Road Rage Linked To Automobile Bumper Stickers

Ponca City, We Love You sends news of a study by Colorado State University psychologist William Szlemko that recorded whether people had added seat covers, bumper stickers, special paint jobs, stereos, or plastic dashboard toys to their cars. Szlemko found a link between road rage and the number of personalized items on or in people's vehicles. "The number of territory markers predicted road rage better than vehicle value, condition, or any of the things that we normally associate with aggressive driving,' says Szlemko. What's more, only the number of bumper stickers, and not their content, predicted road rage... Szlemko suggests that this territoriality may encourage road rage because drivers are simultaneously in a private space (their car) and a public one (the road). 'We think they are forgetting that the public road is not theirs, and are exhibiting territorial behavior that normally would only be acceptable in personal space,' the researcher says.

Comments

Re:in other news

[PakProtector]

I thought we did have a cure for cancer? The same one as the cure for Haemophilia.

You let the people predisposed to both die before reproducing.

Bad Driver Advertising

[vodevil]

I, for one, love the fact that a lot of the really bad drivers identify themselves with one particular bumper sticker - Bush/Cheney. To me, that's advertising "stay away from me, i'm a crappy driver."

Re:Other people's stickers?

[Corporate Troll]

Well, see that's the difference between a democrat and a republican: a democrat only thinks of it, a republican actually does it....

;-)/p>

Re:Not hard

[aproposofwhat]

No - because I have no beef with them.

If they were following the highway code and got hurt, then it's either the fault of the driver who hit them, or their own fault for getting in somebody's blind spot / passing a lorry on the inside while turning left / doing any manner of stupid things that I regularly see cyclists do that aren't illegal, but are stupid.

So - no, I won't apologise.

And 'if a bike hits a car guess who suffers most' sums up exactly why cyclists should be more aware of the world around them, and not expect everyone else to cater for their ignorant behaviour on the road.

IOW - piss off, you sanctimonious git.

Re:Makes me wish I had a bumper

[sumdumass]

I think you might be confused, Inversely means opposite not direct.

You see, you talk like you got balls but your failure to act tells us all what is up.

Re:what about the obvious ?

[Silicon Jedi]

Oh, so it's science like evolution or cosmology.

Re:IQ and bumper stickers

[aarggh]

And so far as i'm concerned, ANY of the "**** On Board" stickers automatically make you a target of derision.

Re:Other people's stickers?

[ScentCone]

They take a few sentences and attribute an entire ideology, that could in no way be derived from what the person actually said, and then go on a rant against that ideology when the ideology in fact exists only in their own heads.

Really! And you don't find that to be true of loons on the left, as well? People (on the left) will encounter one aspect of my life (say, my habit of taking dogs and a shotgun out in the field and putting game birds in my freezer for nice dinners) and immediately launch into a first-rate Obama-esque dissertation about my clinging to guns and Jebus, etc.

Now, given the general demographic here, and the poster's rabid hatred for Bush (you'll note that unlike you, there was no context given about stupidity, etc., just blanket hatred), and his disengenuous attempt to sound meek (gosh, he just wouldn't know how to key a car - hysterical!), do you really think it's unreasonable to make a calculated assumption about the idealogical/political bent of the poster? Anyone who's comfortable talking about their urge to vandalize on seeing Bush's name, but who does not feel obligated to provide any context beyond that, is himself making some assumptions about how his position/idealogy will be understood. Since most people on the left who hate him so much are very comfortable just assuming that everyone does (this is my experience, hearing the way such people start such conversations), I think it's safe to say this isn't a disgruntled fiscal conservative talking, or someone who thinks he hasn't been harsh enough the stem cell issue, etc.