Suppr超能文献

道路上的错误和违规:真正的区别?

Errors and violations on the roads: a real distinction?

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Manchester, Mancester M13 9PL, UK.

出版信息

Ergonomics. 1990 Oct-Nov;33(10-11):1315-32. doi: 10.1080/00140139008925335.

Abstract

In considering the human contribution to accidents, it seems necessary to make a distinction between errors and violations; two forms of aberration which may have different psychological origins and demand different modes of remediation. The present study investigated whether this distinction was justified for self-reported driver behaviour. Five hundred and twenty drivers completed a driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) which asked them to judge the frequency with which they committed various types of errors and violations when driving. Three fairly robust factors were identified: violations, dangerous errors, and relatively harmless lapses, respectively. Violations declined with age, errors did not. Men of all ages reported more violations than women. Women, however, were significantly more prone to harmless lapses (or more honest) than men. These findings were consistent with the view that errors and violations are indeed mediated by different psychological mechanisms. Violations require explanation in terms of social and motivational factors, whereas errors (slips, lapses, and mistakes) may be accounted for by reference to the information-processing characteristics of the individual.

摘要

在考虑人为因素对事故的影响时,似乎有必要对错误和违规行为进行区分;这两种失常行为可能具有不同的心理根源,需要不同的补救方式。本研究旨在调查这种区分对于自报告的驾驶行为是否合理。520 名驾驶员完成了一份驾驶员行为问卷(DBQ),问卷要求他们判断在驾驶时各种类型的错误和违规行为的发生频率。结果识别出三个相当稳健的因素:违规行为、危险错误和相对无害的失误。违规行为随年龄增长而减少,错误则不然。各个年龄段的男性报告的违规行为都多于女性。然而,女性比男性更容易出现无害的失误(或者更诚实)。这些发现与错误和违规行为确实是由不同的心理机制介导的观点一致。违规行为需要从社会和动机因素方面来解释,而错误(疏忽、失误和错误)则可以通过参考个体的信息处理特征来解释。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验