Drivers' ratings of different components of their own driving skill: A greater illusion of superiority for skills that relate to accident involvement

Different components of driving skill relate to accident involvement in different ways. For instance, while hazard-perception skill has been found to predict accident involvement, vehicle-control skill has not. We found that drivers rated themselves superior to both their peers and the average driver on 18 components of driving skill (N = 181 respondents). These biases were greater for hazard-perception skills than for either vehicle-control skills or driving skill in general. Also, ratings of hazard-perception skill related to self-perceived safety after overall skill was controlled for. We suggest that although drivers appear to appreciate the role of hazard perception in safe driving, any safety benefit to be derived from this appreciation may be undermined by drivers' inflated opinions of their own hazard-perception skill. We also tested the relationship between illusory beliefs about driving skill and risk taking and looked at ways of manipulating drivers' illusory beliefs.

Does industry matter? Examining the role of industry structure and organizational learning in innovation and brand performance

A manager's perception of industry structure (dynamism) has the potential to impact various organizational strategies and behaviors. This may be particularly so with regard to perceptions driving organizational learning orientations and innovation based marketing strategy. The position taken here suggests that firms operating within a competitive industry tend to pursue innovative ways of performing value-creating activities, which requires the development of learning capabilities. The results of a study of SMEs suggest that market focused learning, relative to other learning capabilities plays a key role in the relationships between industry structure, innovation and brand performance. The findings also show that market focused learning and internally focused learning influence innovation and that innovation influences a brand's performance. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The effect of auditory and visual distracters on the useful field of view: Implications for the driving task

PURPOSE. The driving environment is becoming increasingly complex, including both visual and auditory distractions within the in- vehicle and external driving environments. This study was designed to investigate the effect of visual and auditory distractions on a performance measure that has been shown to be related to driving safety, the useful field of view. METHODS. A laboratory study recorded the useful field of view in 28 young visually normal adults (mean 22.6 +/- 2.2 years). The useful field of view was measured in the presence and absence of visual distracters (of the same angular subtense as the target) and with three levels of auditory distraction (none, listening only, listening and responding). RESULTS. Central errors increased significantly (P < 0.05) in the presence of auditory but not visual distracters, while peripheral errors increased in the presence of both visual and auditory distracters. Peripheral errors increased with eccentricity and were greatest in the inferior region in the presence of distracters. CONCLUSIONS. Visual and auditory distracters reduce the extent of the useful field of view, and these effects are exacerbated in inferior and peripheral locations. This result has significant ramifications for road safety in an increasingly complex in-vehicle and driving environment.

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.