When Brisbane driver Marcus cuts off a cyclist on his morning commute, he doesn't see a person. Instead, he sees an obstacle in Lycra delaying his journey to work. When the cyclist yells in alarm, Marcus feels vindicated rather than concerned. Why? According to him, they shouldn’t have been on the road in the first place.
This is a common attitude that many motorists have in Australia. Research from Monash University revealed something chilling: more than half of non-cyclists surveyed rated cyclists as ‘less than fully human’, even comparing them to cockroaches and mosquitoes. Those who dehumanised cyclists were more likely to report deliberately blocking them, driving dangerously close or cutting them off.
The Psychology of Road Rage: Why We See Others as ‘Less Than’
This dehumanistation phenomenon is the same mental mechanism that allows groups to inflict harm on others throughout history, but on Australian roads, it plays out in seemingly mundane moments that can turn deadly.
When drivers perceive cyclists as an outgroup rather than fellow humans, the brain's empathy circuits effectively switch off. The person on the bike becomes an abstraction, a member of ‘them’ rather than ‘us.’
Three psychological forces drive this dangerous mindset:
Outgroup hostility occurs when we categorise people into competing tribes. Drivers become one tribe, cyclists another.
The ‘Lycra effect’ amplifies the problem. Studies found that cyclists wearing helmets, high-visibility clothing, or Lycra were dehumanised more than those in casual clothes. The very safety gear meant to protect cyclists actually marks them as ‘other’ in drivers' minds.
Status threat turns roads into battlegrounds. Some drivers perceive road space as a zero-sum game where every cyclist represents lost territory or a challenge to their rightful dominance of the road. This perceived threat triggers anger and aggression that drivers might never express in face-to-face encounters.
Learn more about the psychology of road rage in Australia.
Beyond Cyclists: A Broader Pattern of Dehumanisation
Cyclists aren't alone in experiencing this psychological othering. Motorcyclists face stereotypes of being reckless daredevils, making other drivers less sympathetic when conflicts arise. Pedestrians, particularly in high-traffic urban areas, become obstacles to navigate around rather than people to protect.
The common thread? Vulnerability. The more exposed a road user is, the more they seem to provoke irritation rather than care.
This represents a lack of empathy, even though our road rules were put in place to prevent this. Queensland’s Government mandates that drivers share the road safely with all users. This includes a minimum passing distance of one metre at speeds up to 60km/h and 1.5 metres for speeds over 60km/h.
The Deadly Empathy Gap
The Monash University studies uncovered disturbing specifics. Results revealed that 17% of surveyed drivers reported deliberately blocking cyclists, 11% admitted driving dangerously close and 9% intentionally cut cyclists off. These are all choices enabled by the psychological distance that dehumanisation creates.
When you don't see someone as fully human, it becomes easier to justify putting them at risk. The empathy that would normally make you think, ‘that could be someone's parent, someone's child’ simply doesn't activate.
Without significant intervention, thousands of deaths and injuries will occur on Australian roads over the next decade and many of these casualties will involve vulnerable road users. By 2030, the National Road Safety Strategy wants to reduce fatalities by 50% and serious injuries by 30%. The truth of the matter is that many could be prevented right now if drivers recognised the humanity of everyone sharing the space.
Also read: Why Do Some Drivers Really Hate Cyclists?
How Social Media Weaponises Hate
Online platforms have become amplifiers for normalising hostility by using insect reference slurs such as ‘cockroaches’ in the comments sections on news articles. When dozens of people ‘like’ a comment suggesting cyclists are legitimate targets for aggression, it reinforces the tribal mindset.
When hostile attitudes are publicly validated, they become easier to act on in real-world encounters. For example, the driver who sees such comments might feel more justified cutting off a cyclist tomorrow morning.
Social media's role reveals an uncomfortable truth that dehumanisation isn't just individual psychology. It's culturally reinforced, shared and celebrated in digital spaces where accountability is minimal and empathy even more so.
What Success Looks Like: Learning From the Netherlands
The Netherlands offers a radically different model. Dutch roads are among the safest globally, but this didn't happen by accident or through infrastructure alone.
The Dutch have built a culture where all road users are seen as legitimate, worthy of respect and protection. Several factors drive this:
Legal frameworks create accountability. Dutch law operates on presumed liability, meaning drivers are generally considered at fault in collisions with cyclists or pedestrians unless proven otherwise. This legal structure reinforces the message that vulnerable road users deserve protection.
Humanisation is built into education. Dutch driving tests and school curriculums emphasise empathy for all road users, not just technical competence. Children learn about road safety from multiple perspectives, such as cycling to school themselves while also understanding drivers' responsibilities.
Infrastructure separates conflict points. Protected bike lanes and pedestrian zones reduce the frequency of interactions where tribal psychology can take effect. When road users aren't competing for the same space, there's less opportunity for the ‘us versus them’ mindset to take hold.
The Dutch example proves that cultural change is possible. But it requires coordinated effort across policy, education, infrastructure and social messaging.
Evidence-Based Solutions for Australian Roads
Research has identified practical interventions that measurably reduce dehumanisation and aggression in Australia.
Humanisation Campaigns That Actually Work
Monash University researchers tested various approaches to humanising cyclists in public messaging. It soon became clear that photographs showing cyclists' faces were more effective than stylised graphics or images showing only cyclists from behind.
When we see someone's face, mirror neurons activate. The person becomes real, individual, human. This simple change in visual messaging can begin breaking down the psychological distance that enables aggression.
Effective campaigns share certain characteristics. They show diverse road users as people with lives, families and stories. They avoid abstract representations and emphasise connection rather than competition.
Programs That Change Driver Behaviour
The Reducing Aggressive Driving (RAD) program, developed by Monash University and trialled in the ACT, demonstrates what's possible when psychology meets practical intervention.
RAD teaches drivers to recognise emotional triggers and develop practical strategies for managing anger. Techniques include:
- Cognitive reframing: asking, ‘will this matter in five days?’ when feeling frustrated
- Mindful driving: deliberately noting the humanity of each road user encountered
- Personalising the other driver: what if it was your mother, father, or grandparent?
- Relaxation techniques: engaging in deep breathing when feeling stressed
The results were significant. Participants reported sustained reductions in aggressive behaviour for at least four months after the program. Nearly half noted that driving with passengers reduced their anger, suggesting social accountability serves as a natural empathy prompt.
It’s become clear that these are practical tools that change how people think and behave in real situations.
Infrastructure and Policy Working Together
Physical design shapes psychological experience. When cyclists have protected lanes, drivers don't feel their space is being invaded. When pedestrian crossings are clearly marked and enforced, walking becomes a legitimate use of road space rather than an inconvenience.
Queensland's minimum passing distance laws represent a policy acknowledging both vulnerability and the empathy gap. But enforcement matters and laws without consequences don't change behaviour.
Government and corporate roles extend beyond regulation. Workplace driver training programs, particularly for fleet operators and delivery services, can embed empathy and safety as professional standards. Some forward-thinking companies now include aggressive driving indicators in performance reviews and use telematics to identify concerning patterns.
Moving Beyond Tribalism
Australia's road user tribal wars are the product of psychological patterns we can interrupt and cultural norms we can change.
Research shows that when we see each other as human, behaviour changes. When infrastructure creates safety rather than conflict, attitudes shift. When education and enforcement work together, roads become safer for everyone.
The cyclist in Lycra is someone's parent heading to work. The pedestrian crossing the street is someone's child walking to school. The motorcyclist filtering through traffic is someone trying to get home safely.
They're not ‘less than human.’ They're exactly as human as you are, with the same right to arrive safely, the same families waiting for them and the same value as a person.
That simple recognition could save thousands of lives. The question is whether we're willing to see it.
