FOUR GROUPS OF DRIVERS DIFFERING IN LEVELS OF EXPERTISE AND EXPERIENCE MADE RATINGS OF HOW EASILY THEY FELT AN ACCIDENT COULD HAPPEN IN 28 DRIVING SITUATIONS. SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES WERE FOUND ON 10 ITEMS, WITH THE 'EXPERT' GROUPS GENERALLY RATING THE LIKELIHOOD OF AN ACCIDENT HIGHER THAN THE 'AVERAGE' OR 'INEXPERIENCED' GROUP, WITH FEWER DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE LATTER TWO GROUPS. TWO TYPES OF ITEM APPEARED TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE GROUPS. THE FIRST WAS CONCERNED WITH MORE VULNERABLE ROAD USERS, AND THE SECOND WITH LEGALLY PERMITTED BUT POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS MANOEUVRES. NO CONSISTENT PATTERN OF CORRELATION WAS FOUND BETWEEN RECENCY RATINGS AND RISK ESTIMATES, SUGGESTING THAT RECENCY WAS NOT AN IMPORTANT DETERMINANT OF THE RISK ESTIMATES. HOWEVER, THERE WAS A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE CORRELATION BETWEEN MEAN RECENCY AND MEAN RISK ESTIMATES AGGREGATED OVER ALL INDIVIDUALS. RISK ESTIMATES ON ALL ITEMS CORRELATED SIGNIFICANTLY WITH TOTAL RISK ESTIMATES, SUGGESTING A SINGLE UNDERLYING RISK DIMENSION (A). THE NUMBER OF THE COVERING ABSTRACT OF THE CONFERENCE IS IRRD NO 255423.
Samenvatting