School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.
School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Nov;132:105266. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.105266. Epub 2019 Aug 29.
Novice drivers are statistically over-represented in reported road crashes, with recent evidence suggesting that some of this increased crash involvement may be a result of limitations in their cognitive processing. Such processing has typically been measured by recording drivers' patterns of eye movements, however, the exact ways in which eye movements are reported and interpreted varies substantially between different studies in the literature. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review was to investigate whether novice drivers and experienced drivers do differ in clear and reproducible ways in their visual search. Studies were identified through searches of Web of Science, Medline, TRID Database, and the TRB Research in Progress Database, with no restrictions on publication status. Studies were included if they compared the visual search of a novice driver group (<3 years driving experience) and an experienced driver group (>3 years driving experience) using an eye tracking method and reported at least one of the following four visual search outcomes: fixation durations, horizontal spread of search, vertical spread of search and number of fixations. Two reviewers independently screened searches and assessed the full texts of potentially included studies. Of the 235 studies initially identified 18 were included in the review, with 13 studies reporting sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis for at least one outcome measure. Given that the included studies deployed a range of method types, additional sub-group analyses were conducted using this factor. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted by temporarily removing extreme experience groups (e.g. driving instructors and learner drivers) in order to test the effect of different levels of experience and training. The meta-analyses, along with support from results discussed narratively, revealed that novice drivers have a narrower horizontal spread of search compared to experienced drivers, however, there were no overall differences in fixation durations, vertical spread of search or number of fixations when the studies were pooled together. These findings have important primary implications for the development of novice training interventions, with novice drivers needing to develop a broader horizontal spread of visual search, but not to necessarily learn to fixate further down the road. Subgroup analyses also provided considerations for future research studies in terms of the experience of the driver groups, and the method type used.
新手驾驶员在报告的道路事故中统计上占比过高,最近的证据表明,这种增加的事故参与可能是由于他们认知处理能力的限制。这种处理通常通过记录驾驶员的眼动模式来衡量,然而,文献中的不同研究在报告和解释眼动的方式上存在很大差异。因此,本系统评价的目的是调查新手驾驶员和有经验的驾驶员在他们的视觉搜索中是否存在明显且可重复的差异。通过 Web of Science、Medline、TRID 数据库和 TRB 研究进展数据库进行了研究搜索,对出版物状态没有限制。如果研究比较了新手驾驶员组(<3 年驾驶经验)和有经验的驾驶员组(>3 年驾驶经验)的视觉搜索,使用眼动追踪方法,并报告了以下四个视觉搜索结果中的至少一个:注视持续时间、水平搜索范围、垂直搜索范围和注视次数,则将其纳入研究。两名评审员独立筛选搜索结果并评估潜在纳入研究的全文。在最初确定的 235 项研究中,有 18 项研究被纳入综述,其中 13 项研究报告了足够的数据,可纳入至少一项结果测量的荟萃分析。鉴于纳入的研究采用了一系列方法类型,还使用该因素进行了额外的亚组分析。还进行了敏感性分析,暂时去除了极端经验组(例如驾驶教练和学习驾驶员),以测试不同经验和培训水平的影响。荟萃分析以及从叙述性讨论中得到的结果支持表明,与有经验的驾驶员相比,新手驾驶员的水平搜索范围较窄,但是当将研究汇总在一起时,注视持续时间、垂直搜索范围或注视次数没有总体差异。这些发现对新手培训干预措施的发展具有重要的初步意义,新手驾驶员需要扩大水平搜索范围,但不一定需要学会在道路上进一步注视。亚组分析还为未来的研究提供了考虑因素,包括驾驶员群体的经验和所使用的方法类型。