RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Road injuries are a prime cause of death in early adolescence. Often road safety education (RSE) is used to target risky road behaviour in this age group. These RSE programmes are frequently based on the assumption that deliberate risk taking rather than lack of competency underlies risk behaviour. This study tested the competency of 10-13 year olds, by examining their decisions - as pedestrians and cyclists - in dealing with blind spot areas around lorries. Also, the effects of an awareness programme and a competency programme on these decisions were evaluated. METHOD: Table-top models were used, representing seven scenarios that differed in complexity: one basic scenario to test the identification of blind spot areas, and 6 traffic scenarios to test behaviour in traffic situations of low or high task complexity. Using a quasi-experimental design (pre-test and post-test reference group design without randomization), the programme effects were assessed by requiring participants (n=62) to show, for each table-top traffic scenario, how they would act if they were in that traffic situation. RESULTS: On the basic scenario, at pre-test 42% of the youngsters identified all blind spots correctly, but only 27% showed safe behaviour in simple scenarios and 5% in complex scenarios. The competency programme yielded improved performance on the basic scenario but not on the traffic scenarios, whereas the awareness programme did not result in any improvements. The correlation between improvements on the basic scenarios and the traffic scenarios was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Young adolescents have not yet mastered the necessary skills for safe performance in simple and complex traffic situations, thus underlining the need for effective prevention programmes. RSE may improve the understanding of blind spot areas but this does not 'automatically' transfer to performance in traffic situations. Implications for the design of RSE are discussed.
Asunto(s)
Accidentes de Tránsito/prevención & control , Ciclismo , Toma de Decisiones , Educación/métodos , Vehículos a Motor , Caminata , Adolescente , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Países Bajos , Asunción de Riesgos , SeguridadRESUMEN
The aim of the present study was to replicate the distinction between errors, lapses and violations, and to identify aggressive violations from normal or highway code violations. Furthermore, the relationship of these behaviours with road traffic accidents was examined. A total number of 1126 Finnish drivers completed a questionnaire containing the Driver Behaviour Questionnaire (DBQ) with extended violations scale, and questions regarding background information, such as age, gender and mileage. Also, questions about previous accidents and fines were asked. Factor analysis showed that a four-factor structure seemed more appropriate than the earlier established three-factor structure. The four factors were errors, lapses, speeding violations and interpersonal violations. The two types of violations result from different motives, and seem to be associated with different kinds of affect. Both interpersonal and speeding violations were reported most by young males, which was consistent with earlier findings. Logistic regression analyses indicated that errors predicted active accident involvement after partialling out the effects of demographic variables, whereas interpersonal violations were positively related to involvement in passive accidents. This was presumably due to different reporting tendencies of respondents. Speeding tickets were predicted by speeding and interpersonal violations and lapses and penalties for speeding by both kinds of violations and errors. Penalties for speeding, parking and other offences were predicted by interpersonal violations. The implications of these results are discussed.