School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.
Accid Anal Prev. 2013 May;54:57-66. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.013. Epub 2013 Feb 16.
We investigated whether self-generated commentaries and what happens next exercises are useful additions to hazard perception training. Two hundred and thirty-three novice drivers experienced one of four different video-based training interventions derived from an existing hazard perception training package: (1) what happens next training; (2) expert commentary training; (3) hybrid commentary training (i.e., expert plus self-generated commentaries); or (4) the full training package (i.e., what happens next plus hybrid commentary training). There was also a placebo control condition. Drivers' hazard perception skill was measured using video-based tests featuring real driving footage at three times: immediately prior to the intervention; immediately post-intervention; and after a one-week delay. Compared to the placebo control, all training interventions significantly improved hazard perception response times immediately after the intervention. The full training resulted in the largest improvement, and the what happens next training the least. The addition of self-generated commentaries to the expert commentary training (hybrid commentary condition) did not significantly improve response times. The what happens next training was found to be significantly less effective than the expert commentary training condition both immediately after the intervention, and also after a one week delay. All training effects decayed significantly after the delay, but the effect of full training remained significant. Although no benefit was found in adding self-generated commentaries to expert commentaries, the possibility remains that the what happens next exercises may provide an additional benefit when combined with commentary training. The results provide further support for hazard perception training as an evidence-based alternative to traditional methods of improving novice driver safety.
我们研究了自我生成评论和接下来会发生什么的练习是否对危险感知训练有用。233 名新手驾驶员体验了四种不同的基于视频的培训干预措施之一，这些措施来自现有的危险感知培训包：（1）接下来会发生什么的培训；（2）专家评论培训；（3）混合评论培训（即，专家加自我生成评论）；或（4）完整的培训包（即，接下来会发生什么加混合评论培训）。还有一个安慰剂对照组。驾驶员的危险感知技能通过基于视频的测试进行测量，这些测试使用真实驾驶镜头，在三个时间点进行：干预前立即；干预后立即；以及一周后延迟。与安慰剂对照组相比，所有培训干预措施都显著提高了干预后立即的危险感知反应时间。完整的培训效果最大，而接下来会发生什么的培训效果最小。在专家评论培训（混合评论条件）中加入自我生成的评论并没有显著提高反应时间。在干预后立即和一周后延迟，接下来会发生什么的培训被发现明显不如专家评论培训有效。所有的培训效果在延迟后都显著下降，但完整培训的效果仍然显著。尽管在专家评论中加入自我生成的评论没有带来好处，但当与评论培训结合时，接下来会发生什么的练习可能会提供额外的好处，这种可能性仍然存在。研究结果进一步支持了危险感知训练作为一种基于证据的替代传统方法，以提高新手驾驶员的安全性。
