Psychological Predictors of Environmentally Unsustainable Driving Behaviors: Schadenfreude and Preference for Loud Car Modifications

Abstract

Noise pollution from modified vehicles represents a growing environmental and social sustainability concern in urban areas. Understanding the psychological factors underlying such behaviors is essential for promoting sustainable mobility and public well-being. The present study investigates whether schadenfreude (i.e., the enjoyment of others’ misfortune) predicts attitudes toward loud car modifications, an environmentally unsustainable behavior linked to social disturbance. University undergraduate students (N = 606; 61% men) completed an online self-report survey assessing sex, age, schadenfreude across three scenarios, and attitudes toward loud cars. Multiple regression analyses revealed that men with lower scores on two schadenfreude scenarios and higher scores on the third were more likely to report favorable attitudes toward loud car modifications. These findings extend previous research on personality and antisocial driving tendencies, highlighting the relevance of emotional traits in understanding behaviors that undermine sustainable urban environments. Future interventions addressing social and psychological drivers of noise pollution may contribute to environmental and social sustainability efforts.

1. Introduction

Excessive environmental noise generated by modified car engines poses a growing public health and sustainability concern. The prevalence of excessive noise generated by the sound of a modified car engine may be more harmful than just a disturbance or a nuisance to neighborhoods. High levels of excessive noise in urban centers are largely contributed to by vehicles, and repeated exposure may cause issues from disruptions to sleep, tinnitus, and cardiovascular disease [1,2]. Passchier-Vermeer and Passchier [2] highlight the detriment of noise on the cognitive development of children, suggesting that urban noise negatively affects the young. The World Health Organization identifies environmental noise as a key determinant of well-being and quality of life, and many countries have implemented regulations prohibiting vehicle muffler modifications to reduce this form of noise pollution. However, despite these regulations and the consequent fines issued, loud car fans continue to show disregard for the law [3]. While most offenders drawn to these illegal modifications are typically men [4], little is known about the personality traits that predict a preference for loud cars. The inclination for offenders to show off their vehicles, disregard the law, or ignore others’ well-being may be explained by maladaptive personality traits, such as the Dark Tetrad (i.e., subclinical narcissism, Machiavellianism, subclinical psychopathy, and everyday sadism), or the closely related concept of schadenfreude.

Schadenfreude is characterized as deriving pleasure from others’ misfortunes [5] and is associated with everyday sadism [6] and psychopathy [7]. Parton and Chester [6] explored the overlap and distinctiveness of these two concepts. Exploratory and confirmatory latent factor modeling suggested that sadism was a sub-facet of schadenfreude. However, this finding was contradicted by exploratory factor analysis, which suggested that schadenfreude and sadism are distinct concepts with overlapping facets [6]. One scenario that exemplifies this overlap is an observer’s reaction to a mourner. Observers higher in sadism are more likely to respond to mourners insensitively, finding pleasure or humor in a bereaved person’s pain [7]. Besides sadism, schadenfreude is associated with the other Dark Tetrad traits [5]. Of the remaining three traits, subclinical narcissism has the weakest association. The relationship between schadenfreude and Machiavellianism is slightly stronger, particularly in situations involving personal gain. Higher levels of subclinical psychopathy are shown to strongly predict higher levels of schadenfreude [5]. Yee and Lee [8] suggested that schadenfreude and the four dark traits may predict common behaviors or interests, as all correlate with the aggressive humor style, reflecting the use of humor to ridicule or belittle others [9].

Aggression, a personality dimension positively associated with the aggressive humor style [10], may be a key overlapping feature, extending to behaviors such as aggressive driving (see review by Love and Nicolls [11]). Subclinical psychopathy was one of the most significant predictors of self-reported driving aggression [12], and psychopathy was found to be positively correlated with both verbal and physical driving aggression [13]. Moreover, the horsepower of a car (which often relates to the loudness of a car) is predictive of driving aggression [14], which may further indicate that individuals with maladaptive personality traits may not only exhibit aggressive driving behaviors but also display a preference for louder vehicles.

In a recent pilot study, Schermer [4] examined the relationships between the Dark Tetrad and a desire for a modified car muffler. To measure the desire for a muffler, participants were asked three items: whether they thought loud cars were cool, if they would modify their muffler, and if they viewed their car as an extension of themselves. The results show that, compared to women, men scored significantly higher on the Dark Tetrad traits and had a desire to have a loud modified car muffler, while age showed no association or prediction power. The overall regression equation was significant, indicating that each of the three loud car items had a significant positive correlation with the Dark Tetrad scales, except for the correlation between Machiavellianism and the item asking participants how strongly they agreed that they would make their car louder with muffler modification. Notably, the strongest personality trait predictors for wanting a louder car were higher scores on both subclinical psychopathy and everyday sadism [4]. Such behaviors exemplify how maladaptive traits can translate into environmentally detrimental and socially disruptive acts.

Other reports found that individuals using alternative methods to increase the loudness of their car may share characteristics associated with the Dark Tetrad, such as a disregard for the law. In 2001, the Savannah Georgia Police Department conducted a report on individuals using loud car stereos and found that offenders had no regard for the noise laws or fines and were pleased that their stereos were perceived as loud, despite complaints. A second finding showed that loud stereo offenders were over three times as likely as a randomly selected traffic violator to have a criminal driving record, and many had criminal histories [15]. Overall, this research highlights a relationship between aggressive tendencies and criminal behavior observed in maladaptive personality types and elucidates how this can be expressed using a vehicle. Given that psychopathy is a strong predictor of driving aggression and a preference for loud car stereos, and its strong association with schadenfreude [5], schadenfreude may be a promising predictor of the choice for loud cars.

1.1. Noise Pollution and Policy Implications

From a sustainability perspective, noise pollution is not the result of people’s choices but also reflects broader psychological and cultural patterns that delay progress toward more sustainable urban living. Understanding which personality traits are linked to these behaviors helps us achieve the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Furthermore, recognizing psychological traits that predict noise noncompliance can allow future studies to create measures for prosocial behavior and environmental responsibility.

In Canada, cities such as Toronto and Vancouver have implemented bylaws and noise cameras to monitor vehicle decibel levels, while similar efforts are underway across Europe, Australia, and South America. For example, Brazil’s National Traffic Council (CONTRAN) sets maximum noise limits for motor vehicles, and authorities have the power to issue fines or suspend registrations for modifications that go over these limits. However, following these rules remains unreliable, suggesting that psychological and cultural factors often overshadow deterrence-based measures.

The “car culture” and environmental noise emphasize tensions between individual identity and collective well-being. For some, a modified car is not just a way to get around but a form of self-expression and status signaling. Such modifications are “performative transgressions”, where the loudness becomes a statement of defiance. This defiance aligns with findings in personality psychology showing that individuals higher in aversive personality traits are less responsive to external rules and more likely to see rules as challenges rather than limits [16].

1.2. Present Study

The aim of our study was to examine whether schadenfreude predicts a preference for loud car modifications. Although prior work has linked the Dark Tetrad (particularly psychopathy and everyday sadism) to interest in loud mufflers, no study to date has investigated whether schadenfreude contributes to this preference. This represents a contribution to existing research, as schadenfreude may capture emotional motivations for rule-breaking and socially disruptive behavior that are not explained by broader personality traits alone.

After finding that subclinical psychopathy and everyday sadism exhibited promising results as predictors for the preference of a modified muffler [4], we examine the closely related concept of schadenfreude. It is hypothesized that schadenfreude will positively correlate with a desire for a loud car due to its relationship with everyday sadism [6], subclinical psychopathy [5], difficulties following rules [16], and aggressive humor [8]. Considering the results from Schermer [4] and evidence from Feder et al. [17] that young males are more likely to be drawn to loud leisure noise, it is also predicted in the present study that being a man will be a significant predictor of preference for loud car modifications.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Procedures

Undergraduate students (N = 606; 61% men) enrolled in a first-year management studies program course completed an informed consent form and the survey items. The mean age was 18.33 years (SD = 1.41, range 17 to 37 years old). Participants were recruited using an online research platform tailored to inform students about available research studies. The only inclusion criteria to participate in this study was enrollment in the first-year course. Participants received credit towards their course for simply starting the study, and credit was not contingent on completing any of the questions. Also provided to participants was a debriefing form with an explanation of the research and suggested references to read for those interested in the topic. Ethics approval was obtained from the university’s non-medical research ethics board (Protocol #124058).

2.2. Measures and Data Analysis

In addition to providing information about their biological sex and age, participants completed two additional measures. Schadenfreude was assessed using the three scenarios (labeled as “soccer”, “student”, and “speeder”) outlined by James et al. [5] in which feelings of schadenfreude may be induced. The “soccer” scenario reads: Imagine yourself in the following situation: “You are competing in the final quarter of a knockout-style soccer competition. The main goal scorer on the other team is a loudmouth and has been bragging about their skills throughout the game, and tries to use a fancy move. Instead of kicking a goal, they fall and sprain their ankle”; the “student” scenario reads: “Your peer or co-worker is a know-it-all and constantly gloating about their abilities. You find out they recently got a bad grade/performance review”, and the “speeder” scenario reads “There is a wealthy business person driving the latest model sports car tailgating you while you are driving home. After a while, he overtakes you, zooming past you and through the traffic lights up ahead. You see the flash of a speed camera, indicating he has been caught for speeding and will be getting a fine in the mail”. Participants rate how amusing, satisfying, pleasurable, and sympathetic (reversed keyed) they would feel in each situation on a four-point Likert-type scale (1 = not at all, 4 = very). Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was 0.76 for the speeder scenario, 0.79 for the soccer scenario, and 0.75 for the student scenario.

To measure the preference for a modified car, we used the three original items created by Schermer [4], including: “I think loud cars are really cool”, “If I could, I would make my car louder with muffler modification”, and “My car is an extension of what makes me a person”. Three new items designed specifically for the present study were also measured, including: “I love the sound of a roaring engine”, “I wish the police would charge/fine loud cars and motorcycles” (reversed keyed), and “How often are you startled and upset by a loud car/motorcycle?” (reversed keyed). Participants rated how much they agreed with five of the six items using a five-point rating scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree), and the last item was responded to using (1 = rarely, 5 = frequently). The two new items were reverse-scored to mitigate response bias. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha for the six items was 0.82, confirming that an aggregate could be generated.

All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 30). To examine the relationships among variables, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were computed between the three schadenfreude scenarios (“speeder”, “student”, and “soccer”), age, sex, and the loud car preference aggregate. Next, a multiple linear regression analysis was performed to determine whether age, sex, and the three schadenfreude scenarios could predict the participants’ preference for loud cars. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 for all tests.

3. Results

As seen in

Table 1. Correlations Between Loud Car Preference and Predictor Variables: Age, Sex, and Schadenfreude.

	Loud Car	Age	Speeder	Student	Soccer
Age	0.09 *
Speeder	−0.15 **	−0.06
Student	−0.12 **	−0.15 **	0.42 **
Soccer	0.06	−0.07	0.33 **	0.47 **
Sex a	−0.37 **	−0.03	−0.06	−0.001	−0.07
Mean	18.62	18.33	12.00	11.14	10.51
SD	5.09	1.41	2.58	2.56	2.76

Notes. ^a: 1 = men, 2 = women; * p < 0.05 (2-tailed); ** p < 0.01 (2-tailed).

, each schadenfreude scenario positively correlated with the others. The schadenfreude “speeder” and “student” scales had weak negative correlations with the preference for a loud car, and there was no significant association between schadenfreude “soccer” and the loud car aggregate. Age had a weak positive correlation with, and men scored higher, on the loud car scale aggregate.

A regression analysis was conducted to examine whether age, sex, and the three schadenfreude scenarios could predict the loud car scale total. The regression equation was significant (F(5, 555) = 22.97, p < 0.001), predicting 17% of the variance (adjusted R² = 0.16). In addition to being a man, the standardized regression coefficients for schadenfreude “speeder” and “student” were significant negative predictors and the “soccer” variable was a positive predictor for the loud car total (see

Table 2. Sex, Age, and Schadenfreude Predictor Coefficients for Loud Car Preference.

Predictor	Β and 95% CI	Standardized β	t	p
Constant	21.74 [14.28, 29.20]		2.23	0.026
Age	0.28 [−0.09, 0.65]	0.06	1.50	0.135
Sex a	−3.56 [−4.35, −2.76]	−0.34	−8.80	<0.001
Speeder	−0.29 [−0.46, −0.12]	−0.15	−3.41	<0.001
Student	−0.21 [0.07, 0.39]	−0.10	−2.23	0.026
Soccer	0.23 [−0.39, −0.02]	0.13	2.82	0.005

Notes. ^a: 1 = men, 2 = women.

).

4. Discussion

The present study examined whether schadenfreude predicts preference for loud car modifications, an environmentally and socially disruptive behavior that contributes to noise pollution and reduced community well-being. Men were found to score higher on the loud car measure, replicating the findings from Schermer [4]. The results with schadenfreude were mixed and did not entirely meet the predictions. Contrary to our hypothesis, two out of three schadenfreude scenarios (speeder and student) had negative correlations with, and negative predictions for, the preference for loud car modifications. Consistent with our hypothesis, one of the schadenfreude scenarios (soccer) showed a positive, albeit nonsignificant, association with car modifications. These findings suggest that schadenfreude may depend on various factors, including contextual considerations or specific criteria regarding the individuals that they target. For example, group identities influence schadenfreude, with outgroup targets evoking higher levels of schadenfreude than ingroup targets [18]. This influence of targets and schadenfreude could potentially explain the study’s results. Because the study participants were students, they may have perceived the target in the student scenario as an ingroup member, empathetically predisposing them towards the target and reducing schadenfreude. Similarly, if those who prefer loud cars also enjoy speeding, the participants who prefer loud cars may have identified the target in the speeding scenario as an ingroup member, reducing the likelihood of experiencing schadenfreude. In these two scenarios, outgroup members, participants who do not prefer loud cars, may have been more likely to experience schadenfreude, matching the model prediction in this study’s results. In the soccer scenario, all participants, regardless of their preference for loud cars, may have perceived the sports competitor as an outgroup member, as evidenced by their positive prediction of experiencing schadenfreude. The relationship between higher schadenfreude levels and a preference for loud cars remains unclear, warranting future studies. Specifically, future research should include the perception of the target group membership by the participants.

Several other contextual factors influence schadenfreude. Schadenfreude may be more likely to be evoked if the victim is deserving, rather than an innocent civilian. Perception of injustice predicts schadenfreude [19], and schadenfreude may be socially acceptable if the offense was not major and if the target had high status [20,21]. Additional research found that those with higher levels of schadenfreude were more willing to be the agent of misfortune if the target was rude or disliked [22], providing further evidence that schadenfreude may be motivated by characteristics of the target. Therefore, individuals who prefer loud car modifications may not necessarily experience schadenfreude, as they may not consider others in their actions, as would be reflected by subclinical psychopathy [4]. It is possible that if different schadenfreude scenarios are used in which the participant is the agent of misfortune, there may be stronger positive predictions of the loud car scale scores. Another factor to consider is the age of our participants. Emerging adulthood is characterized by identity exploration and a tendency to prioritize personal goals and expressions over community-oriented concerns. Likewise, dark trait tendencies manifest differently in young adults than in older populations, as empathy maturation, social perspective taking, and moral reasoning continue to develop across early adulthood [23].

From a sustainability perspective, these findings have implications for understanding why some individuals disregard noise regulations and contribute to urban sound pollution. A preference for loud vehicles may serve symbolic or identity-related purposes, asserting dominance, status, or autonomy, often at the expense of collective well-being. Recognizing the role of personality traits may help inform targeted educational campaigns that emphasize social responsibility and environmental stewardship. These campaigns may adopt some of the models suggested by researchers who address attitudes towards electric vehicles. Buhmann and Criado [24] examined consumers’ preference for electric vehicles in a sample of over two thousand adults between the ages of 18 and 87. Buhmann and Criado [24] asked individuals about the likelihood that they would purchase an electric vehicle in addition to attitude questions about vehicles in general. Of interest, participants reported that price, driving range, and fuel consumption were of greatest importance, but that social acceptance of the vehicle was of less importance. This finding is particularly of interest to the present study’s results. If social acceptance is less of a salient factor in people’s perceptions of cars, then individuals who choose to modify their vehicles may be doing so less for social reasons and more for personal reasons. Campaigns to try to stop illegal muffler modifications may therefore need to focus on individual factors and not the distress caused by the loud vehicles to society in general. Relatedly, Zou et al. [25] also examined variables that predict people’s intentions to purchase an electric vehicle and discovered that attitudes about the vehicles were more strongly predictive of purchase intention than were perceptions of risk. In particular, Zou et al. [25] reported that economic value was the strongest attitude dimension (stronger than attitudes about environmental value, brand, and after-sales services). Knowing these results, it may be the case that campaigns to reduce modified muffler use may have to target the price of the mufflers as well as the fines and penalties. If the cost of the mufflers becomes more exorbitantly expensive, then individuals may possibly be less likely to purchase and use these mufflers.

The preference for loud cars can be seen not just as a choice but as an act of self-presentation, as suggested by the findings of Buhmann and Criado [24] in examining individuals’ attitudes about vehicles. Cars often serve as identity markers that communicate power, independence, and social status [14]. Noise, in particular, acts as a display of dominance, allowing people to emphasize their presence in shared spaces. This view aligns with status-signaling and compensatory behaviors, suggesting that people may use sound or volume to project control and confidence, especially in situations where other forms of status expression are limited. For example, Lowe et al. [26] reported that individuals use noise in their products to demonstrate dominance, but that those who wanted to present themselves as prestigious would select quieter products.

From this perspective, noise pollution also becomes a social issue beyond an environmental one. Another explanation involves moral emotions and social regulation. Schadenfreude can be seen as a deviation from prosocial emotional norms, showing satisfaction with others’ discomfort rather than empathy or compassion. When this emotion occurs alongside low empathy and rule-breaking, it can decrease awareness of the broader effects of one’s actions. Because schadenfreude is context-sensitive, the emotional responses in our scenarios likely reflected how participants interpreted each situation (i.e., who the target was, whether the misfortune seemed deserved, and how relevant the event felt to them). This contextual variability helps explain the mixed results and posits that schadenfreude should not be understood apart from the social setting in which it occurs. Our findings thus add to emerging frameworks that connect aversive traits and environmental irresponsibility, where personality psychology can significantly enhance sustainability research.

Although the present study moves forward with the understanding of emotional predictors of environmentally unsustainable behavior, some limitations must be considered. First, the cross-sectional design limits causal inference. Experimental studies could determine whether schadenfreude precedes, co-occurs with, or is the result of attitudes toward loud car modifications. Second, using self-report measures introduces potential biases, including social desirability. Including behavioral measures could increase ecological validity. Third, our sample consisted mainly of undergraduate students from a Canadian university, limiting generalizability across groups, cultures, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Our sample raises concerns regarding representativeness, as it remains unclear whether only students in this context are more likely to engage in muffler modifications than same-aged or older individuals. This limits the extent to which our findings can be generalized to the broader driving community. Future research should recruit a more diverse set of participants, including individuals who own modified vehicles, to examine whether stated attitudes translate into observable behaviors. Researchers may also consider using different or video schadenfreude scenarios, as Greenier [27] reported that hypothetical scenarios may not be as representative of schadenfreude compared to a live scenario with a confederate as the target. In addition, future studies may be interested in investigating schadenfreude using the tripartite motivational model proposed by Wang et al. [28], who suggest that schadenfreude can be further understood by examining the sub-forms of aggression, justice, and rivalry. In particular, Wang et al. [28] argue that schadenfreude researchers should move away from using vignettes and work to develop self-report scales that assess dimensions of the disposition of dehumanization across a variety of settings. Future investigations may benefit from exploring specific vehicle models that have been reported to be associated with personality traits [29] or by examining the reasons behind driving [30], in addition to examining other vehicles that create excessive noise, such as motorcycles [31].

5. Conclusions

Overall, this study provides an examination of how schadenfreude relates to the preference for loud cars, which have been purposely made to be louder by employing illegal muffler modifications. It should be noted that this research does not include those classic car enthusiasts who have loud vehicles by the vintage of the vehicle as the questions asked about modifying mufflers to make cars louder. Although results were mixed, they underscore traits involved in antisocial or environmentally detrimental behaviors. Our findings have important implications for public policy and environmental education. Current efforts to reduce noise pollution tend to rely on deterrence and enforcement. However, these measures are not enough when behaviors are motivated by emotional gratification or personal expression. Urban planners and policymakers should consider integrating behavioral science approaches, such as feedback or identity-based messaging, to reduce the appeal of loud modifications. For example, promoting quiet vehicles as symbols of modernity could provide an acceptable alternative to the loudness associated with dominance. Similar to the models proposed to increase the propensity of individuals to adopt and use autonomous vehicles by directly addressing attitudes held by people [32], political leaders could promote information campaigns that target negative characteristics associated with illegally modified vehicles in an attempt to change held attitudes. Finally, understanding how personality traits, such as schadenfreude, influence the desire for loud, illegally modified cars provides a more straightforward understanding to develop public policies that could reduce noise pollution by addressing its psychological roots, not only its legal boundaries.