Explaining affective polarization between road users: The role of identity, personality and attributions

• Study explores affective polarization among Belgian road users (N = 2,905). • Strong group identity lowers polarization toward thar road user group. • Seeing others as “all the same” raises polarization toward cyclists. • Blaming individuals boosts polarization toward cyclists and e-scooter users. • Agreeableness consistently reduces affective polarization across road user groups. Despite signs of growing affective polarization between road users in various European countries, the topic has received little attention within the field of traffic safety research. This study investigates affective polarization among Belgian road users, drawing on social identity theory, attribution theory, and the Big Five personality framework. Using an online survey of 2,905 participants, emotional biases among car/van drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, and e-scooter users are examined. The findings reveal substantial affective polarization, particularly toward e-scooter users and (recreational) sportive cyclists. Stronger identification with a road user group consistently reduces polarization toward that group, while perceiving groups of road users as homogeneous heightens polarization, especially toward cyclists. Internal attributions for inappropriate behavior – attributing faults to personality rather than situational factors – are associated with greater polarization, but only toward cyclists and e-scooter users. Among personality traits, agreeableness emerges as the most robust and consistent inhibitor of affective polarization. Structural equation modeling provides limited evidence that attributions mediate the effects of social identification and personality traits. This study is among the first to systematically examine affective polarization among road users and highlights the significant roles of group identification, attributional processes and personality in shaping emotional intergroup dynamics on the road. Further research is needed to explore the behavioral consequences of affective polarization and to inform interventions promoting traffic safety and mutual tolerance.