Does the use of a head mounted display increase the success of risk awareness and perception training (RAPT) for drivers?

The efficacy of hazard perception training and education: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hazard perception (HP) has been argued to improve with experience, with numerous training programs having been developed in an attempt to fast track the development of this critical safety skill. To date, there has been little synthesis of these methods.

OBJECTIVE

The present study sought to synthesise the literature for all road users to capture the breadth of methodologies and intervention types, and quantify their efficacy.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of both peer reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature was completed. A total of 57 papers were found to have met inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Research into hazard perception has focused primarily on drivers (with 42 studies), with a limited number of studies focusing on vulnerable road users, including motorcyclists (3 studies), cyclists (7 studies) and pedestrians (5 studies). Training was found to have a large significant effect on improving hazard perception skills for drivers (g = 0.78) and cyclists (g = 0.97), a moderate effect for pedestrians (g = 0.64) and small effect for motorcyclists (g = 0.42). There was considerable heterogeneity in the findings, with the efficacy of training varying as a function of the hazard perception skill being measured, the type of training enacted (active, passive or combined) and the number of sessions of training (single or multiple). Active training and single sessions were found to yield more consistent significant improvements in hazard perception.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that HP training improved HP skill across all road user groups with generally moderate to large effects identified. HP training should employ a training method that actively engages the participants in the training task. Preliminary results suggest that a single session of training may be sufficient to improve HP skill however more research is needed into the delivery of these single sessions and long-term retention. Further research is also required to determine whether improvements in early-stage skills translate to improvements in responses on the road, and the long-term retention of the skills developed through training.

A comparison of cybersickness symptoms across 360-degree hazard perception and hazard prediction tests for drivers

Hazard perception assessment may benefit from VR-presentation by removing field-of-view restrictions imposed by single-screen tests. One concern is whether VR-induced 'cybersickness' will offset any benefits. Self-reported cybersickness ratings were recorded from 77 participants viewing two variants of a 360-degree hazard test: hazard perception and hazard prediction. The latter was hypothesised to be particularly susceptible as clips abruptly cut to a probe question at hazard onset. Such sudden occlusions are thought to increase cybersickness. Overall cybersickness levels were low, with only four participants excluded for above-threshold sickness ratings. The remaining participants showed unexpectedly lower symptoms for the hazard prediction test and rated this test format as more comfortable and engaging. These findings mitigate concerns over the use of 360-degree videos in formative hazard assessments, even when clips involve sudden occlusions. Nonetheless, removal of any participants due to cybersickness raises problems for using VR for formal assessments of hazard perception skill.

Risky Decision-Making and Hazard Prediction are Negatively Related and Could Be Assessed Independently Using Driving Footage

Introduction

Traffic collisions are a principal cause of death in Europe, disproportionately affecting young drivers. Driving safety depends not only on our ability to anticipate and respond to dangers on the road but also on the level of risk we are willing to engage within our own driving behaviour.

Methods

Hazard prediction (HPr) and risky decision-making (RDM) tests were given to three groups of young Spaniards (169 participants): 54 non-drivers (M=20), 65 novice (M=21) and, 50 experienced drivers (M=26 years old). Both tests presented participants with video clips of driving recorded from the driver’s perspective. The HPr test contained hazardous situations caused by the actions of another road user (eg, a pedestrian crossing the road). Each HPr clip was occluded as a hazard began to unfold and participants were asked to predict “what happens next?” They selected their answer from four on-screen options. The RDM test used clips where any imminent danger would be provoked by the film-car driver’s risky behaviour (eg, overtaking illegally). Participants were asked to report the probability of following certain types of risky behaviour (eg, “Would you go forward with the lights on amber?” or “Would you overtake the cyclist/lorry/bus at this point?”). In addition, the effect of the locality of the driving scenarios was manipulated: they could take place in the participant’s native country (Spain) or in a different country (UK).

Results

Non-drivers and novice drivers were less able to predict upcoming hazards and more likely to make risky decisions. Driving scenarios from another country (UK) provoked riskier decisions than those from the participants’ home country (Spain).

Conclusion

Improvement in HPr skills among novice or new drivers poses a huge challenge as far as driver training is concerned, though it is only part of the solution. Young inexperienced drivers’ willingness to engage in risky behaviour also needs to be tackled. Our results suggest that such RDM can be assessed in a similar way to HPr skill, using a naturalistic approach, which raises the possibility of assessing and training drivers on a wider range of safety-related behaviours.