Key Takeaways
- A 1968 field experiment found that 84% of drivers honked when blocked by a lower-status car, compared with 50% when blocked by a luxury vehicle.
- Later research examined the opposite question: whether people driving higher-status vehicles behave differently toward other motorists and pedestrians.
- A 2012 study found that drivers of higher-status vehicles were more likely to commit certain right-of-way violations at intersections and crosswalks.
- A 2020 study involving 461 vehicles found that higher estimated car value was associated with lower odds of yielding to pedestrians.
- Stereotypes about BMW drivers raise related questions about vehicle brands and perceived aggression, but the studies discussed here do not establish that BMW drivers behave worse than other motorists.
Introduction
A pedestrian reacts as a luxury car passes through a crosswalk. Research has found an association between higher vehicle value and lower odds of yielding to pedestrians.
A traffic light turns green, but the car ahead remains stationary. Most drivers eventually become impatient. Yet how quickly they react may depend on something seemingly unrelated to the delay: the kind of car blocking their way.
Would a driver be equally willing to honk at an old, inexpensive vehicle and a polished luxury sedan?
Psychologists investigated that question decades ago and found a striking difference. Motorists were substantially more likely to sound their horns when obstructed by a lower-status car.
The finding raises a broader question about driving behavior. Cars do more than transport people. Their appearance can communicate wealth, prestige, and perceived social standing.
Subsequent research has explored whether those signals influence how drivers respond to one another and how motorists behave toward vulnerable road users.
Taken together, the studies offer evidence that vehicle status can matter on the road. They also reveal important limits to what researchers can conclude about the motivations of individual drivers.
The Classic Experiment: Drivers Honked Less at a Luxury Car
In 1968, psychologists Anthony Doob and Alan Gross published an experiment designed to investigate how perceived social status might affect reactions to frustration.
The researchers conducted the study at traffic lights in Palo Alto and Menlo Park, California.
A researcher stopped a vehicle at a red light. When another motorist pulled up behind it and the light turned green, the experimental driver deliberately remained stationary.
Observers recorded whether the following driver honked and how long the driver waited.
The researchers varied the apparent status of the obstructing vehicle.
The high-status condition used a polished 1966 Chrysler Crown Imperial, a luxury car. The lower-status condition used older vehicles, including a rusty Ford station wagon and a Rambler sedan.
The experiment initially involved 82 drivers. Eight observations were excluded because the motorists went around the experimental car, left the intersection early, or struck its bumper instead of honking. The final analysis included 74 drivers.
The difference was substantial: 84% of motorists honked when blocked by a lower-status car, compared with 50% when blocked by the luxury Chrysler.
Drivers were also more likely to honk twice in the lower-status condition: 47%, compared with 19% in the high-status condition.
The researchers interpreted the pattern as evidence that perceived status could inhibit responses to frustration (Doob & Gross, 1968).
Importantly, the experiment manipulated the apparent status of the car ahead. It did not establish the actual wealth of its owner, nor did it measure the following driver’s thoughts.
A motorist who remained silent might have been intimidated, more patient, distracted, or simply reluctant to use the horn. The experiment could not distinguish those explanations.
Why Would the Car Ahead Make a Difference?
One possible explanation involves the social meaning of status.
People often respond differently to individuals they perceive as powerful or influential. A luxury vehicle may communicate higher social standing even when the driver is a complete stranger.
Doob and Gross proposed that perceived status could discourage confrontation. People may be less willing to challenge someone they regard as higher in a social hierarchy.
That explanation is plausible, but the honking experiment did not directly test whether motorists feared retaliation or consciously deferred to the luxury-car driver.
There is also a more basic problem with interpreting honking as aggression.
A horn can be used to express anger, but it can also communicate a practical message. At a green light, a brief honk may simply mean that the driver ahead has not noticed the signal.
The researchers acknowledged that horn use could serve both practical and emotional purposes.
This distinction remains important today. A driver who waits longer before honking is not necessarily calmer or more respectful. The observed behavior tells researchers what happened, not everything about why it happened.
Another Question: Do Drivers of Expensive Cars Behave Differently?
The original experiment examined how people reacted to a high-status vehicle.
Later research approached the issue from the opposite direction: whether motorists driving higher-status vehicles were more likely to disregard other road users.
In 2012, researchers led by Paul Piff published a series of seven studies examining socioeconomic status and unethical behavior.
Two involved direct observations of driving in the San Francisco Bay Area.
In the first traffic study, observers monitored 274 drivers approaching a four-way intersection. They rated vehicle status using the car’s make, age, and appearance.
They then recorded whether drivers violated the right-of-way by cutting ahead of another vehicle.
Overall, 12.4% committed the observed violation.
Higher vehicle status was statistically associated with a greater likelihood of cutting off other motorists, even after adjustment for factors including traffic conditions and the driver’s perceived age and sex.
In a second field study, observers recorded the behavior of 152 drivers approaching a marked pedestrian crosswalk.
A pedestrian working with the researchers waited to cross while observers recorded whether motorists yielded.
Overall, 34.9% failed to yield.
Again, higher vehicle status was associated with a greater likelihood of the observed violation (Piff et al., 2012).
These findings concern the conduct of drivers in higher-status vehicles, not how other motorists treated those vehicles.
They also do not establish that purchasing an expensive car causes someone to become less considerate.
Vehicle status was used as an indirect indicator of social class. The researchers did not independently verify each driver’s income, wealth, or reasons for the behavior.
What a Later Pedestrian Study Found
A separate study published in 2020 examined whether the estimated cost of a vehicle was related to a driver’s willingness to yield to pedestrians.
Researchers observed 461 vehicles at two midblock crosswalks in Las Vegas. The study also examined whether yielding behavior differed according to the pedestrian’s gender and race.
Four pedestrians working with the researchers, two men and two women, including Black and white participants, crossed the road using a standardized procedure.
Researchers recorded driver responses on video and estimated vehicle values using automotive pricing information.
Only 129 drivers, approximately 28%, yielded to pedestrians.
Vehicles that yielded had a lower average estimated value than vehicles that did not yield.
In the adjusted analysis, each additional $1,000 in estimated vehicle value was associated with approximately 3% lower odds of yielding.
The reported odds ratio was 0.97, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.94 to 0.99 (Coughenour et al., 2020).
The researchers also observed higher yielding percentages for female and white pedestrians than for male and nonwhite pedestrians. However, those differences were not statistically significant in the adjusted analysis.
The vehicle-value finding does not mean that increasing a car’s value by $1,000 causes a three-percentage-point reduction in the probability of yielding. Odds and probabilities are different statistical measures, and the researchers identified an association rather than a causal relationship.
The study was also limited to two crosswalks in one American city. Vehicle values were estimated, and the researchers could not determine whether the car’s price itself influenced the driver’s decision.
Nevertheless, the findings add an important road-safety dimension to the discussion.
The original honking experiment concerned a motorist’s response to an inconvenience. Pedestrian yielding involves a direct interaction with someone who is more physically vulnerable in traffic.
Do the Studies Point to the Same Psychological Effect?
Not necessarily.
At first glance, the results might appear to tell one story: high-status cars receive more deference, while their drivers are less likely to defer to others.
But that interpretation goes further than the evidence.
The studies measured different behaviors, involved different participants, and used different definitions of vehicle status.
The 1968 experiment deliberately changed the car blocking another motorist. Because the researchers controlled that part of the encounter, the design provides stronger evidence that the status manipulation influenced honking in that particular setting.
The 2012 and 2020 road observations were different. Researchers recorded the vehicles people were already driving and examined associations with their behavior.
Those studies could not randomly assign drivers to different social classes or determine whether vehicle ownership itself explained the results.
A driver’s age, experience, personality, occupation, local driving environment, and other unmeasured characteristics might influence both vehicle choice and driving behavior.
The studies are therefore complementary, but they do not prove a single psychological mechanism.
Does Wealth Make People Less Considerate?
This is where the research requires particular caution.
The 2012 paper examined social class and ethical decision-making beyond driving. Its laboratory experiments included scenarios involving dishonesty, self-interest, and rule-breaking.
The authors proposed that attitudes toward greed and self-interest could help explain some of the differences they observed.
However, those findings should not be turned into a general claim that wealthy people are inherently selfish or dangerous drivers.
Socioeconomic status is complex. A person’s vehicle is an imperfect measure of their financial circumstances, and individual behavior varies enormously within every income group.
Furthermore, the studies do not establish that a driver in a luxury vehicle necessarily owns it or belongs to a wealthy household.
The more defensible conclusion is narrower: in some observed traffic situations, vehicle status was associated with behavior that affected other road users.
That is an important finding without requiring a sweeping judgment about the character of people who drive expensive cars.
Why Do BMW Drivers Have a Reputation for Aggressive Driving?
BMW drivers are sometimes stereotyped as impatient, aggressive, or less considerate of other road users. But does that reputation reflect actual driving behavior, or does the brand influence how people interpret what they see?
The distinction matters because a car’s appearance can shape expectations about its driver. Someone who already associates a particular brand with aggressive driving might pay more attention to behavior that reinforces that belief while overlooking similar actions by other motorists.
Psychologists refer to this tendency as confirmation bias. It offers one possible explanation for why driving stereotypes persist, although the studies discussed here did not test that explanation specifically.
The 1968 honking experiment examined perceived vehicle status, while the 2012 and 2020 studies investigated relationships between vehicle characteristics and certain traffic behaviors. None compared BMW drivers directly with drivers of other brands.
Consequently, these findings cannot establish whether BMW owners are more aggressive or whether other motorists respond differently to BMW vehicles.
Answering those questions would require research comparing driving behaviors across brands while accounting for factors such as driver demographics, vehicle characteristics, and traffic conditions.
For now, the BMW stereotype illustrates a broader issue: assumptions about a vehicle can influence how people interpret its driver, even when those assumptions have not been established by reliable evidence.
Would the Honking Experiment Produce the Same Results Today?
That remains uncertain.
The original experiment took place in California in the 1960s, using cars whose status was meaningful in that social setting.
Modern traffic differs in many ways.
Vehicle prices have changed, luxury branding is more varied, and an expensive car may not always be perceived as prestigious. A large pickup truck, an electric vehicle, or an older luxury sedan may carry different social meanings depending on the location.
Driving customs also vary.
In some cities, honking is a routine communication tool. In others, motorists may interpret it as an aggressive challenge.
Congestion, road design, traffic enforcement, and local expectations could all affect how drivers react when someone delays them at a green light.
These are reasonable factors for a modern replication to investigate, but they should not be presented as explanations already established by the original experiment.
A stronger contemporary study would compare several vehicles across multiple price and status categories, use standardized drivers and clothing, and collect observations in different cities.
It would also distinguish brief reminder honks from repeated or prolonged horn use.
That would help determine whether the original effect persists and whether it reflects perceived status, expected consequences, or other social cues.
What This Research Means for Road Safety
The practical lesson is not that motorists should honk at luxury cars more often or assume that drivers of expensive vehicles are inconsiderate.
Instead, the research raises questions about how quickly people form judgments about strangers on the road.
A vehicle’s appearance provides limited information about the person driving it. Yet in some studies, that appearance was related to observable decisions.
For road safety, the most consequential findings concern behaviors such as failing to yield or disregarding another road user’s right-of-way.
Those actions can create immediate danger regardless of the vehicle’s price.
The research does not justify treating drivers differently based on their cars. Traffic rules and safe driving practices should apply equally to everyone.
Limitations of the Evidence
The studies differ substantially in age, design, location, and outcomes.
The original honking experiment was small and involved a limited selection of vehicles. The researchers also used different clothing in the high-status and lower-status conditions, meaning the car itself was not the only potential status cue.
The 2012 field observations relied on researchers’ ratings of vehicle status rather than direct financial information about drivers. The paper also covered several distinct experiments, and its findings should not be generalized beyond the behaviors measured.
The 2020 study estimated car prices and observed yielding at only two crosswalks. Its results do not establish causation or necessarily apply to other cities.
None of these studies demonstrates that every luxury-car driver behaves similarly or that expensive cars consistently receive preferential treatment in modern traffic.
There is also a substantial difference between perceived status, actual wealth, vehicle market value, and vehicle size. Those characteristics can overlap, but they are not equivalent.
Final Thoughts
Drivers may respond differently to the same traffic situation depending on the vehicle in front of them. In a 1968 field experiment, motorists were considerably less likely to honk when a luxury car blocked their way than when an older, lower-status vehicle did.
Later research found associations between higher vehicle status or estimated value and certain driving behaviors, including right-of-way violations and reduced pedestrian yielding.
These findings indicate that a car’s appearance may influence social interactions on the road. However, the studies do not establish that wealthy drivers are inherently less considerate or that expensive vehicles always receive preferential treatment.
For everyday motorists, the takeaway is straightforward: a vehicle’s appearance reveals little about the person behind the wheel. Safe driving depends on attention, patience, and respect for traffic rules, not assumptions about another driver’s social status.
Funding and Disclosures
Doob and Gross (1968): The paper acknowledged support for Anthony N. Doob through a Public Health Service Predoctoral Fellowship. It did not provide a modern competing-interests declaration.
Piff and colleagues (2012): Paul K. Piff received support from a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. The authors declared no conflicts of interest. A published correction changed a reported standard error in the seventh study from 0.18 to 0.10. The correction stated that the study’s conclusions were unaffected (Piff et al., 2017).
Coughenour and colleagues (2020): The study reported support from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences through NIH grant P20GM103440. The authors declared no competing interests and stated that the study’s contents did not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
References
Coughenour, C., Abelar, J., Pharr, J., Lung-Chang, C., & Singh, A. (2020). Estimated car cost as a predictor of driver yielding behaviors for pedestrians. Journal of Transport & Health, 16, 100831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2020.100831
Doob, A. N., & Gross, A. E. (1968). Status of frustrator as an inhibitor of horn-honking responses. The Journal of Social Psychology, 76(2), 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1968.9933615
Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2012). Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(11), 4086–4091. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118373109
Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2017). Correction for “Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(43), E9181. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1716910114