Do expert drivers have a reduced illusion of superiority?

It is well established that people tend to rate themselves as better than average across many domains. To maintain these illusions, it is suggested that people distort feedback about their own and others' performance. This study examined expert/novice differences in self-ratings when people compared themselves with others of the same level of expertise and background as themselves. Given that a key expert characteristic is increased self-monitoring, we predicted that experts in a domain may have a reduced illusion of superiority because they are more aware of their actual ability. We compared expert police drivers with novice police drivers and found that this prediction was not supported. Expert police drivers rated themselves as superior to equally qualified drivers, to the same degree as novices, Cohen's d = .03 ns. Despite their extensive additional training and experience, experts still appear to be as susceptible to illusions of superiority Lis everyone else. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Signal detection theory in applied tasks: The case of hazard perception in driving

Fuzzy signal detection analysis can be a useful complementary technique to traditional signal detection theory analysis methods, particularly in applied settings. For example, traffic situations are better conceived as being on a continuum from no potential for hazard to high potential, rather than either having potential or not having potential. This study examined the relative contribution of sensitivity and response bias to explaining differences in the hazard perception performance of novices and experienced drivers, and the effect of a training manipulation. Novice drivers and experienced drivers were compared (N = 64). Half the novices received training, while the experienced drivers and half the novices remained untrained. Participants completed a hazard perception test and rated potential for hazard in occluded scenes. The response latency of participants to the hazard perception test replicated previous findings of experienced/novice differences and trained/untrained differences. Fuzzy signal detection analysis of both the hazard perception task and the occluded rating task suggested that response bias may be more central to hazard perception test performance than sensitivity, with trained and experienced drivers responding faster and with a more liberal bias than untrained novices. Implications for driver training and the hazard perception test are discussed.