Hazard anticipation of young novice drivers - SWOV

ecognition task, risk assessment and action selection task, and the MVPT-3)
and the type of latent hazard (overt hazards and covert latent hazards). The
dependent measures were:
• The anticipatory eye glances and the mentioned latent hazards in the
hazard detection and recognition task;
• The number of fixations in the AOIs and the total time of all fixation
durations in the AOIs and the total risk score of the risk assessment and
action selection task, and
• The score on the visual perception test (MVPT-3).
Before using parametric statistical test, checks were made if the criteria for
normal distribution and homogeneity of variance were met. No situations
were encountered in which these assumptions were violated. T-tests for
independent samples were used to compare two means. Univariate analysis
of variance was used to compare more than two means. Univariate analysis
of variance is denoted in the text as 'ANOVA'. For the measurement of the
detection of latent hazards in video clips two different methods were used:
anticipatory eye glances and the mentioning of the latent hazards. In order to
test if the profile style of the two methods was the same, univariate analysis
of variance for repeated measures was applied. This is denoted as 'repeated
measures ANOVA' in the text. When repeated measures ANOVA were
applied the data was additionally checked if the assumption of sphericity
was met. To analyse what the combined effect on the groups was of two
different dependent variables (e.g. the scores on the hazard detection and
recognition task and the scores on the risk assessment and action selection),
multivariate analysis of variance was applied. This is denoted in the text as
'MANOVA'. For MANOVA the Phillai's Trace criterion was used. Each time
MANOVA was applied, this test was succeeded with a discriminant function
analysis in order to interpret the results of the MANOVA. In case of
categorical data the chi-square test was used. The chi-square test is denoted
as 'χ 2 '. Pearson's correlation coefficients between for instance the scores on
the hazard perception and recognition task and the risk assessment and
action selection task were also calculated. No other types of correlation
coefficients were used. The Pearson's correlation coefficient is denoted as 'r'.
Differences were considered statistically significant when p < .05. In cases
several variables were combined into one variable, the internal consistency
reliability (Cronbach's α) was considered with α > .65 as acceptable. In order
to test if fixations on particular areas predicted the scores on the risk
assessment and action selection task, multiple regression was applied.
145