1. Fatalistic Beliefs, Accident Explanations, and Safety- Related Behaviors Robert NGUEUTSA * ngueutsa@yahoo.fr Dongo Rémi KOUABENAN* remi.kouabenan@upmf-grenoble.fr *Université Pierre Mendès-France, Grenoble 2, France Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012

2. Introduction 1/2  This study deals with the role of beliefs in understanding safety- related behaviors (Norenzayan & Lee, 2010; Slovic et al., 1981).  Beliefs as a predictor of behaviors has been highlighted several times in the literature (Ajzen, 1985; Bandura, 1977; Becker & Rosenstock, 1987; Dejoy, 1996; Rogers, 1983; Schwarzer, 1992), but few empirical data shows it.  The naive causal explanation of accident (Kouabenan, 1999) offers an interesting framework to study beliefs.This approach states that, the spontaneous explanation of an accident can help to understand peoples’ behaviors towards risks.  According to Kouabenan (1999, 2007, 2009), because of the uncertainty and the complexity proper to the environment or the situation of the accident, individuals tend to explain it by referring to their beliefs. Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012

3. Introduction 2/2  Beliefs affect an individual’s conception of accident’ causation and his behaviors, because he tends to behave according to the causal inferences he makes (Kelley, 1972)  Fatalistic beliefs is a form of belief which promote external causal explanations and less safe behaviors (Kouabenan, 1998; Peltzer & Renner, 2003).  Explaining accident by external factors seems to show a sort of fatalism.  The objective of this paper is firstly to analyze the effect of fatalism and causal explanation of accident on traffic safety-related behaviors  Secondly, we postulate that, the effect of fatalistic beliefs on traffic safety- related behaviors is mediated by external causal explanation of accidents. Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012

4. Methodology 1/2 A study carried out with a questionnaire in Cameroon Characteristics of the sample (N = 525, mean age = 31.47) n (%) Male319 (74.2) Female132 (25.8) Drivers136 (27.4) Students in driving school25 (5) Pedestrians142 (28.2) Traffic agents (gendarms, policemen, highway engineers) 102 (20.4) Economic operators of the traffic sector (bosses of travelling enterprises, insurance agents, etc.) 95 (19) Oral communication presented at the 30 th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012

5. Methodology 2/2 Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012 Variable measuredItemsMα Fatalistic beliefs (Kouabenan, 1998) « traffic accidents are due to bad luck, nothing can be done »: 1(totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree) 111.88.81 Naive causal explanations: 1(not important at all) to 4(very important)54.92 -Explanations internal to drivers: « over speed»23.26.83 Explanations internal to pedestrians: « neglecting crosswalk by pedestrians » 6-.10.74 - External explanations: « unsignalized intersections»25-.73.84 * Controllable external explanations: « bad state of the road»18.77 * Not controllable external explanations: « curse, fate»7.81 Safety-related behaviors: 1(totally disagree) to 4(totally agree)292.91.84 - Unsafe behaviors: « When I feel tired while driving during a travel, I take a stimulant that keeps me awake until destination» 15.84 - Safe behaviors: «When I take a taxi and realize along the way that the driver smells alcohol, I kindly ask him to let me drop off» 14.82

6. Results (1/2) Descriptive analyses Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July, 22-27, 2012 Fatalistic beliefs Explanations internal to drivers Explanations internal to pedestrians External explanations Safety-related behaviors Male1.88.24-.08 -.742.92 Female1.83.30-.15-.712.88 Drivers1.88.25-.08-.812.91 Students in driving school 2.00.22-.11-.642.86 Pedestrians1.75.31-.14-.892.99 Traffic agents1.89.28-.10-.622.95 Economic operators 1.99.14-.01-.502.75

7. Results 2/2 Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July, 22-27, 2012 safety-related behaviors Mtp Fatalistic beliefs Non fatalistic participants3.02 6.79.001 Fatalistic participants2.79 Explanations internal to drivers More internal participants2.97 6.98.001 Less internal participants2.68 Explanations internal to pedestrians More internal participants2.84 3.22.001 Less internal participants2.96 External causal explanations Controllable causal explanations’ group 2.96 8.39.001 Uncontrollable causal explanations’ group 2.56

8. Results 2/2 Fatalistic beliefs External causal explanations Safety-related behaviors β =.30**β = -.28** (β = -.15**) Partial mediation of the effect of fatalistic beliefs by external causal explanations Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012 β = -.24**

9. DISCUSSION  Fatalistic individuals tend to explain accidents by uncontrollable factors (fate) which leads them to adopt less safe behaviors on the road (Kouabenan, 1998; Peltzer & Renner, 2003).  Explaining accidents by external and uncontrollable factors appears as one of the way of expressing fatalistic beliefs as shown in the mediation results.  Curiously, the economic operators of the traffic sector in Cameroon, are the most fatalistic and the less cautious on the road. Furthermore, they tend to explain accidents more by invisible forces (curse, anger of ancestors, bewitchment, evil spirits on some sections of the road, etc.) than others causal factors. Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July, 22-27, 2012

10. Conclusion The results of this study show that one must take into account the beliefs of recipients while conceiving and communicating safety measures. Instigating the explanation of one’s accident can be an opportunity to clarify some objective causes of accidents. It can also leads to the reduction of the fatalistic conception of the causality of traffic accidents. Targeting preventive measures on specific groups is highly recommended. Economic operators of traffic sector in Cameroon are more concerned. It is urgent to convince them that accidents can be prevented by controlling objective causes and to encourage them to invest in road safety. Oral communication presented at the 30th International Congress of Psychology (ICP), Cape Town, South Africa, July 22-27, 2012

11. Thank you for your kind attention!