998 resultados para Supervised driving requirements
Resumo:
Using only legal sanctions to manage the speed at which people drive ignores the potential benefits of harnessing social factors such as the influence of others. Social influences on driver speeds were explored in this qualitative examination of 67 Australian drivers. Focus group interviews with 8 driver types (young, mid-age and older males and females, and self-identified Excessive and Rare speeders) were guided by Akers’ social learning theory (Akers, 1998). Findings revealed two types of influential others: people known to the driver (passengers and parents), and unknown other drivers. Passengers were generally described as having a slowing influence on drivers: responsibility for the safety of people in the car and consideration for passenger comfort were key themes. In contrast, all but the Rare speeders reported increasing their speed when driving alone. Parental role modelling was also described. In relation to other drivers, key themes included speeding to keep up with traffic flow and perceived pressure to drive faster. This ‘pressure’ from others to ‘speed up’ was expressed in all groups and reported strategies for managing this varied. Encouragingly, examples of actual or anticipated social rewards for speeding were less common than examples of social punishments. Three main themes relating to social punishments were embarrassment, breaching the trust of others, and presenting an image of a responsible driver. Impression management and self-presentation are discussed in light of these findings. Overall, our findings indicate scope to exploit the use of social sanctions for speeding and social praise for speed limit compliance to enhance speed management strategies.
Resumo:
In December 2007, random roadside drug testing commenced in Queensland, Australia. Subsequently, the aim of this study was to explore the preliminary impact of Queensland’s drug driving legislation and enforcement techniques by applying Stafford and Warr’s [Stafford, M. C., & Warr, M. (1993). A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30, 123-135] reconceptualization of deterrence theory. Completing a comprehensive drug driving questionnaire were 899 members of the public, university students, and individuals referred to a drug diversion program. Of note was that approximately a fifth of participants reported drug driving in the past six months. Additionally, the analysis indicated that punishment avoidance and vicarious punishment avoidance were predictors of the propensity to drug drive in the future. In contrast, there were indications that knowing of others apprehended for drug driving was not a sufficient deterrent. Sustained testing and publicity of the legislation and countermeasure appears needed to increase the deterrent impact for drug driving.
Resumo:
This study explored the psychological influences of hands-free and hand-held mobile phone use while driving. Participants were 796 Australian drivers aged 17 to 76 years who owned mobile phones. A cross-sectional survey assessed frequency of calling and text messaging while driving (overall, hands-free, hand-held) as well as drivers’ behavioural, normative, and control beliefs relating to mobile phone use while driving. Irrespective of handset type, 43% of drivers reported answering calls while driving on a daily basis, followed by making calls (36%), reading text messages (27%), and sending text messages (18%). In total, 63.9% of drivers did not own hands-free kits and, of the drivers that owned hand-free kits, 32% did not use it most or all of the time. Significant differences were found in the behavioural, normative, and control beliefs of frequent and infrequent users of both types of handset while driving. As expected, frequent users reported more advantages of, more approval from others for, and fewer barriers that would prevent them from, using either a hands-free or a hand-held mobile phone while driving than infrequent users. Campaigns to reduce mobile phone use while driving should attempt to minimise the perceived benefits of the behaviour and highlight the risks of this unsafe driving practice.
Resumo:
Purpose: To determine (a) the effect of different sunglass tint colorations on traffic signal detection and recognition for color normal and color deficient observers, and (b) the adequacy of coloration requirements in current sunglass standards. Methods: Twenty color-normals and 49 color-deficient males performed a tracking task while wearing sunglasses of different colorations (clear, gray, green, yellow-green, yellow-brown, red-brown). At random intervals, simulated traffic light signals were presented against a white background at 5° to the right or left and observers were instructed to identify signal color (red/yellow/green) by pressing a response button as quickly as possible; response times and response errors were recorded. Results: Signal color and sunglass tint had significant effects on response times and error rates (p < 0.05), with significant between-color group differences and interaction effects. Response times for color deficient people were considerably slower than color normals for both red and yellow signals for all sunglass tints, but for green signals they were only noticeably slower with the green and yellow-green lenses. For most of the color deficient groups, there were recognition errors for yellow signals combined with the yellow-green and green tints. In addition, deuteranopes had problems for red signals combined with red-brown and yellow-brown tints, and protanopes had problems for green signals combined with the green tint and for red signals combined with the red-brown tint. Conclusions: Many sunglass tints currently permitted for drivers and riders cause a measurable decrement in the ability of color deficient observers to detect and recognize traffic signals. In general, combinations of signals and sunglasses of similar colors are of particular concern. This is prima facie evidence of a risk in the use of these tints for driving and cautions against the relaxation of coloration limits in sunglasses beyond those represented in the study.
Resumo:
This study investigated the effects of visual status, driver age and the presence of secondary distracter tasks on driving performance. Twenty young (M = 26.8 years) and 19 old (M = 70.2 years) participants drove around a closed-road circuit under three visual (normal, simulated cataracts, blur) and three distracter conditions (none, visual, auditory). Simulated visual impairment, increased driver age and the presence of a distracter task detrimentally affected all measures of driving performance except gap judgments and lane keeping. Significant interaction effects were evident between visual status, age and distracters; simulated cataracts had the most negative impact on performance in the presence of visual distracters and a more negative impact for older drivers. The implications of these findings for driving behaviour and acquisition of driving-related information for people with common visual impairments are discussed
Resumo:
Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic vision corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when viewing and responding to driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Participants included 20 presbyopes (mean age: 56.1 ± 5.7 years) who had no experience of wearing presbyopic vision corrections, apart from single vision (SV) reading spectacles. Each participant wore five different vision corrections: distance SV lenses, progressive addition spectacle lenses (PAL), bifocal spectacle lenses (BIF), monovision (MV) and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CL). For each visual condition, participants were required to view videotape recordings of traffic scenes, track a reference vehicle, and identify a series of peripherally presented targets. Digital numerical display panels were also included as near visual stimuli (simulating the visual displays of a vehicle speedometer and radio). Eye and head movements were measured, and the accuracy of target recognition was also recorded. Results: The path length of eye movements while viewing and responding to driving-related traffic scenes was significantly longer when wearing BIF and PAL than MV and MTF CL (both p ≤ 0.013). The path length of head movements was greater with SV, BIF, and PAL than MV and MTF CL (all p < 0.001). Target recognition and brake response times were not significantly affected by vision correction, whereas target recognition was less accurate when the near stimulus was located at eccentricities inferiorly and to the left, rather than directly below the primary position of gaze (p = 0.008), regardless of vision correction. Conclusions: Different presbyopic vision corrections alter eye and head movement patterns. The longer path length of eye and head movements and greater number of saccades associated with the spectacle presbyopic corrections may affect some aspects of driving performance.
Resumo:
Objectives: As the population ages, more people will be wearing presbyopic vision corrections when driving. However, little is known about the impact of these vision corrections on driving performance. This study aimed to determine the subjective driving difficulties experienced when wearing a range of common presbyopic contact lens and spectacle corrections.----- Methods: A questionnaire was developed and piloted that included a series of items regarding difficulties experienced while driving under daytime and night-time conditions (rated on five-point and seven-point Likert scales). Participants included 255 presbyopic patients recruited through local optometry practices. Participants were categorized into five age-matched groups; including those wearing no vision correction for driving (n = 50), bifocal spectacles (n = 54), progressive spectacles (n = 50), monovision contact lenses (n = 53), and multifocal contact lenses (n = 48).----- Results: Overall, ratings of satisfaction during daytime driving were relatively high for all correction types. However, multifocal contact lens wearers were significantly less satisfied with aspects of their vision during night-time than daytime driving, particularly regarding disturbances from glare and haloes. Progressive spectacle lens wearers noticed more distortion of peripheral vision, whereas bifocal spectacle wearers reported more difficulties with tasks requiring changes of focus and those who wore no optical correction for driving reported problems with intermediate and near tasks. Overall, satisfaction was significantly higher for progressive spectacles than bifocal spectacles for driving.----- Conclusions: Subjective visual experiences of different presbyopic vision corrections when driving vary depending on the vision tasks and lighting level. Eye-care practitioners should be aware of the driving-related difficulties experienced with each vision correction type and the need to select corrective types that match the driving needs of their patients.
Resumo:
The present study used a university sample to assess the test-retest reliability and validity of the Australian Propensity for Angry Driving Scale (Aus-PADS). The scale has stability over time, and convergent validity was established, as Aus-PADS scores correlated significantly with established anger and impulsivity measures. Discriminant validity was also established, as Aus-PADS scores did not correlate with Venturesomeness scores. The Aus-PADS has demonstrated criterion validity, as scores were correlated with behavioural measures, such as yelling at other drivers, gesturing at other drivers, and feeling angry but not doing anything. Aus-PADS scores reliably predicted the frequency of these behaviours over and above other study variables. No significant relationship between aggressive driving and crash involvement was observed. It was concluded that the Aus-PADS is a reliable and valid tool appropriate for use in Australian research, and that the potential relationship between aggressive driving and crash involvement warrants further investigation with a more representative (and diverse) driver sample.
Resumo:
Paropsis atomaria is a recently emerged pest of eucalypt plantations in subtropical Australia. Its broad host range of at least 20 eucalypt species and wide geographical distribution provides it the potential to become a serious forestry pest both within Australia and, if accidentally introduced, overseas. Although populations of P. atomaria are genetically similar throughout its range, population dynamics differ between regions. Here, we determine temperature-dependent developmental requirements using beetles sourced from temperate and subtropical zones by calculating lower temperature thresholds, temperature-induced mortality, and day-degree requirements. We combine these data with field mortality estimates of immature life stages to produce a cohort-based model, ParopSys, using DYMEX™ that accurately predicts the timing, duration, and relative abundance of life stages in the field and number of generations in a spring–autumn (September–May) field season. Voltinism was identified as a seasonally plastic trait dependent upon environmental conditions, with two generations observed and predicted in the Australian Capital Territory, and up to four in Queensland. Lower temperature thresholds for development ranged between 4 and 9 °C, and overall development rates did not differ according to beetle origin. Total immature development time (egg–adult) was approximately 769.2 ± S.E. 127.8 DD above a lower temperature threshold of 6.4 ± S.E. 2.6 °C. ParopSys provides a basic tool enabling forest managers to use the number of generations and seasonal fluctuations in abundance of damaging life stages to estimate the pest risk of P. atomaria prior to plantation establishment, and predict the occurrence and duration of damaging life stages in the field. Additionally, by using local climatic data the pest potential of P. atomaria can be estimated to predict the risk of it establishing if accidentally introduced overseas. Improvements to ParopSys’ capability and complexity can be made as more biological data become available.
Resumo:
Problem: This study considers whether requiring learner drivers to complete a set number of hours while on a learner licence affects the amount of hours of supervised practice that they undertake. It compares the amount of practice that learners in Queensland and New South Wales report undertaking. At the time the study was conducted, learner drivers in New South Wales were required to complete 50 hours of supervised practice while those from Queensland were not. Method: Participants were approached outside driver licensing centres after they had just completed their practical driving test to obtain their provisional (intermediate) licence. Those agreeing to participate were interviewed over the phone later and asked a range of questions to obtain information including socio-demographic details and amount of supervised practice completed. Results: There was a significant difference in the amount of practice that learners reported undertaking. Participants from New South Wales reported completing a significantly greater amount of practice (M = 73.3 hours, sd = 29.12 hours) on their learner licence than those from Queensland (M = 64.1 hours, sd = 51.05 hours). However, the distribution of hours of practice among the Queensland participants was bimodal in nature. Participants from Queensland reported either completing much less or much more practice than the New South Wales average. Summary: While it appears that the requirement that learner drivers complete a set number of hours may increase the average amount of hours of practice obtained, it may also serve to discourage drivers from obtaining additional practice, over and above the required hours. Impact on Industry: The results of this study suggest that the implications of requiring learner drivers to complete a set number of hours of supervised practice are complex. In some cases, policy makers may inadvertently limit the amount of hours learners obtain to the mandated amount rather than encouraging them to obtain as much practice as possible.
Resumo:
Social and psychological theories have provided a plethora of evidence showing that the physical difficulty to express appropriate social interactions between drivers expresses itself in aggression, selfish driving and anti-social behaviour. Therefore there is a need to improve interactions between drivers and allow clearer collective decision making between them. Personal characteristics and the driving situations play strong roles in driver’s aggression. Our approach is centered around the driving situation as opposed to focusing on personality characteristics. It examines aggression and manipulates contextual variables such as driver’s eye contact exchanges. This paper presents a new unobtrusive in-vehicle system that aims at communicating drivers’ intentions, elicit social responses and increasing mutual awareness. It uses eye gaze as a social cue to affect collective decision making with the view to contribute to safe driving. The authors used a driving simulator to design a case control experiment in which eye gaze movements are conveyed with an avatar. Participants were asked to drive through different types of intersections. An avatar representing the head of the other driver was displayed and driver behaviour was analysed. Significant eye gaze pattern difference where observed when an avatar was displayed. Drivers cautiously refer to the avatar when information is required on the intention of others (e.g. when they do not have the right of way). The majority of participants reported the perception of “being looked at”. The number of glances and time spent gazing at the avatar did not indicate an unsafe distraction by standards of in-vehicle device ergonomic design. Avatars were visually consulted primarily in less demanding driving situations, which underlines their non-distractive nature.
Resumo:
Purpose: In 1970, Enright observed a distortion of perceived driving speed, induced by monocular application of a neutral density (ND) filter. If a driver looks out of the right side of a vehicle with a filter over the right eye, the driver perceives a reduction of the vehicle’s apparent velocity, while applying a ND filter over the left eye increases the vehicle’s apparent velocity. The purpose of the current study was to provide the first empirical measurements of the Enright phenomenon. Methods: Ten experienced drivers were tested and drove an automatic sedan on a closed road circuit. Filters (0.9 ND) were placed over the left, right or both eyes during a driving run, in addition to a control condition with no filters in place. Subjects were asked to look out of the right side of the car and adjust their driving speed to either 40 km/h or 60 km/h. Results: Without a filter or with both eyes filtered subjects showed good estimation of speed when asked to travel at 60 km/h but travelled a mean of 12 to 14 km/h faster than the requested 40 km/h. Subjects travelled faster than these baselines by a mean of 7 to 9 km/h (p < 0.001) with the filter over their right eye, and 3 to 5 km/h slower with the filter over their left eye (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The Enright phenomenon causes significant and measurable distortions of perceived driving speed under realworld driving conditions.
Resumo:
Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic refractive corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when searching for dynamic targets in driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Eye and head movements of 20 presbyopes (mean age = 56.2 ± 5.7 years), who had no experience of wearing presbyopic corrections or were unadapted wearers were recorded using the faceLABTM eye and head tracker, while wearing five different corrections: single vision lenses (SV), progressive addition lenses (PALs), bifocal spectacles (BIF), monovision and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CLs) in random order (within-subjects comparison). Recorded traffic scenes of suburban roads and expressways with edited targets were viewed as dynamic stimuli. Results: The magnitude of eye and head movements was significantly greater for SV, BIF and PALs than monovision and MTF CLs (p < 0.001). In addition, BIF wear led to more eye movements than PAL wear (p = 0.017), while PAL wear resulted in greater head movements than SV wear (p = 0.018). The ratio of eye to head movement was smaller for PALs than all other groups (p < 0.001). The number of saccades made to fixate a target was significantly higher for BIF and PALs than monovision or MTF CLs (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Different presbyopic corrections can alter eye and head movement patterns. Wearing spectacles such as BIF and PALs produced relatively greater eye and head movements and saccades when viewing dynamic targets. The impact of these changes in eye and head movement patterns may have implications for driving performance under real world driving conditions.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate the on-road driving performance of persons with homonymous hemianopia or quadrantanopia in comparison to age-matched controls with normal visual fields. Methods: Participants were 22 hemianopes and eight quadrantanopes (mean age 53 years) and 30 persons with normal visual fields (mean age 52 years) and were either current drivers or aiming to resume driving. All participants completed a battery of tests of vision (ETDRS visual acuity, Pelli-Robson letter contrast sensitivity, Humphrey visual fields), cognitive tests (trials A and B, Mini Mental State Examination, Digit Symbol Substitution) and an on-road driving assessment. Driving performance was assessed in a dual-brake vehicle with safety monitored by a certified driving rehabilitation specialist. Backseat evaluators masked to the clinical characteristics of participants independently rated driving performance along a 22.7 kilometre route involving urban and interstate driving. Results: Seventy-three per cent of the hemianopes, 88 per cent of quadrantanopes and all of the drivers with normal fields received safe driving ratings. Those hemianopic and quadrantanopic drivers rated as unsafe tended to have problems with maintaining appropriate lane position, steering steadiness and gap judgment compared to controls. Unsafe driving was associated with slower visual processing speed and impairments in contrast sensitivity, visual field sensitivity and executive function. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that some drivers with hemianopia or quadrantanopia are capable of safe driving performance, when compared to those of the same age with normal visual fields. This finding has important implications for the assessment of fitness to drive in this population.
Resumo:
Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic vision corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when viewing dynamic driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Participants included 20 presbyopes (mean age: 56±5.7 years) who had no experience of wearing presbyopic vision corrections (i.e. all were single vision wearers). Eye and head movements were recorded while wearing five different vision corrections: single vision lenses (SV), progressive addition spectacle lenses (PALs), bifocal spectacle lenses (BIF), monovision (MV) and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CL) in random order. Videotape recordings of traffic scenes of suburban roads and expressways (with edited targets) were presented as dynamic driving-related stimuli and digital numeric display panels included as near visual stimuli (simulating speedometer and radio). Eye and head movements were recorded using the faceLAB™ system and the accuracy of target identification was also recorded. Results: The magnitude of eye movements while viewing the driving-related traffic scenes was greater when wearing BIF and PALs than MV and MTF CL (p≤0.013). The magnitude of head movements was greater when wearing SV, BIF and PALs than MV and MTF CL (p<0.0001) and the number of saccades was significantly higher for BIF and PALs than MV (p≤0.043). Target recognition accuracy was poorer for all vision corrections when the near stimulus was located at eccentricities inferiorly and to the left, rather than directly below the primary position of gaze (p=0.008), and PALs gave better performance than MTF CL (p=0.043). Conclusions: Different presbyopic vision corrections alter eye and head movement patterns. In particular, the larger magnitude of eye and head movements and greater number of saccades associated with the spectacle presbyopic corrections, may impact on driving performance.