Hazard anticipation of young novice drivers - SWOV

Figure 4.9 shows the difference between the fixated overt latent hazards and
the mentioned overt latent hazards per group.
100
90
80
70
Percentage
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Fixated overt latent
hazards
Mention overt latent
hazards
Young learner drivers Older learner drivers Exprienced drivers
Figure 4.9. Mean percentages fixated mentioned overt latent hazards per group. Error
bars indicate +/- 1 standard error.
For the three groups, the percentage mentioned overt latent hazards was
lower than the percentage fixated overt latent hazards, but the difference
between the two was considerably smaller for experienced drivers than for
novice drivers (both young and older). Repeated measures ANOVA showed
that there was a significant interaction effect with a large effect size, F(2,51) =
4.11, p < .05, η 2 P
= .14. This indicates that fixations on overt latent hazards
measure something different from what is measured by the mentioning of
overt latent hazards. Probably mentioning overt latent hazards is a better
indicator of one's capability to recognize and predict overt latent hazards
than fixations on overt latent hazards. Again, it could be that for
inexperienced drivers fixations on other road users were more often the
result of bottom-up processes and top-down processes not related to hazard
perception than for experienced drivers (see for a discussion the next subsection).
The results depicted in Figure 4.7 are in support of hypothesis 6 in
Section 4.1.8 that for novice drivers, fixations on overt latent hazards more
often are due to gaze control not related to hazard perception than for
experienced drivers.
156