The authors investigated whether self-generated commentaries and what happens next exercises are useful additions to hazard perception training. Two hundred and thirty-three novice drivers experienced one of four different video-based training interventions derived from an existing hazard perception training package: (1) what happens next training; (2) expert commentary training; (3) hybrid commentary training (i.e., expert plus self-generated commentaries); or (4) the full training package (i.e., what happens next plus hybrid commentary training). There was also a placebo control condition. Drivers’ hazard perception skill was measured using video-based tests featuring real driving footage at three times: immediately prior to the intervention; immediately post-intervention; and after a one-week delay. Compared to the placebo control, all training interventions significantly improved hazard perception response times immediately after the intervention. The full training resulted in the largest improvement, and the what happens next training the least. The addition of self-generated commentaries to the expert commentary training (hybrid commentary condition) did not significantly improve response times. The what happens next training was found to be significantly less effective than the expert commentary training condition both immediately after the intervention, and also after a one week delay. All training effects decayed significantly after the delay, but the effect of full training remained significant. Although no benefit was found in adding self-generated commentaries to expert commentaries, the possibility remains that the what happens next exercises may provide an additional benefit when combined with commentary training. The results provide further support for hazard perception training as an evidence-based alternative to traditional methods of improving novice driver safety. (Author/publisher)
Abstract