#DVSA HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST 2016 DRIVERS#
#DVSA HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST 2016 DRIVER#

#DVSA HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST 2016 DRIVER#

A number of studies have applied the SA model to hazard prediction assessments and found that it successfully discriminates among driver groups with varying experience. Within the SA model, there are three levels, namely, perception (level 1), comprehension (level 2), and projection (level 3), which respectively approximate the source, location, and projection of the road hazard. Correspondingly, several researchers have defined hazard perception as situation awareness on the road or the ability to read the road. To provide an alternative to assess driversвЂ™ hazard perception ability, several researchers attempted to develop a hazard prediction test using a predictive paradigm that originated from situation awareness (SA) theory. Accordingly, lower test scores on reaction time-based tests may be arbitrary as a lower score could either reflect a proficient ability to perceive what constitutes a hazard or indicate a poor performance on the test.

ДЄlthough the reliability of the traditional hazard perception test is acceptable and the test can distinguish between novice and more experienced drivers, many researchers doubt its validity, claiming that it may not test the driverвЂ™s ability to identify hazards and anticipate how they (the hazards) will develop. In this case, the reaction time obtained from the test may have little to do with the hazard perception ability but rather be more related to the driverвЂ™s risk acceptance.

#DVSA HAZARD PERCEPTION TEST 2016 DRIVERS#

That is, hazard desensitization may increase driversвЂ™ risk thresholds, thus making drivers with varying experiences reluctant to respond, i.e., press the button. Thus, a road hazard that was identified by a driver from a developed country may not be hazardous enough for a driver from a developing country, such as China. The underlying reason for this may be that drivers in developing countries have more opportunities to experience road hazards. Д¬ross-cultural studies on drivers in England and Malaysia indicate that the reaction time-based hazard perception test is less effective in discriminating between novice and experienced drivers in developing countries. One possible explanation for this discrepancy is the methodology used in these studies. For instance, similar response latencies in video clips were found between novice drivers and experienced drivers. Although many studies have found that hazard perception ability develops over time with driving experience, there are studies that have revealed no experience-related difference between driver groups. In these tests, drivers are instructed to press a button or touch the screen once they detect a potential developing hazard. Traditional hazard perception tests are typically based on the reaction time paradigm using still images, simulated driving situations, road tests and clips of normal driving. However, hazard perception tests have not been widely used in driver testing or training in developing countries, such as China. Thus, reaction time-based hazard perception tests have been developed for driver testing and training in some developed countries, such as Australia and England. More importantly, the slower response times of young novice drivers are associated with their traffic crashes. Numerous studies have found that young novice drivers' response times to hazards in video clips are slower than those of experienced drivers, albeit with some exceptions. Hazard perception refers to the ability of drivers to anticipate potential road hazards. Since human factors account for approximately 90% of accidents, many countries have rendered hazard perception tests a compulsory part of driving tests. According to the data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, a total of 244,937 cases resulted in 63,000 deaths and caused immeasurable losses in 2018. The number of traffic accidents in developing countries accounts for 80% of the worldвЂ™s road traffic accidents.

Dvsa hazard perception test 2016