Martin Nicolleau
email: martin.nicolleau@univ-eiffel.fr

Nicolas Mascret

Cécile Martha

Claire Naude

Thierry Serre

Isabelle Ragot

Nicolleau Martin

Isabelle Ragot-Court

Implicit theories in driving: Scale development, validation, and predictive role on violations and driving self-efficacy

Keywords: Entity beliefs, incremental beliefs, accidents, risky driving, driving behavior

published or not. The documents may come

Introduction

Worldwide, the number of car user fatalities is estimated at 392,904 people in 2016 and this number is increasing each year (World Health Organization, 2018). Consequently, road safety may be considered a major global issue. In France, 3,239 people died on the road in 2019, including 1,621 car drivers [START_REF] Onisr | Accidentalité routière 2019-Estimations au 31janvier[END_REF], which is the leading cause of death among 18-24-year-olds. In 90% of cases, human error is involved [START_REF] Van Eslande | L'erreur humaine dans les scénarios d'accident : Cause ou conséquence? 66[END_REF] as well as risky behaviors [START_REF] Reason | Errors and violations on the roads : A real distinction?[END_REF]. To better understand what may influence and motivate drivers to adopt risky behaviors, a large body of research has studied their selfreported psychological characteristics, such as sensation seeking [START_REF] Jonah | Sensation seeking and risky driving : A review and synthesis of the literature[END_REF], self-efficacy [START_REF] Boccara | Time course of drivingskill self-assessments during French driver training[END_REF], or anger [START_REF] Delhomme | Personality predictors of speeding in young drivers : Anger vs. sensation seeking[END_REF]. But some theoretical frameworks

have not yet penetrated the driving domain. For instance, it has been shown that beliefs about human abilities, called implicit theories, have an influence on cognition, affect, and behavior [START_REF] Dweck | Self-theories : Their Role in Motivation, Personnality, and Development[END_REF]. This theoretical framework has been widely developed in the last 30 years in many areas such as education and sport, but not so far in the driving domain. [START_REF] Magill | Motor learning : Concepts and applications[END_REF] defines ability as "a general trait or capacity of an individual that is a determinant of a person's achievement potential for the performance of specific skill" (p.17).

Lohman (1997) argues that ability depends on both innate traits and genetics, but also on learning and practice. The purpose of studying implicit theories is not to determine whether an ability is objectively innate or acquired, but rather to focus on what individuals think about the nature of this ability. The review of [START_REF] Dweck | Chapter 3-The Development of Ability Conceptions[END_REF] showed that many theorists believe that ability is a personal and social construct, and this construct can change from person to person and from culture to culture. These interindividual differences are central to the definition of implicit theories. Implicit theories can be defined as the beliefs that individuals have about the changing or fixed nature of human traits and abilities (Biddle et al., 2003;[START_REF] Dweck | Self-Theories : Their impat on Competence Motivation and Acquisition[END_REF]. Implicit theories are conscious and unconscious representations of the nature of human abilities. They are personal theories based on naive theories [START_REF] Heider | The psychology of interpersonal relations[END_REF][START_REF] Kelly | The psychology of personal constructs[END_REF], which allow people to interpret events in their social life according to their own theories and interpretations. [START_REF] Dweck | Implicit Theories : Elaboration and Extension of the Model[END_REF] characterized implicit theories as assumptions that define an individual's reality and give sense to events. They exert a strong influence on motivation, as they provide a response pattern in achievement situations [START_REF] Dweck | A Social-Cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality[END_REF]. There are two main beliefs. An individual pursues entity beliefs when he/she considers ability stable, fixed, and not improvable. An individual pursues incremental beliefs when he/she considers ability to be malleable and improvable through work and effort. There is no right or wrong theory, as these beliefs are alternative ways for individuals to perceive reality. The study of implicit theories is not interested in reality, but in the perception of reality by individuals. An individual will not pursue a unique pattern of belief in all domains, as it is possible to predominantly pursue entity beliefs in one domain, and incremental beliefs in another domain. [START_REF] Santamariña-Rubio | Goal orientations and conceptions of the nature of sport ability in children : A social cognitive approach[END_REF] have shown that individuals pursue both types of beliefs at the same time, and therefore that they should not be seen as two extremities of a continuum. The model of implicit theories developed by [START_REF] Dweck | Motivational processes affecting learning[END_REF], and by [START_REF] Dweck | A Social-Cognitive Approach to Motivation and Personality[END_REF], is not intended for the study of general and observable abilities. Various studies have shown that it is possible to evaluate implicit theories at a general level (i.e., people's personality) and at more specific levels (e.g., intelligence, sport ability, use of technologies, work). Dweck andcolleagues (1986, 1988) were the first to study the beliefs of individuals about the nature of intelligence. People pursuing entity beliefs consider intelligence or a gift, a fixed and innate attribute that cannot be improved, while those pursuing incremental beliefs consider intelligence or athletic, malleable, and improvable. Beliefs about the nature of athletic ability were then investigated (Biddle et al., 2003;[START_REF] Santamariña-Rubio | Goal orientations and conceptions of the nature of sport ability in children : A social cognitive approach[END_REF], and more specifically beliefs about swimming and basketball abilities (Mascret et al., 2016). In other contexts, very specific skills such as intention to use a new technology [START_REF] Solberg | Digital Mindsets : Recognizing and Leveraging Individual Beliefs for Digital Transformation[END_REF] , passion for work [START_REF] Chen | Finding a Fit or Developing It : Implicit Theories About Achieving Passion for Work[END_REF], and also beliefs about body weight [START_REF] Burnette | Implicit Theories of Body Weight : Entity Beliefs Can Weigh You Down[END_REF] have been studied.

Investigating implicit theories in driving would examine whether a driver considers driving skills to be stable, to be a gift (entity beliefs) or improvable with practice and experience (incremental beliefs). The question: Are you born a good driver or are you in the process of becoming one? In other words, are there innate driving skills or can they be improved by experience? Is reversing into a parking space a gift or a skill that can be acquired? Is it innate to be able to take curves properly in the mountains innate or is it developed through experience? Examination of drivers' implicit theories could explain certain behaviors, affects, and cognition in different situations, e.g. when people give up the idea of parking in a small area, or when people approach curves too slowly. It is important to remember that implicit theories of driving are concerned with what people think about driving, not with reality. Due to the lack of studies on implicit theories in driving, no specific questionnaire was available. However, questionnaires have been developed in other domains such as education and sport. [START_REF] Dweck | Implicit Theories : Elaboration and Extension of the Model[END_REF] developed a three-item scale to assess beliefs about the nature of intelligence. This scale has been frequently used in various studies [START_REF] Aditomo | Students' Response to Academic Setback : « Growth Mindset » as a Buffer Against Demotivation[END_REF][START_REF] Yeager | A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement[END_REF], but it has been called in to question because it considers entity and incremental beliefs as the opposite of a continuum (Biddle et al., 2003). Consequently, Dweck (1999) developed a new eight-item scale that separately assesses entity beliefs (four items) and incremental beliefs (four items) of intelligence. [START_REF] Santamariña-Rubio | Goal orientations and conceptions of the nature of sport ability in children : A social cognitive approach[END_REF] validated the first scale in the field of sport, followed by Biddle et al. (2003) who proposed a modified version of this scale called the "CNAAQ-2" (Conception of the Nature of Athletic Ability Questionnaire-2). This scale is the most used in studies assessing implicit theories in the fields of sport, physical exercise, and physical education (for a review, see [START_REF] Vella | A systematic review and meta-analysis of implicit theory research in sport, physical activity, and physical education[END_REF].

Hence, the first objective of the present study was to validate a scale specifically assessing implicit theories in driving, in order to improve knowledge of drivers' psychological characteristics through a theoretical framework never used before but seemingly worthwhile in this area, as seen previously.

After this first step, it would be relevant to evaluate the relationships between implicit theories and usual variables of interest in the field of driving. In sport and education, research has shown that incremental and entity beliefs are correlated with different outcomes. In the education domain, [START_REF] Dweck | Self-Theories : Their impat on Competence Motivation and Acquisition[END_REF] observed that incremental beliefs were more often linked to positive consequences (e.g., pleasure, persistence, performance) than entity beliefs which were rather linked to negative outcomes such as abandonment, high level of anxiety, and lower performance. In the domains of sport, physical exercise, and physical education, incremental beliefs were also linked to positive and adaptative consequences, such as lower levels of anxiety, better satisfaction, and higher enjoyment (Biddle et al., 2003;[START_REF] Warburton | Implicit theories of ability in physical education : Current issues and future directions[END_REF]. On the contrary, entity beliefs were associated with negative outcomes, such as amotivation, anxiety, and lower levels of satisfaction (Biddle et al., 2003;[START_REF] Ommundsen | Self-handicapping strategies in physical education classes : The influence of implicit theories of the nature of ability and achievement goal orientations[END_REF]. In summary, the adoption of incremental beliefs appears to be more beneficial than the adoption of entity beliefs. Based on the previous tendencies, we hypothesized that, in driving, incremental beliefs might be linked to more positive consequences. Conversely, entity beliefs could be linked to more negative outcomes. In order to test these general hypotheses more specifically, we selected variables frequently used in the driving literature: driving self-efficacy, violations, accidents, and emergency maneuvers. Indeed, self-efficacy is a variable often used to study psychological profiles in driving [START_REF] Miele | Driver Confidence and Level of Automation Influencing Trust in Automated Driving Features[END_REF][START_REF] Zhang | Who uses a mobile phone while driving for food delivery? The role of personality, risk perception, and driving selfefficacy[END_REF]. Violations are measured with the Driving Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ), which has been used extensively in the field of driving (de Winter and Dodou (2010) reported 174 studies using this questionnaire). DBQ's scores are frequently related to self-reported accidents. Emergency maneuvers, are often measured in Naturalistic Driving Studies (NDS) under the name of "driving events" or "near-crashes" [START_REF] Dingus | Driver crash risk factors and prevalence evaluation using naturalistic driving data[END_REF][START_REF] Wu | Using naturalistic driving data to explore the association between traffic safety-related events and crash risk at driver level[END_REF]; in this study, the term "emergency maneuvers" was preferred, as it was more meaningful to individuals. Furthermore, these variables have already been used in studies focusing on the development of psychometric scales in the driving domain, such as achievement goals in driving (Mascret et al., 2020). First, self-efficacy is generally defined as "beliefs in one's capabilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of action needed to meet given situational demands" (Wood & Bandura, 1989, p.408). Driving self-efficacy represents the driver's self-assessment of his/her capacities to meet the requirements of the driving situation. In sport, incremental beliefs positively predict selfefficacy [START_REF] Kasimatis | The Effects of Implicit Theories on Exercise Motivation[END_REF][START_REF] Lirgg | Impact of Conception of Ability and Sex-Type of Task on Male and Female Self-Efficacy[END_REF][START_REF] Wood | Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making[END_REF]. In education, self-efficacy is positively correlated with incremental beliefs, while self-efficacy is negatively correlated with entity beliefs [START_REF] Diseth | Self-beliefs among students : Grade level and gender differences in self-esteem, self-efficacy and implicit theories of intelligence[END_REF][START_REF] Norton | Self-efficacy and academic achievement : Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter?[END_REF]. Based on the literature, one would expect incremental beliefs in driving to positively predict driving selfefficacy (H1), while entity beliefs should negatively predict driving self-efficacy (H2).

Secondly, this study investigated violations so as to examine risky driving behaviors.

Violations represent transgressions of official traffic rules and social codes between drivers [START_REF] Reason | Errors and violations on the roads : A real distinction?[END_REF]. Ordinary violations are defined as deliberate traffic violations, without aggression towards other drivers (e.g., exceeding speed limit, failing to stop at a red light).

Aggressive violations refer to behavior that is violent towards others, putting other drivers at risk (e.g., deliberately refusing to yield at an intersection). Both ordinary and aggressive violations refer to intentional risky driving behavior. These violations while driving may refer to cheating and aggression in other areas. In education, [START_REF] Yeager | Adolescents' implicit theories predict desire for vengeance after peer conflicts : Correlational and experimental evidence[END_REF] observed that entity beliefs are related to a desire for revenge after a conflict with peers: while driving, this reaction could produce aggressive behavior (e.g., cutting the road, honking the horn etc.). In contrast, Yeager et al. (2013a) found that incremental beliefs could improve and reduce the desire for revenge. In physical education, entity beliefs positively influenced the judgement of cheating acceptability, highlighting that students with high entity beliefs are more likely to accept cheating in physical education [START_REF] Corrion | Effect of implicit theories on judgement of cheating acceptability in physical education : The mediating role of achievement goals[END_REF], while incremental beliefs were related to positive reactions after failure [START_REF] Potgieter | Goal orientation, self-theories and reactions to success and failure in competitive sport[END_REF]. Based on these previous results, we hypothesized that entity beliefs would be positive predictors of ordinary and aggressive violations (H3) and that incremental beliefs would be negative predictors of these violations (H4).

Thirdly, implicit theories may be studied in relation to other self-reported variables relevant in the driving literature: past accidents and emergency maneuvers. Accidents are strongly related to the adoption of risky driving [START_REF] De Winter | The Driver Behaviour Questionnaire as a predictor of accidents : A meta-analysis[END_REF]. In our study, road accidents are a collision on a public or private road between at least one moving vehicle and another vehicle, a pedestrian, an animal, or a fixed obstacle. Since the frequency of accidents has decreased in recent years, it may also be relevant to study emergency maneuvers or hazardous driving situations [START_REF] Serre | Causes of road driving hazardous situations[END_REF]. [START_REF] Wu | Using naturalistic driving data to explore the association between traffic safety-related events and crash risk at driver level[END_REF] reported a significant positive correlation between accidents, near crashes, and crash-relevant accidents. Emergency maneuvers are part of near crashes. In other domains, such as education or sport, the notion of performance is often related to implicit theories, but it is difficult to give a precise definition of "performance" in the driving domain. In the study by, driving performance was assessed by accident history and by driving errors made during a test drive. Compared to sport or education, fewer accidents and emergency maneuvers could represent a kind of positive performance. In education, entity beliefs are mostly negatively related to academic performance [START_REF] Cury | Implicit theories and IQ test performance : A sequential mediational analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Thompson | Does priming for mastery goals improve the performance of students with an entity view of ability[END_REF], while incremental beliefs are strongly positively related to performance [START_REF] Cury | Implicit theories and IQ test performance : A sequential mediational analysis[END_REF][START_REF] Dupeyrat | Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement : A test of Dweck's model with returning to school adults[END_REF]. In sport, incremental beliefs are positively related to effort and persistence, which are essential components of sport performance. Consequently, we hypothesized that incremental beliefs would be negative predictors of accidents and emergency maneuvers (H5), and that entity beliefs would be positive predictors of these variables (H6).

Finally, our study evaluated the influence of gender on the different variables selected (i.e., implicit beliefs, driving self-efficacy, violations). Many studies in driving have observed gender differences, for instance anger in driving [START_REF] González-Iglesias | Driving anger and traffic violations : Gender differences[END_REF] : men have higher driving anger than women. Gender differences in driving self-efficacy have been identified in previous studies (e.g., [START_REF] Delhomme | Comparing one's driving with others' : Assessment of abilities and frequency of offences. Evidence for a superior conformity of self-bias?[END_REF][START_REF] Sundström | Self-assessment of driving skill -A review from a measurement perspective[END_REF], showing that men tend to overestimate their driving abilities. We supposed that men have a higher level of driving self-efficacy than women (H7). Concerning driving violations (ordinary and aggressive), men reported more ordinary violations (traffic violation) than women [START_REF] Guého | French validation of a new version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) for drivers of all ages and level of experiences[END_REF][START_REF] Özkan | Why are there sex differences in risky driving? The relationship between sex and gender-role on aggressive driving, traffic offences, and accident involvement among young turkish drivers[END_REF]. No gender difference in aggressive violations was shown by [START_REF] Guého | French validation of a new version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) for drivers of all ages and level of experiences[END_REF], while previous studies revealed that men declared more aggressive violations than women [START_REF] Lawton | The Role of Affect in Predicting Social Behaviors : The Case of Road Traffic Violations[END_REF][START_REF] Özkan | Why are there sex differences in risky driving? The relationship between sex and gender-role on aggressive driving, traffic offences, and accident involvement among young turkish drivers[END_REF]. Santamariña-Rubio et al. ( 2014) found that men have significantly more road accidents than women. Concerning implicit theories, [START_REF] Spinath | Implicit theories about personality and intelligence and their relationship to actual personality and intelligence[END_REF] observed that women report less stable intelligence than men do. In sport, [START_REF] Li | Gender Differences in Beliefs About the Influence of Ability and Effort in Sport and Physical Activity[END_REF] reported that incremental beliefs do not differ by gender, but that men score higher than women do on entity beliefs. Based on previous studies, we hypothesized that while driving, men pursue entity beliefs to a greater extent than women do (H8). Based on all these results, gender appears to be a relevant variable to consider when studying implicit theories, driving self-efficacy, violations, accidents, and emergency maneuvers. Therefore, we investigated the potential moderating role of gender between implicit theories and variables of interest in the driving domain (driving self-efficacy, ordinary violations, aggressive violations, accidents, and emergency maneuvers). This research consisted of two studies. The objectives of the first study were (a) to develop a questionnaire assessing implicit theories in driving, (b) to test the factorial structure of this scale, and (c) to examine the concurrent validity with self-reported variables of interest in the driving domain (i.e., accidents, responsible accidents, emergency maneuvers). The objectives of the second study were (a) to evaluate the predictive role of implicit theories in driving on self-reported drivers' aggressive violations, ordinary violations, and driving selfefficacy and (b) to investigate the moderating role of gender among the preceding variables.

Study 1

Method

Participants

A total of 318 French car drivers (180 women, 138 men, 𝑀 !"# = 30.68 years, SD = 12.78, range = 18-70 years) participated in the study. Only drivers with a category B license were included (𝑀 $#!%& () *%+,+-" .+/#-&# = 11.41, SD = 12.54), with an annual mileage of approximately 11 377 kilometers (SD = 10 445). In terms of driving frequency, 45.60% of the sample reported driving every day, 20.75% about three times a week, and 33.65% less than three times a week. 50% of the participants reported having had more than one accident since the obtention of their driving license. Then, regarding at-fault accidents, 29.79% of the sample reported being at fault for at least of one accident. The number of emergency maneuvers reported by participants in the previous week ranged from 0 (64.15%) to more than 2 (9.75%).

Procedure

The development of a scale measuring implicit theories in driving was based on the scale developed by [START_REF] Dweck | Self-theories : Their Role in Motivation, Personnality, and Development[END_REF], which measures implicit theories of intelligence. Dweck's scale has been modified to apply to the field of driving. Terms related to intelligence such as "amount of intelligence" have been modified to "driving level" and the initial items have been adjusted to be transposed to the driving domain. Some additional items were proposed, respecting the theoretical framework of Dweck's scale (2000).

The participants completed either a web-based or paper questionnaire. The use of these two collection methods resulted in the most representative sample, with similar results being obtained with both methods [START_REF] Birnbaum | Psychological Experiments on the Internet[END_REF][START_REF] Buchanan | Using the Internet for psychological research : Personality testing on the World Wide Web[END_REF]. For the paper session, participants volunteered to answer on their own, without interaction with the researcher and other participants. For the web version, 100 participants were recruited through social networks (e.g., Facebook, LinkedIn). A brief description of the study, the time required to complete the questionnaire (approximatively 10min) and the link to access it were provided. Participants were then invited to share the questionnaire with three people close to them. The only inclusion criterion was a category B driving license. The study met the requirements of the institutional boards of XXX, XXX, and the XXX (n°2004-801). It was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Consent was requested beforehand, and participants' responses were completely anonymous.

Measures

Implicit theories in driving. Incremental and entity beliefs were measured with the scale developed for this study, called ITDQ (Implicit Theories in Driving Questionnaire).

Participants responded to items using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The description of the scale, its factorial structure, and its internal consistency are presented in the Results section.

Demographic information. Information usually collected in traffic psychology

studies, such as age, gender, years of driving experience, and annual mileage, was obtained from the participants. In addition, self-reported information on driving was requested: number of accidents since licensing, number of at-fault accidents, and number of emergency maneuvers performed in the previous week. So as to get more representative indicators, the numbers of accidents and at-fault accidents were divided by the number of years of driving.

Data analyses

Preliminary analyses were performed to detect missing values and to detect outliers using the Mahalanobis distance (In'nami & Koizumi, 2013). Skewness (values ≤ |2|) and kurtosis (values ≤ |7|) were used to test the univariate normality of the main variables, following the recommendations of [START_REF] Curran | The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis[END_REF]. Then, descriptive statistics and correlations between variables were calculated (see Table 1).

Main analyses were then conducted. First, a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was carried out with the JASP software (version 13.1.0) to test the internal validity of the ITDQ.

The adjustment indices used in the study were the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), and the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). The criteria for a good fitting model were CFI ≥ .95, TLI ≥ .95, SRMR ≤ .08 and RMSEA ≤ .05, and the criteria for an acceptable fitting model were CFI ≥ .90, TLI ≥ .90, SRMR ≤ .08 and RMSEA ≤ .08 [START_REF] Byrne | Structural equation modeling with AMOS : Basic concepts, applications, and programming (multivariate applications series)[END_REF]. A value of ≤ .10 is also considered acceptable for RMSEA [START_REF] Blunch | Introduction to structural equation modelling using SPSS and AMOS[END_REF]. Secondly, we tested the convergent validity, using item reliability (each factor loading > .50), composite reliability (each factor > .70), and the average variance extracted (AVE > .70 for each factor), following the recommendations of [START_REF] Hair | Multivariate data analysis[END_REF]. Thirdly, we assessed discriminant validity: an item is considered as independent of another if the √𝐴𝑉𝐸 is higher than the correlation between the factor and other factors of the model. We calculated McDonald's omegas to assess the internal consistency. They must be superior to .70 [START_REF] Dunn | From alpha to omega : A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation[END_REF] to be considered acceptable.

Finally, we performed correlation analyses and multiple regression analyses to estimate whether the two implicit beliefs predicted accidents, at-fault accidents and emergency maneuvers, controlling for gender, age, annual mileage, and years of driving license, in order to evaluate the concurrent validity of the ITDQ.

Results

Preliminary results

First, 0.64% of the initial data was missing and was replaced by the participants' mean of the item sub-scale [START_REF] Roth | Missing Data in Multiple Item Scales : A Monte Carlo Analysis of Missing Data Techniques[END_REF]. Eight participants were excluded from the study because they were detected as outliers based on a Mahalanobis distance at the multivariate level greater than the critical value of χ2( 9

Factorial structure

The CFA conducted on the covariance matrix of the 8-items (ITDQ) supported an acceptable fitting model: χ2 (19, N = 318) = 38.75, p < .005, CFI = .979, TLI = .969, SRMR =

.036, RMSEA = .057. The standardized factor loadings ranged from .58 to .85, composite reliability from .84 to .88, and AVE from .57 to .64 (see Table 2). Consequently, convergent validity was supported. Finally, discriminant validity was evaluated to show whether each implicit theory shares more variance with its items than the other implicit theory. The discriminant validity was considered satisfactory (see Table 1) according to the recommendations of [START_REF] Teo | Assessing the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers in Singapore and Malaysia : A multigroup invariance analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)[END_REF].

Concurrent validity

Correlation analyses showed (Table 3) a positive relation between entity beliefs and emergency maneuvers (r = -.12; p =.030). The results of the multiple regression analyses showed that incremental beliefs negatively predicted at-fault accidents (b = -.13; p = .049), and entity beliefs positively predicted emergency maneuvers (b = .16; p = .011), controlling for gender, age, years of driving license, and annual mileage. No significant relationship was found between incremental beliefs (p = .604) and accident, and also between entity beliefs (p = .091) and accidents. The detailed results of the multiple regression analyses are presented in Table 4.

Discussion

This study is the first to develop and validate a questionnaire measuring implicit theories in driving. The structure of the ITDQ (Implicit Theories in Driving Questionnaire) showed acceptable psychometric properties and the concurrent validity was assessed using main variables in driving (accidents, responsible accidents, and emergency maneuvers). Using the ITDQ, it is now possible to study the relationship between implicit theories and usual variables of interest in the driving domain (e.g., aggressive and ordinary violations, driving self-efficacy). Furthermore, the regression analyses highlighted that entity beliefs positively predicted emergency maneuvers and incremental beliefs negatively predicted responsible accidents. Entity beliefs in driving were linked with more negative outcomes than incremental beliefs. This finding supports our general hypotheses and are consistent with the literature in education and sport [START_REF] Dweck | Self-Theories : Their impat on Competence Motivation and Acquisition[END_REF][START_REF] Warburton | Implicit theories of ability in physical education : Current issues and future directions[END_REF], which attest to the concurrent validity of the ITDQ.

Study 2

3.1. Method

Participants

A total of 309 volunteers ( 131

Procedure

Participants completed the questionnaire in online sessions only. As in Study 1, it was distributed through social networks (e.g., LinkedIn) and an email list. Participants completed the questionnaire individually and anonymously; consent was obtained before completion.

The study followed the same ethical requirements as Study 1.

Measures

Implicit theories in driving. The two implicit beliefs in driving were measured using the ITDQ scale that has been developed in study 1. Entity beliefs (e.g., "In driving, It is difficult to change your skill level") and incremental beliefs (e.g., "In driving, improvement is always possible") were assessed with a five level Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). According to the recommendations of [START_REF] Blunch | Introduction to structural equation modelling using SPSS and AMOS[END_REF][START_REF] Byrne | Structural equation modeling with AMOS : Basic concepts, applications, and programming (multivariate applications series)[END_REF][START_REF] Hu | Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives[END_REF], the first results of the CFA were not acceptable: χ2 (19, N = 309) = 108.03, p < .001, CFI = .900, TLI = .853, SRMR = .059, RMSEA = .123. The JASP software suggested modification indices, consisting in adding covariance errors between item 3 and 4 of incremental subscale, and between item 1 and 3 of entity subscale. After this step, the results showed an acceptable fitting model: χ2 (17, N = 309) = 62.57, p < .001, CFI = .949, TLI = .916, SRMR = .048, RMSEA = .093. Internal consistency was satisfactory for the entity (𝜔 = .76) and for the incremental (𝜔 = .82) subscales.

Driving self-efficacy. The scale developed by [START_REF] Boccara | Time course of drivingskill self-assessments during French driver training[END_REF] was used to assess driving self-efficacy. The two items focusing on driving license test and driving lessons were removed, so that participants responded to 10 items (e.g., "I make driving mistakes"). A seven-level Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) was used to Violations. Ordinary and aggressive violations were assessed using two subscales of the French version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire [START_REF] Guého | French validation of a new version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) for drivers of all ages and level of experiences[END_REF]. Ordinary violations were measured by six items (e.g., "You ignore the speed limit in a residential area"), and aggressive violations were measured by six items (e.g., "You get angry at another driver and you chase him to let him know how you feel about him"). Participants responded on a scale from 1 (never) to 6 (almost all the time). The results of the first CFA were not acceptable for CFI and TLI: χ2 (53, N = 309) = 155.84, p < .001, CFI = .825, TLI = .783, SRMR = .070, RMSEA = 0.079. Following the modification indices suggested by JASP software, covariance errors were added between items 5 and 6, between items 3 and 5 of ordinary violations subscale, between items 5 and 6, between items 2 and 5, between items 2 and 6 of aggressive violations subscale, to improve model fit: χ2 (53, N = 309) = 85.54, p < 0.001, CFI = .936, TLI = .912, SRMR = .048, RMSEA = .050. Internal consistency for aggressive violations (ω = .66) and ordinary violations (ω = .67) was somewhat low.

However, these results are consistent with those obtained in the validation study of the French version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire [START_REF] Guého | French validation of a new version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) for drivers of all ages and level of experiences[END_REF], in which Cronbach's alphas were acceptable for aggressive violations (α = .72) and low for ordinary violations (α = .64).

Data analyses

In a first step, preliminary analyses were conducted to detect outliers using the Mahalanobis distance (In'nami & Koizumi, 2013) and to test the normality of the main variables [START_REF] Curran | The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis[END_REF] using skewness (values ≤|2|) and kurtosis (values ≤ |7|). In a second step, correlation analyses and multiple regression analyses were conducted to assess whether gender, age, years of driving license, annual mileage, and implicit theories were predictors of violations and self-efficacy. Finally, we conducted moderation analyses to evaluate the moderating role of gender on the relationship between the two implicit theories and violations, along with driving self-efficacy.

Results

Preliminary results

Five participants were excluded from the study because they were detected as outliers based on a Mahalanobis distance at the multivariate level greater than the critical value of χ2(9) = 27.88, p < .001. The distribution of the variables of interest was approximately normal, consistent with measures of skewness (maximum = 0.989) and kurtosis (maximum = 1.288). The results are presented in Table 5.

Correlation analyses and regression analyses

Correlational analyses (Table 6) showed that incremental beliefs were positively related to driving self-efficacy (r = .14; p = .011) and entity beliefs were negatively related to driving self-efficacy (r = -.19; p < .001). The results of the multiple regression analyses showed that entity beliefs positively predicted aggressive violations (b = .18; p = .049), and negatively predicted self-efficacy (b = -.23; p = .015), controlling for gender, age, years of driving license, and annual mileage. No significant relationship was found between entity beliefs and ordinary violations (b = -.07; p = .434). Incremental beliefs were negative predictors of both ordinary violations (b = -.20; p = .035) and driving self-efficacy (b = .20; p = .032)., controlling for the same variables. There was no relationship between incremental beliefs and aggressive violations (b = .08; p = .411).

The detailed results of the regression analyses are presented in Table 7.

Moderation analysis

Only one interaction effect between incremental beliefs and gender was found for ordinary violations (b = .22; p = .020). Simple slopes analyses showed that women with high incremental beliefs commit fewer violations than women with low incremental beliefs (p < .001). The results are not significant for men (p = .312). The results are graphed in Figure 1.

Discussion

Study 2 showed the predictive role of implicit theories on aggressive and ordinary violations, on driving self-efficacy, and the moderating role of gender. Entity beliefs were found to be positive predictors of aggressive violations. It is difficult to compare these results directly with other findings in driving, since to our knowledge there are no other studies than the previous two. However, aggressive or ordinary violations in driving can be compared with cheating in sport, or aggressive behavior in other domains. Hence, our results are in line with those observed in the domains of sport and intelligence, in which entity beliefs are positive predictors of cheating acceptability and the desire for revenge after failure [START_REF] Corrion | Effect of implicit theories on judgement of cheating acceptability in physical education : The mediating role of achievement goals[END_REF][START_REF] Yeager | Adolescents' implicit theories predict desire for vengeance after peer conflicts : Correlational and experimental evidence[END_REF]. Moreover, the present study found that entity beliefs negatively predicted self-efficacy in driving, indicating that individuals who believe that driving abilities are stable and not improvable tend to be less confident in their driving. This finding confirmed our hypothesis 2 and previous results found in the field of education [START_REF] Diseth | Self-beliefs among students : Grade level and gender differences in self-esteem, self-efficacy and implicit theories of intelligence[END_REF][START_REF] Norton | Self-efficacy and academic achievement : Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter?[END_REF]. The results also showed that incremental beliefs negatively predicted ordinary violations, which is in accordance with our hypothesis 4. This result corroborates the findings of [START_REF] Yeager | Adolescents' implicit theories predict desire for vengeance after peer conflicts : Correlational and experimental evidence[END_REF] who found that people who pursue an incremental belief have less desire for revenge than those who pursue entity beliefs. People who think that ability is malleable are less prone to aggressive behavior. As expected (Hypothesis 1), incremental beliefs were positive predictors of driving self-efficacy. This is consistent with the results observed in sport [START_REF] Kasimatis | The Effects of Implicit Theories on Exercise Motivation[END_REF] and education [START_REF] Diseth | Self-beliefs among students : Grade level and gender differences in self-esteem, self-efficacy and implicit theories of intelligence[END_REF].

Finally, gender moderates the relationship between incremental beliefs and ordinary violations, indicating that women with high incremental beliefs committed fewer ordinary violations than women with a low level of incremental beliefs. This finding was predictable because a higher level of incremental beliefs was related to more positive outcomes, such as fewer ordinary violations in the present study. But this result was significant for women only, maybe because men have in general a higher level of incremental beliefs than women in other domains than driving [START_REF] Li | Gender Differences in Beliefs About the Influence of Ability and Effort in Sport and Physical Activity[END_REF].

General discussion

The present research is the first to develop and validate a scale (ITDQ) measuring implicit theories in the driving domain and to evaluate the predictive role of implicit theories in driving. The development and the validation of the ITDQ were successful. The factorial structure (i.e., internal validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and internal consistency) was found satisfactory. Secondly, the concurrent validity was tested, and it was found that entity beliefs were positive predictors of a negative outcome (i.e., emergency maneuvers) and that incremental beliefs were negative predictors of a negative outcome (i.e., responsible accidents). These results are consistent with the literature in education [START_REF] Costa | Implicit Theories of Intelligence and Academic Achievement : A Meta-Analytic Review[END_REF] and sport (Biddle et al., 2003). Indeed, in many studies in these domains, incremental beliefs were linked with adaptative outcomes (e.g., intrinsic motivation, performance, enjoyment, effort, perceived competence, lower level of anxiety and cheating acceptability). Conversely, entity beliefs were associated with non-adaptive and negative outcomes (e.g., cheating acceptability, high level of anxiety, hostile intent). Based on these results, we can recommend using the ITDQ to assess implicit theories in the driving domain.

The future use of the IDTQ will improve the knowledge of implicit theories in driving, in order to adapt the training of drivers to their psychological profile.

Study 2 confirmed the results observed in study 1 and showed that entity beliefs were positively related to negative outcomes (i.e., aggressive violations) and negatively related to positive outcomes (i.e., self-efficacy). Secondly, Study 2 showed that incremental beliefs positively predicted driving self-efficacy and negatively predicted ordinary violations.

Moreover, a moderating role of gender was found between incremental beliefs and ordinary violations, indicating that women who are more inclined to believe that driving is a malleable ability committed more ordinary violations than women with lower incremental beliefs.

All these results cannot be directly compared to other studies in driving, but they are in accordance with our hypotheses, and also consistent with findings observed in various education and sport studies [START_REF] Guého | French validation of a new version of the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ) for drivers of all ages and level of experiences[END_REF][START_REF] Vella | A systematic review and meta-analysis of implicit theory research in sport, physical activity, and physical education[END_REF][START_REF] Warburton | Implicit theories of ability in physical education : Current issues and future directions[END_REF].

Indeed, the positive relationship between entity beliefs and aggressive violations in driving is in accordance with our hypothesis 5 and the findings observed in education by [START_REF] Yeager | Adolescents' implicit theories predict desire for vengeance after peer conflicts : Correlational and experimental evidence[END_REF]. The authors found that entity beliefs were positively related to a desire for revenge after conflict with peers, and this desire for revenge in education appeared to correspond to aggressive driving behavior. This relationship demonstrates that individuals who pursue entity beliefs are more likely to adopt aggressive and risky driving behavior. Conversely, the negative relationship between incremental beliefs and ordinary violations is consistent with our hypothesis 4, and the results observed in education by Yeager et al. (2013a). They found that incremental beliefs could reduce the desire for revenge after failure. According to these results, a driver who believes that driving ability is malleable seems to pursue a safer driving behavior than entity theorists do.

Concerning driving self-efficacy, the positive relationship with incremental beliefs and the negative relationship with entity beliefs support our hypotheses 1 and 2, as well as the findings obtained in education and sport [START_REF] Norton | Self-efficacy and academic achievement : Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter?[END_REF][START_REF] Moritz | The Relation of Self-Efficacy Measures to Sport Performance : A Meta-Analytic Review[END_REF]. In education and sport, self-efficacy is positively linked with performance and motivation [START_REF] Bandura | Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited[END_REF]Feltz et al., 2008). In driving, it has been observed that an overestimation of driving self-efficacy in young drivers is linked to risky driving behavior [START_REF] Delhomme | Comparing one's driving with others' : Assessment of abilities and frequency of offences. Evidence for a superior conformity of self-bias?[END_REF][START_REF] Delhomme | Comparing one's driving with others' : Assessment of abilities and frequency of offences. Evidence for a superior conformity of self-bias?[END_REF]. The adoption of incremental beliefs can result in more adaptive driving outcomes, if they do not overestimate driving self-efficacy in young drivers. The pursuit of incremental beliefs seems to be the most beneficial for driving, contrary to entity beliefs.

The present research is not without limitations. First, both studies took place in one country (France). Since driving style differs from country to country (Özkan et al., 2006), cross-cultural studies are needed to examine whether the same pattern of results may be found in other countries. Secondly, the sample size could be larger to increase the proportion of under-represented people (> 65 years old), in order to generalize the results, and also because driving behaviors are different across age groups [START_REF] Jonah | Age differences in risky driving[END_REF]. Finally, the driving variables used in the present research are self-reported measures. It could be relevant to use objective criteria developed by Naturalistic Driving Studies [START_REF] Jamson | Developing a driving Safety Index using a Delphi stated preference experiment[END_REF][START_REF] Naude | Vehicle dynamics data collection to characterize the drivers' behavior[END_REF], and to cross with implicit theories in order to assess whether the adoption of incremental or entity beliefs predicts objective driving behaviors (e.g., number of road incidents).

Complementarily, in sport, education and personality, a few studies tried to manipulate the beliefs in order to positively influence behavior. In education, [START_REF] Yeager | A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement[END_REF] implemented a light protocol (less than an hour) of teaching incremental beliefs to 12 490 students and observed a positive effect on grades. [START_REF] Orvidas | Mindsets applied to fitness : Growth beliefs predict exercise efficacy, value and frequency[END_REF] fostered incremental fitness beliefs, with a basic manipulation (i.e., reading a text reinforcing the malleability of fitness), and highlighted a significant increase in intention to exercise. Yeager et al. (2013b) manipulated incremental personality beliefs and showed a significant decrease in aggressivity after a victimization experience. According to these studies, it might be relevant to manipulate drivers' implicit theories to induce safer driving behavior. We could also adapt the training course of drivers, presenting both types of beliefs so that learner drivers are informed about them, and then encouraging the adoption of incremental beliefs. The promotion of incremental driving beliefs could follow the recommendations proposed by Vella et al. (2014): focusing on effort and persistence (e.g., emphasize the importance of driving a lot and continue even if you make mistakes); facilitating challenge (e.g., encourage them to carry out difficult maneuvers or driving in difficult situations); defining success as effort (e.g., it is through effort that we can become a good driver); promoting learning (e.g., show that learning is essential to becoming a good driver); providing high expectations (e.g., expecting the success of all the maneuvers performed). The recommendation "promoting the value of failure" proposed by Vella et al. (2014) cannot be implemented in the driving domain, because it may be related to driving events or even to accidents. This manipulation of incremental beliefs could take place during point recovery courses, during driver training, and during prevention messages.

Conclusions

Prior to this present research, implicit theories had been widely developed in different domains (e.g., education, sport), but never in the driving domain. This research filled this lack. A questionnaire, called Implicit Theories in Driving Questionnaire (ITDQ), was developed and validated to measure implicit theories in driving. The scale was validated using a confirmatory factor analysis, and regression analyses were performed between the two implicit beliefs and accidents, at-fault accidents, and emergency maneuvers to test the concurrent validity of the scale. The second study showed that entity beliefs are linked with maladaptive outcomes (i.e., aggressive violations, low level of driving self-efficacy), while incremental beliefs are linked with positive outcomes (i.e., low level of ordinary violations, high level of driving self-efficacy). A moderating role of gender between incremental beliefs and ordinary violations was found. All these results are in line with findings in other domains.

From now on, the IDTQ is available to assess drivers' implicit theories, thus improving knowledge of drivers' psychological characteristics. Furthermore, it will be possible to adapt drivers' learning to their implicit beliefs, so they can adopt the safest behaviors. Future research can also attempt to modify the implicit theories of at-risk drivers in order to change their behavior, in order to reduce the number of crashes and improve road safety.

  ) = 27.88, p < .001. The distribution of the variables of interest was approximately normal, consistent with measures of skewness (maximum = 0.664) and kurtosis (maximum = 2.102).

  women, 178 men, 𝑀 !"# = 36.95, SD = 13.90, range = 20-78 years) participated in the study. All participants had a French category B driving license (𝑀 $#!%& () *%+,+-" .+/#-&# = 18.23 years, SD = 13.56, range = 0-59 years), with an annual mileage of approximately 16 416 kilometers (SD = 13 354).

  answer the questions. The first results of the CFA were unsatisfactory: χ2 (35, N = 309) = 172.98, p < .001, CFI = .823, TLI = .773, SRMR = .071, RMSEA = 0.113. Modification indices suggested adding covariance errors between items 7 and 8, between items 4 and 5, and between items 9 and 10 to improve model fit: χ2 (32, N = 309) = 75.29, p < .001, CFI = .944, TLI = .922, SRMR = .051, RMSEA = .066. Internal consistency was satisfactory (𝜔 = .73).

Figure 1 .

 1 Figure 1. The interaction between incremental beliefs and gender in predicting ordinary violations.

Table 1 .

 1 Descriptive statistics of the final sample, correlations, internal consistency, Skewness, Kurtosis, and discriminant validity.

	Variable	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6
	1. Entity beliefs	1.86	0.72	(.80)
	2. Incremental beliefs	4.30	0.64	-.46***	(.75)
	3. Gender	0.43	0.50	0.13*	.00	-
	4. Age	30.68 12.78	.04	.02	.03	-
	5. Years of driving License	11.41 12.54	.03	.02	.03	.99***	-
	6. Annual mileage	11377 10445	.03	.01	.16** .21*** 0.22***	-
	McDonald's omega	-	-	.79	.84	-	-	-	-
	Skewness	-	-	0.664 -1.085	-	-	-	-
	Kurtosis	-	-	-0.138 2.102	-	-	-	-
	Notes.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, M = Mean, SD = Standard Deviation, Gender (boys = 1, girls = 0), the diagonal elements in bold represent √𝐴𝑉𝐸 for the two implicit theories, AVE = Average Variance Extracted.

Table 2 .

 2 French version of the ITDQ (English translation), construct reliability, and average variance extracted. If you provide yourself with the means, you always improve 8. Le niveau s'améliorera toujours si on fait ce qu'il faut pour ça .78 Your skill level will always improve if you do what it takes Notes. SFL = Standardized Factor Loading, CR = Composite Reliability, AVE = Average Variance Extracted

	Factors/Items:
	En conduite automobile,…
	(In driving,…)

Table 3

 3 Correlations between accidents, responsible accidents, emergency maneuvers, and other variables.

	Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

Table 4 .

 4 Summary of multiple regression analyses predicting accidents, responsible accidents, and emergency maneuvers.

	Accidents	Responsible accidents	Emergency maneuvers
	R 2	b	R 2	b	R 2	b
	.033		.019		.081***
	Gender	.03		.01	-.11*
	Age	.03		.02	.12
	Years of driving license	-.17		-.09	-.19
	Annual mileage	.09		.05	.25***
	Entity beliefs	-.11		-.04	.16*
	Incremental beliefs	-.03		-.13*	.00
	Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

Table 5 .

 5 Descriptive statistics of the final sample (without outliers), internal consistency, Skewness, and Kurtosis.

		Entity	Incremental	Driving self-	Aggressive	Ordinary
		beliefs	beliefs	efficacy	violations	violations
	Mean	2.12	4.42	5.65	1.99	2.02
	Standard deviation	0.85	0.64	0.67	0.71	0.75
	McDonald's omega	.76	.82	.73	.66	.67
	Skewness	0.639	-1.168	-0.296	0.989	0.827
	Kurtosis	-0.252	1.288	-0.225	1.099	0.486

Table 6 .

 6 Correlation analyses between aggressive violations, ordinary violations, driving selfefficacy and other variables.

		Aggressive violations	Ordinary violations	Driving self-efficacy
	Gender	.161**	.177**	.097
	Age	-.269***	-.281***	.005
	Years of driving license	-.252***	-.267***	.015
	Annual mileage	.058	.188***	.082
	Entity beliefs	.076	.016	-.194***
	Incremental beliefs	-.004	-.013	.137*
	Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

Table 7 .

 7 Summary of multiple regression analyses predicting aggressive violations, ordinary violations, and self-efficacy in driving.

	Aggressive violations	Ordinary violations	Driving self-efficacy
	R 2	b	R 2	b	R 2	b
	.105***		.133***		.076
	Gender	.12*		.13*		.07
	Age	-.67*		-.74*		-.03
	Years of driving license	.42		.48		.05
	Annual mileage	-.04		.07		.07
	Entity beliefs	.18*		-.07		-.23*
	Incremental beliefs	.08		-.20*		.20*
	Entity X Gender	-.12		.11		.09
	Incremental X Gender	-.05		.22*		-.18
	Note. *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

Analysis & Prevention, 65, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.11.015

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Valentine Naude for her proofreading of the English version of the article.