Motonormativity

The term motonormativity was coined by Swansea University psychologist Ian Walker, with Alan Tapp and Adrian Davis from the University of the West of England, in a 2023 study in the United Kingdom. The study was replicated in the United States by Tara Goddard in 2024. == Causes ==

In the century since its mass adoption, the initial public opposition to the car and its dangers has been largely forgotten, in part due to propaganda and advertising by the automotive industry. Cars have become ubiquitous, and 20th- and 21st-century urban planning choices have made them essential in many places, as well as symbols of status, comfort and control, People embedded within car-dependent systems may struggle to imagine alternatives to the system One possible factor, proposed by Walker, is conflation of all transport and travel with driving. There may be cognitive dissonance about the preferability of cars. Journalist and author Sarah Goodyear suggests that the necessity of driving demands purposefully ignoring its risks: "If you allowed yourself to think about how dangerous that is, it would be debilitating." For drivers specifically, another suggested factor is the sunk cost of investment in a car, including direct costs such as petrol and parking. On the other hand, since the monetary costs of a car are not paid at the same time as using it (unlike a fare), they are also frequently undervalued. == Significance ==

According to studies of motonormativity, people are significantly more accepting of negative externalities associated with cars compared to similar non-car scenarios. This demonstrates a pervasive societal tendency to overlook the public health hazards of car-centric systems. As a consequence of motonormative bias, attempts to reduce car use are often misinterpreted as attempts to curtail personal freedoms such as freedom of movement; cars become the only conceivable form of mobility. == Examples ==

in Kansas City, United States, in 2013, surrounded by parking lots Motonormativity creates the expectation of driving to reach destinations, such as grocery stores, making alternative means of access seem or become unfeasible. Psychologist Ian Walker has cited certain road safety campaigns targeting children as an example of motonormativity: by encouraging children to wear brightly coloured clothing to avoid being run over, such campaigns normalize the idea of motor traffic as an accepted danger others must adjust to, in a way which in other contexts would be considered victim blaming. Motor vehicles are relatively tolerated as a leading cause of death in the U.S., compared to other leading causes, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer, which see widespread demand for radical solutions. Individuals are given more discretion to bend traffic rules, even when merely for efficiency, than to bend other health and safety rules such as for food safety. A popular example from the studies contrasts tolerance of car exhaust with that of cigarette smoking, which was increasingly banned in public around the turn of the 21st century. Walker argues: The bias also manifests in blame attribution for theft: If a parked car left on the street is stolen, police response is considered much more appropriate than for other personal belongings, where the owner is then considered more at fault for leaving their property on the street. == See also ==