Proactive Listening to a Training Commentary improves hazard prediction

• Published in: Safety science Vol. 82; pp. 144 - 154
• Main Authors: Castro, Candida, Ventsislavova, Petya, Peña-Suarez, Elsa, Gugliotta, Andres, Garcia-Fernandez, Pedro, Eisman, Eduardo, Crundall, David
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01-02-2016
• Subjects: Assessments; Commentary training; Consistency; Driving; Hazard detection; Hazard perception; Hazards; Perception; Proactive Listening; Situation Awareness; Traffic engineering; Traffic flow; Training; Voice; Hazard perception; Training; Situation Awareness; Driving; Commentary training; Proactive Listening; Hazard detection
• ISSN: 0925-7535; 1879-1042
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.09.018

•Learning becomes easier when expectations are involved.•Gradual-onset hazard events seem to be more difficult to detect than abrupt-onset hazards.•The gradual appearance of the hazard precursor seems to be more difficult to detect than the abrupt.•However, training and practice improves prediction of gradual hazards more than it improves detection of abrupt hazards.•On the other hand, abrupt-onset hazards seem to be easier for drivers to detect.
The aim of this work was to explore the effect of Proactive Listening to a Training Commentary, using the recently developed version of the Spanish Hazard Perception test. Firstly, 16 videos were used in the pre-test session in its short version, cut to black just before the hazard appearance. The What Happens Next Assessment (at the pre-test stage) generates expectations about the outcome of the traffic situation. Then, the training (8min in length) uses the complete version of the same 16 videos, revealing the hazards unfolding. It involves listening to a voice with relevant information about where to allocate attention in the complex driving scene in order to recognise and anticipate the hazard successfully. A total of 121 participants were included in this study. The sample consisted of learner, novice and experienced drivers, including re-offender and non-offender drivers. The participants were divided into 2 groups: a trained and an untrained group. Two assessment times were used: pre-test (16 videos) and post-test sessions (another 16 videos). The test presented a high internal consistency (Alpha=0.875). This training shows significant positive effects for all types and groups of participants. No significant differences were found between the non-offender and the offender groups. Performance in gradual-onset hazard events can be improved after training but also by practice; however this training is essential and especially beneficial for training the ability to detect hazards that appear abruptly (which seems to be difficult to improve just by practice).