This paper comments on the papers of Volkerts et al, and points out that no comprehensive correlations between the features of human performance and traffic accidents have yet been demonstrated or verified. Arising from this situation, O'Hanlon and Willumelt independently developed two different test methods in the late 1970s for investigating driving performance. The first method is an over-the-road test, based on a model which was developed for problems of stabilisation in aircraft and then transferred to car driving. The second method, using the TS2 tracking simulator, was developed primarily for car driving, and had steering along a curved road as a primary task, and obstacle avoidance as a secondary task. In this paper, the authors report on their use of different theoretical models to evaluate the two test methods. The results show that the over-the-road test and the tracking simulator test apply to two different psychological functions, despite their identical objectives. The simulator test has very little similarity to real traffic conditions, as its tracking task makes minimal task demands and has almost no personal risk for the subject. The two methods compared here cannot provide a comprehensive assessment of driving performance efficiency.
Abstract