A HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST DRIVERS
A HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST SERIES

A HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST DRIVERS

The results demonstrate that drivers of varying experience respond differently to different hazards, and lay the foundations for a hazard typology. Only instructors’ ability to detect hazards early in the approach translated into differences in driving speed for certain types of hazard.

While drivers with a moderate amount of experience were as fast as driving instructors to look at hazards, they spent the greatest amount of time looking at them. The results showed that learner drivers took longer to fixate hazards, although they were particularly likely to miss hazards that were obscured by the environment (such as a pedestrian emerging from behind a parked truck).

A HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST SERIES

The current study used a car simulator to test drivers of differing levels of experience on approach to a series of hazards that were categorized a priori according to their underlying structure. One potential reason for the lack of consistency is the failure to understand the structural differences between those hazards that discriminate between safe and unsafe drivers, and those that do not. The ability to detect hazards in video clips of driving has been inconsistently linked to driving experience and skill. Further, it suggests improvements for new hazard perception tests. It identifies potential confounds in previous work and demonstrates that experiential differences can be found if the appropriate tests are used. This research informs the current controversy over whether hazard perception is a good diagnostic tool for driving performance.

These differences are discussed with reference to hazard perception and situation awareness. The findings indicate that when processing time is manipulated, hazard perception accuracy reveals experiential differences. Novice drivers benefited from the extra processing time afforded by the image remaining on the screen and significantly anticipated more hazards when the image remained on the screen than when it went black. Experienced drivers significantly anticipated more correct hazardous outcomes than novice drivers when the screen went black. This variant of the hazard perception test allowed the influence of processing time to be included and the level of situation awareness to be measured. Participants were then asked five questions about what happened next. There is a chance that they might veer out into the. If you see a child cycling on the pavement by the side of the road, you should click. Best practices include clicking as soon as you see a potential hazard.

It involves watching video clips and identifying hazards as they develop. The clips were stopped just prior to hazard onset and either the screen went black or the final still image stayed on the screen. The hazard perception test is a component of your theory test. In this study video clips of actual driving scenarios were shown to novice and experienced drivers. Hazard perception is one of the most important facets of driving and if the appropriate diagnostic tool is used it can discriminate between novice and experienced drivers.

A hazard perception test