Two experiments compared self-reported driving effectiveness of licensed drivers (mean age 19 years) to their performance on two simulated driving tasks. For both experiments, drivers first completed a driving history questionnaire. In Experiment 1, they then performed Cue Recognition, which uses stationary line drawings of vehicles as stimuli and requires a turning or braking response to an appropriate stimulus. Males responded faster than females, especially for the most complex choice responses, and reported more tickets. Drivers reporting no tickets responded slower than those reporting at least one ticket, and they reported fewer accidents. In Experiment 2, drivers also performed Evasive Action Skills, which uses more realistic recorded driving scenarios in which the appearance of a hazard is the imperative stimulus that commands the appropriate turn or brake response. Number of errors on Evasive Action Skills correlated significantly with number of self-reported accidents. Response times on Cue Recognition and Evasive Action Skills were correlated, but there was no relation between response times on Cue Recognition and errors on Evasive Action Skills. However, a comparison of the 10 fastest and 10 slowest drivers on Cue Recognition showed that the fastest responders committed significantly more errors on Evasive Action Skills than did the slowest responders. The data in both experiments reflect a speed-accuracy trade-off.
Abstract