State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy Department of Industrial Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2010 Oct;11(5):483-91. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2010.489242.
The effectiveness of two hazard perception training methods, simulation-based error training (SET) and video-based guided error training (VGET), for novice drivers' hazard handling performance was tested, compared, and analyzed.
Thirty-two novice drivers participated in the hazard perception training. Half of the participants were trained using SET by making errors and/or experiencing accidents while driving with a desktop simulator. The other half were trained using VGET by watching prerecorded video clips of errors and accidents that were made by other people. The two groups had exposure to equal numbers of errors for each training scenario. All the participants were tested and evaluated for hazard handling on a full cockpit driving simulator one week after training. Hazard handling performance and hazard response were measured in this transfer test.
Both hazard handling performance scores and hazard response distances were significantly better for the SET group than the VGET group. Furthermore, the SET group had more metacognitive activities and intrinsic motivation. SET also seemed more effective in changing participants' confidence, but the result did not reach the significance level.
SET exhibited a higher training effectiveness of hazard response and handling than VGET in the simulated transfer test. The superiority of SET might benefit from the higher levels of metacognition and intrinsic motivation during training, which was observed in the experiment. Future research should be conducted to assess whether the advantages of error training are still effective under real road conditions.
测试、比较和分析两种驾驶危险感知培训方法，即基于模拟的错误训练（SET）和基于视频的引导错误训练（VGET），对新手驾驶员危险处理性能的有效性。
32 名新手驾驶员参加了危险感知培训。一半的参与者通过在台式模拟器上开车时犯错和/或经历事故接受 SET 培训。另一半参与者通过观看其他人犯错和发生事故的预先录制视频片段接受 VGET 培训。两组在每个培训场景中都经历了相等数量的错误。所有参与者在培训一周后都在全驾驶舱模拟器上进行了危险处理测试和评估。在这个转移测试中，测量了危险处理性能和危险响应。
SET 组的危险处理性能得分和危险响应距离都明显优于 VGET 组。此外，SET 组的元认知活动和内在动机更多。SET 似乎也更有效地改变了参与者的信心，但结果没有达到显著水平。
在模拟转移测试中，SET 在危险反应和处理方面的培训效果明显优于 VGET。SET 的优势可能受益于实验中观察到的培训期间更高水平的元认知和内在动机。未来的研究应该评估在真实道路条件下，错误训练的优势是否仍然有效。
