.A. (2010). Traffic and Highway Engineering. 4th SI Edition, USA