ABSTRACT A SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC EDUCATION FOR BEGINNING MOTORISTS By Kenard McPherson Statement of the Problem The major purposes of this study were (1) to develop curricular models depicting a conceptual scheme of traffic education which could be used by teachers in selecting content and providing instruction for future automobile operators and (2) to develop from the curricular models a course of study to guide teachers of beginning motorists. Included in the development of the curricular models were: (1) the objective of the highway transportation system and traffic education; (2) the major sub-tasks of the automobile operator; (3) the general abilities required of an automobile operator in driving situations; (it) the interaction of psychological factors and general abilities required of an automobile operator; (5) the major support systems which influence the operator's behavior; and (6) the major units to be taught in traffic education. The course of study included (1) guiding enabling, and per- formance objectives necessary for an automobile operator Kenard McPherson to function effectively as a participant in the highway transportation system and (2) a classroom and laboratory traffic education content spiral to assist traffic educa- tion teachers in selecting and sequencing instruction. Methods of Procedure The curricular models depicting the conceptual scheme of traffic education were based on a search of pertinent literature. Following the construction and description of the curricular models, a suggested course of study was determined by the author. Three expert judges, who reflected a broad concept of highway traffic safety, critiqued and reviewed the curricular models. Specifically the judges were asked to evaluate: (l) the material in terms of what a beginning motorist should know or be able to perform; (2) the appro- priateness of this approach for traffic education curricu- lum development; and (3) the project in terms of needed improvements. The judges' observations regarding the models were reported. Further the judges' comments, which related to the course of study, were identified. The Major Findings The following is a summary of the major findings of this study. The findings are reported in terms of positive and negative acceptance of the units in traffic education by one or more judges. The units in traffic education were derived from the curricular models. Kenard McPherson Positive Responses About Units a. Overview: The Highway Transportation System b. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit A, Basic Control c. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit B, Routine Operations d. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit C, Problem Solving Operations e. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit D, Critical Control Operations f. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit A, Psychological and Physical Appraisals g. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit B, Vehicle Mainten— ance and Inspection h. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit C, Environmental Features and Trip Planning 1. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit A, Design and Packaging j. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit B, System Failures k. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit C, Accident Procedures Kenard McPherson 1. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit D, Financial Responsibilities m. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit A, Strategic Driving n. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit B, Highway Transportation System Support and Improvement. 2. Negative Responses About Units a. Overview: The Highway Transportation System b. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit C, Problem Solving Operations c. Division II, Man-Machine—Environment Readiness Task, Unit A, Psychological and Physical Appraisals d. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit A, Strategic Driving e. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit B, Highway Transportation Systems Support and Improvement. In summary, each unit derived from the curricular models received positive comments from at least one judge and five units received comments which suggested that a potential driver did not need to know the information or that the content within the units required a change of emphasis for total acceptance. A SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC EDUCATION FOR BEGINNING MOTORISTS By Kenard McPherson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1970 "\ u‘ '1 , ,. (i- 7,72. l.,.// 7, #7” ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his appreciation to Dr. Robert O. Nolan, who, as Guidance Committee Chairman, provided guidance and assistance during this project. He also wishes to extend his appreciation to Dr. Robert E. Gustafson, Dr. William A. Mann, and Dr. Dale V. Alam for their time, effort, and constructive criticisms. A special note of thanks is given to Mr. Robert C. Rankin, Mr. Warren Quensel, and Mr. J. Stannard Baker who reviewed and critiqued the curricular structure of this study. Appreciation is also extended to Mr. Paul T. Nelson for his production of figures and models. Finally, a special appreciation is due his wife, Billi, for her patience, encouragement, support, and understanding throughout the graduate program. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem . . . Model Design and Data Collection . . Importance of the Study . . . Scope of the Study . . . . Definition of Terms . . . Organization of the Remaining Chapters II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . Driver Characteristics . Personality and Attitudinal Characteristics Human Functions . . . . . . . Task Analysis and Requirements . Summary . . . . . . . . III. CURRICULUM AND MODEL DEVELOPMENT The Developmental Structure The Tasks of the Judges The Curricular Models Summary . . . IV. THE FINDINGS Findings Based on Judges' Review . . The Course of Study . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . Recommendations . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY iii Page ii iv \Oflm H l2 l3 l6 16 3O “7 59 83 8A 8A 85 88 139 1A1 142 151 195 196 196 199 20A 208 Figure ONUW-Ir' 10 ll l2 13 1H 15 16 LIST OF FIGURES Man—Machine—Environment Analysis . Schematic Diagram of Highway Traffic Situations . . . . The Driving Task Initiation Phase A Block Diagram of Driver Functions . General Concept of the Problem: A Three-Level Partitioning . . . . . . Schematic Representation Operator Functions in Vehicle Movement Tasks . . . . . . Description of the Sub-Task for Traffic Education Instruction of a Routine or Procedural Nature, Model A . . . . . . Description of the Sub-Task for Traffic Education Instruction Within a Problem Solving Mode, Model B . . . . . . . Variables that Can Affect Overall Performance of Sub-System . . . . . Operator-Vehicle- Highway Sub- -System Model, Model C . . . Interrelation of Functions . . . . . . Input: Target, Events . . . . . . . Psychological Factors and General Abilities Major Support Systems Influencing Driver Behavior . . . . . . . Major Instructional Units in Traffic Education . iv Page 68 71 73 75 76 78 81 95 97 98 103 106 109 128 135 138 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM The dependence of learning on environmental contin- gencies both of a psychological and physical nature places an enormous responsibility on educators. The situations in which a learner is placed, deliberately or otherwise, have determining and enduring effects on his behavior. The value of a deliberate education is based on the premise that learning situations and experiences can systematically be planned and controlled to benefit the learner.1 If conditions for learning are not based on a con- ceptual scheme an individual learner will at best have "experiences." When a conceptual scheme is absent neither the process nor the product of education can be accurately defined, and traditionalists, institutions, and persons of good opinion will control the curriculum. Traffic safety education, although in infancy, is dominated by traditionalists, institutions, and persons of good opinion who may or may not have a conceptual scheme for determining the process or product in traffic education. 'lRobert M. Gagne, Conditions of Learning (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 19657, p. A. The nature of the traffic safety education discipline is influenced by a variety of organizations and institutions with various points of view. Currently, the effectiveness of driver education is being questioned and suggestions for improving driver education are being offered. The Secretary's Advisory Committee on Traffic Safety reported: The Highway Safety Act of 1966 requires that states shall provide comprehensive highway safety programs, including driver education. Unfortunately, the present state of knowledge as to the effectiveness of driver education provides no certainty, and much doubt, that the return on this enormous prospective effort will be commensurate with the investment. A broad and systematic inquiry is needed into the general question of how driving behavior is acquired, and how drivers can be taught not only to operate automobiles, but also to understand the major problems of highway safety including its crash and postcrash aspects. The report also included the following: there is very little clear evidence in support of one driver education technique over another. For example, no one today can prove that behind-the—wheel instruction per dollar of cost is a better investment than the unit cost per hour of classroom instruction. Even more disturbing is the fact that no one as yet has produced clear proof that driver education, at least as presently constituted, has a signi— ficant favorable effect upon driver attitudes, motivation, performance or other achievements.3 The previous comments presented a challenge for systematically defining driver education. The report also identified content (attitudes, motivation, performance) 2Report of the Secretary's Advisory4Committee on Traffic Safety, U. 8. Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare, February 29, 1968, p. 57. 3 Ibid., p. 6l. which was not systematically derived further indicating the need for employing a conceptual scheme to delineate the discipline of traffic education. In addition to the con- troversy over content in driver education, the amount of instructional time allotted to driver education also varies even with proposed standards being less than ade- quate.Ll The contemporary driver educator can rely on several sources of information for developing his traffic education course of instruction. Any of the desired approaches (traffic law, professional literature, accident causative factors, driver performance, and task analysis) provide a conceptual framework reflecting the nature of the traffic education curriculum. However, the instructional approaches are not well defined and some have already experienced failure as evidenced by current criticism of driver education. Traffic laws or rules of the road have provided a common approach for many teachers. The traffic law approach has been appealing because of the availability of instructional materials, the ease in correlating classroom and laboratory instruction, and allotted instructional time available to driver education. “Herbert J. Stack, History of Driver Education in the United States (Washington: National Commission on Safety Education, 1966), p. 32. A second departure has involved the study of pro- fessional literature. This approach provided a wealth of information but typically lacked a well defined concept of driving and seldom provided the sequential conceptuali- zation necessary for preparing an individual to function in the highway transportation system as a motor vehicle operator. The study of accident causative factors has been employed as a conceptual framework for driver education instruction. This technique covered the spectrum from national statistics to the study of one-car case studies. The accident research in which the statistical information was based had a host of uncontrolled variables. The research was further contradictory and lacked principles which could be applied in other crash situations. When employing this approach the driver education course usually lacked a sequential design, objectives were unclear, and the task of teaching seldom seemed to be terminated when formal instruction was concluded. Two additional approaches, which were similar, for defining traffic education met with some degree of success. The first has been characterized as the study of driver performance. This method of study ranged from simulated methods to the operation of instrumented vehicles in actual traffic situations. The efforts of Greenshields5 and Platt6 were representative of this approach to traffic education. Typically, research in driver performance, tested specific hypothesis which resulted in an unsystema- tic approach to the problem and provided little applicable information for educators, i.e. the role of reaction time in operating an automobile.7 The second approach involved an analysis of the driving task. The performance elements involved in auto— mobile operation were described. The content for instruc- tion evolved around the concept of what a person had to do in actual motor vehicle operation. This approach required a systematic analysis, but could be limited to the concept of driving processes. The conceptual approach employed in teaching traffic education determined the nature and quality of experiences fbr the learner. The identified approaches contributed to the solution of the traffic education instructional pro- blem, but did not provide a solution for the problem 5Bruce D. Greenshields, "Investigating Traffic Highway Events in Relation to Driver—Actions," Traffic Quaterly (October, 1961), pp. 664-676. 6Fletcher N. Platt, Operations Analysis of Traffic EEEEEX (Dearborn, Michigan: Ford Motor Company, 1959). 7Paul Babarik, "Automobile Accidents and Driver Phaction Pattern" Journal of Applied Psychology, 52 (1958). pp. I49-511. 8William G. Anderson, In-Car Instruction Methods EQQIEEE£2£_(Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1968). either singly or collectively. The traffic law method relied on cognitive learning of factual information. The accident factors approach placed the driver educator in the precarious position of attempting to solve a societal problem of highway accidents for which a variety of other institutions and agencies were also responsible. A systematic approach to traffic education based on a conceptual model of operator abilities and sub—tasks required to function in a highway transportation system is needed before an adequate traffic education curriculum can be developed. In addition, research questioning the effectiveness of driver education methodology, or techni- ques employed can only be of value after the burden of driver education instruction is defined. Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was to develop models which could be employed in developing a traffic safety curriculum. The models should aid teachers in content selection and provide a guide for systematic instruction in order to assist beginning highway users in functioning in the highway transportation system. Included in this analysis was an identification of factors required of an individual to function in the highway transportation system from an educational perspective: a. an identification of the highway transportation system and the objectives of traffic education instruction. b. an identification of the major sub-tasks of the automobile operator. c. the development of a model and a description of the general abilities logically required of an automobile operator in driving situations regardless of sub-tasks which confront the operator. d. the development of a model and a description of the interaction of psychological factors and general abilities required of an automobile operator. e. an identification of the major support systems which influence the operator's behavior on the roadway of which a beginning driver should have an understanding. f. the development of a conceptual curricular model which depicts the major units for traffic education instruction. Model Design and Data Collection The curricular models were based on a review of the existing literature. Following completion of the curricu- lar models for traffic education instruction, three expert JUdges who reflected a broad concept of highway traffic safety were asked by letter to review and critique the material. A second letter which explained the judges' task and requested their cooperation accompanied the curricular material. The opinions of the expert judges concerning the curricular models for traffic education instruction were reported in Chapter IV as part of the findings. Further from the analysis and resulting curricular models, objectives and suggested instructional content were determined and reported in Chapter IV. a. Educational enabling and performance objectives necessary for a beginning automobile operator to function effectively as a participant in the highway transportation system were identified. The objectives were based on the derived curricular models. The purpose of the objec- tives was to provide guidelines for traffic educators, not to provide restrictive, limiting, and likely to be refused objectives. b. Secondly, traffic education instructional guidelines for teachers to use in selecting and sequencing learning experiences to help prepare beginning drivers to participate in the highway transportation system were developed. This curriculum evolved from the models and the enabling and performance objectives. Both a classroom and laboratory content spiral was determined, and the interaction between labora- tory and classroom instruction was identified. Importance of the Study With the initiation of the National Highway Safety Bureau, interest in highway safety has intensified. The Highway Safety Bureau promulgated a number of standards covering various areas in traffic safety including driver education. As a part of the federal interest in highway safety, research supporting the effectiveness of driver education has been questioned.9’ 10’ ll Moynihan, Chairman of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Traffic Safety . . . believes that there is inadequate scientific information on the nature of the driving process and the factors affecting it and on the ways in which information obtained from research in this area can be employed in making driver education as effective as possible for different kinds of individuals.12 As a result of current criticism professionals involved in traffic education are attempting to support their positions. The National Commission on Safety Education asserted that it recognized and provided sug— gestions for improving driver education in 196A as 9J. William Asher, Do Driver Training Courses Produce Egtter Drivers? An Alternative Hypothesis (Purdue Univer— SitY), undated. 10Frederick L. McGuire, "Personal Factors in Highway Accidents: A Study in Prediction and Methodology: A PPogress Report on the Mississippi Project," a speech for delivery to the National Safety Congress, October 23, 1967. 11Report of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Traffic Safety, op. cit. 12Ibid., p. 58. 10 as evidenced by its publication Policies and Practices for Driver and Traffic SafetyEducation.13 In addition to comments on increased sophistication and utilization of research in traffic and safety education, the Commission indicated its position on the nature of proposed research in the following statement: Practical advances in driver and traffic safety education may be achieved through investing energy, talent, and money in research to improve the existing program of instruction and, concurrently, in research directed to acquiring a better knowledge and understanding of those culturally operative human factors which create accidents. If driver and traffic safety education is to succeed in changing behavior, it must be based on a better understanding of how DEhaViOfl is developed and how behavior may be changed. Cushman and Wahl have also attempted to define driver education. Their definition was as follows: a valid curriculum offering that helps to prepare citizens to do better that which they'll be doing countless times for the rest of their lives - living in traffic.1 In a statement by the National Education Association (NBA), the emphasis was focused on: ". . . curriculum 13A Commentary on Recent Reports Relating to Driver Education Research (National Commission on Safety Educa- tion). Statement developed by the Commission in June 1968 and subsequently endorsed by the American Driver and Traffic Safety Education Association, NEA, at its Annual Meeting at Pocatello, Idaho, August, 1968. 1“Policies and Practices for Driver and Traffic Safety Education (Washington: National Commission on Safety Education, 1964), pp. 52—53. 15W. Cushman and Ray Wahl, "Driver Education - What it is - and What It Isn' t, " Traffic Safety (August, 1968), D- 19 11 content and teaching methods."16 This focus included ". the human factor or . . . behavioral characteris- tics known to be related to traffic safety."17 Driver educators are mirroring the NEA's position. Bloomfield made an appeal to look at the total driver education program not merely phases. He suggested the use of innovative methods which provided for the student's examination of personal perceptions, values, interests, and attitudes in the learning-teaching process.18 Quane, in an article, questioned why driver educa— tion has not progressed as other disciplines, and why the laboratory program had developed at a greater pace than classroom instruction. With many disciplines taking a fresh look at what they were attempting to do, the curricula changed rapidly. Driver education managed to remain relatively unscathed. It clung to its traditional "do's" and "don'ts" and plodded along methodically. Recently, there has been a great upsurge in the laboratory phase of driver education. Simulators, multiple car off-street driving ranges, and creative in-car teaching techniques among other innovative practices have greatly enriched instruction. The classroom portion of driver education, however, hasn't kept pace. Why has classroom instruction lagged so badly in so many places? One part of the answer relates to the central theme of the classroom 16 . "The NEA Has Its Say," Traffic Safety (December, 1968), p. 1A. 17 18Gary J. Bloomfield, "Remember the Classroom," .§E§2£l (January-February, 1969), p. 15. Ibid., p. 1A. 12 curriculum. There frequently is no focal point. Teachers and students jump from topic to topic with no specific purpose or guiding principle. Too often the objective of classroom instruction has been to pass the written part of the license examination. 9 He further indicated that driver education could be struc- tured by employing the concepts of human factors engineer— ing and system analysis to driver education curriculum development.20 As indicated by the previous articles there is concern about the effectiveness and future direction of driver education. Hopefully this study will make a con- tribution by providing both a conceptual structure and a direction of development for driver education. chpe of the Study This study was a theoretical formulation of a driver education curriculum. It was developed from an educational perspective to provide guidelines for driver educators. It was not designed to include all aspects of highway safety nor were mathematical models developed to define the driving task. The product was based on pertinent existing literature and advisement from expert judges. The final product is not a detailed analysis of every item, task or sub—task which could be included in driver educa- tion, but consists of objectives and a course of study for 19W. Laurance Quane, "New Approach to Classroom Instructions," Safety (May-June, 1969), p. 26. 20Ibid., p. 27. 13 traffic education based on a theory of a driving process and the relation of highway users to the highway traffic system. Definition of Terms Traffic Education: For purposes of this study, traffic education encompassed the former concept of driver education, but was not limited to basic skill development. In this study the purpose of traffic education was to develop those cognitive, affective, and performance skills necessary to function as a highway user in the highway transportation system. System Analysis: "The definition of system is in a sense arbitrary and depends heavily on a prior definition "21 The concept of system was of a task or problem. employed to describe, predict, and control individual behavior. A system could be vague and general in nature such as the social system or it could be a specific man- machine system. The interaction between an operator and an automobile composed a system.22 In this study, system analysis was employed as a method for describing, struc- turing, and theorizing about the traffic education content anticoncepts for beginning motor vehicle operators. 21Robert M. Gagne, Psychological Principles in i stem Develo ment (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 9555, p. 15. Ibid. 14 Performance Objectives: For purposes of this study, performance objectives referred to desired behavior as a result of instruction at the termination of formal instruc- tion. Enabling Objectives: For purposes of this study enabling objectives ". . . state in precise terms the specific knowledge/skills the student must learn in order to arrive at the terminal performance."23 Course of Study: For purposes of this study course of study referred to a topical outline of content for beginning highway users in traffic education. The course of study included both classroom and laboratory content sequences. Eypert Judges: For purposes of this study expert judges referred to those persons with expertise who were selected to review and critique the curricular models. Organization of the RemainingyChapters Chapter II contains a review of literature. The literature was drawn from both driver performance and system analysis human factors engineering literature con- cerning driving or driver education. Presented in Chapter III are the models reflecting the general abilities required of an operator of an automobile; the relation of the general abilities and psychological factors which 23Instructional Simulation Newsletter 2,1, Teaching Research, Oregon State System of Higher Education, Monmouth, Oregon (February, 1969), p. A. 15 influence an operator; and major support systems of the highway transportation system in which a beginning driver should have a cognitive understanding. Chapter IV con- tains the findings based on the judges' responses to the models, objectives, and the traffic education course of study. Presented in Chapter V are the summary, conclu- sions, and the recommendations. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The review of literature revealed several areas which related to man's successful operation of a motor vehicle. The areas were classified into driver charac- teristics, attitudinal and personality considerations, human functions, and task analysis requirements. Driver Characteristics The focus of driver characteristics covered primarily visual aspects and reaction time of the motor vehicle operator. However, some literature was devoted to the less easily measured human functions involved in driving such as perceptual style, judgmental ability, and decision-making ability.2u’ 25 Ylsual Characteristics The derived relationship between various measures of driver characteristics and accident frequency has been low. ‘ 2“Babarik, op. cit. 25Gerald V. Barrett and Carl L. Thornton, "Relation- Ship Between Perceptual Style and Driver Reaction to an Emer'Sency Situation," Journal of Applied Psychology, 52 (1968). pp. 169-176. 16 17 26 Goldstein, in a comprehensive review of literature on human characteristics thought to be important in safe motor-vehicle operations, discovered low relationship between various identified predictors and accident behavior. Goldstein found in over A5 studies that the correlation between criteria measures and visual functioning (acuity, depth, balance, etc.) were never higher than .20. He further revealed a correspondingly low correlation with accident criteria and the use of psychomotor tests, sen- sory perceptual tests, and cognitive measures.27 Both Goldstein28 and Lauer29 recognized that motor- vehicle operation was a perceptual-motor skill, but could establish few strong positive relations between perceptual- motor variables and accident criteria. Goldstein argued that accident records fail to measure stable driver char- acteristics, since accident status in one period of time is only slightly related to accident status in another 26Leon C. Goldstein, Research on Human Variables in §afe Motor Vehicle Operation: A Correlation of Summary of Eyedictor Variables and Criterion Measures. The Driver Behavior Research Project, George Washington University, June,’l96l. 27Leon C. Goldstein, "Human Variables in Traffic Accidents; A Digest of Research," Highway Research Board Siblio ra h 31, National Research Council, Washington, . C., 1952. 28Ibid. 29A. R. Lauer, "A Comparison of Group Paper and Pen- Cil Tests with Certain Psychophysical Tests for Measuring Driver Aptitudes for Army Personnel," Journal of Applied W. 39 (1959). pp. 318-321. 18 period. Hence, accident records are only slightly pre- dictable measures of more or less stable driver charac- teristics such as vision. 3O raised two additional con- Barrett and Thornton siderations when studying driver characteristics. First, past investigators have employed heterogeneous measures of operator accident behavior. The researchers have made little effort to logically group or categorize accidents. Secondly, the identified predictors frequently failed to have any conceptual, theoretical, or logical relationship to the accident behavior which was to be predicted. With the precautions identified by Goldstein, Barrett, and Thornton, a more detailed investigation of visual characteristics was possible. Cobb31 conducted a research study in which he correlated static visual acuity with the number of acci- dents per year. His sample population consisted of over 3,000 drivers in the State of Connecticut, some of whom had been involved in recent accidents, and the remainder 0f whom were volunteers. The control group was 92.7 per- cent male. Nine measures of static visual acuity were correlated with the number of accidents per year. The k 30Barrett and Thornton, op. cit. 31F. W. Cobb, "Automobile Driver Tests Administered to 3,663 Persons in Connecticut, 1936-37, and the Relation ‘fi'the Test Scores to the Accident Sustained." Unpublished PePort to the Highway Research Board, Washington, D. C., July. 1939. l9 correlations ranged from a high of .065 to a low of .028, the former value having statistical significance. 32 Brody compared 26 accident repeaters and 26 control cases on several measures of vision, including acuity. No significant difference in acuity performance was 33 revealed. In a later report, Brody compared 375 chronic violators, 133 accident repeaters, and 12A controls on a number of psychomotor and psychological tests. The groups did not differ in static visual acuity. 3A Cobb further found in his study on field of vision, no relationship between four different measures of visual field and accidents per year. 35 Brody, in comparing 26 accident repeaters with 26 controls, found a slight but significant difference in 'side vision" in favor of the control group. 36 Low studied peripheral motion acuity, using a specially modified perimeter to display Landolt (C) rings in the horizontal meridian. Using 50 subjects, Low exposed k 32Leon Brody, Personal Factors in Safe Operation of Mptor Vehicles, New York University Center for Safety Education, 19A1. 33Leon Brody, "Personal Characteristics of Chronic Violators and Accident Repeaters," Highway Research Board m: 152: 1957- 3“Cobb, op. cit. 35Brody, Personal Factors . . ., op. cit. 36 F. N. Low, "The Peripheral Motion Acuity of 50 SUbJects," American Journal of Physiology, 1A8 (19“?) pp. 12u-133. 20 the target (moving at 15 degrees per second) for 15 degrees of arc at various positions on the perimeter. He found that motion acuity fell off rapidly as the target path moved toward the periphery. He also found that form dis- crimination deteriorated when an object was moving and that there appeared to be little practice effect in dynamic visual acuity performance. The study showed peripheral motion acuity to be poorer than foveal motion acuity which was in accordance with other findings indicating that retinal resolution was at its highest level in the fovea. An extensive research program was initiated at the United States Naval School of Aviation Medicine at Pensa- cola, Florida by Ludvigh and Miller. A series of publi- cations, beginning in l953 and ending in 1962, presented detailed results from this program.37 Using a population of naval aviation cadets that ultimately numbered 1,000 and Landolt rings presented nmnocularly by means of a front surface rotating mirror, Ludvigh and Miller studied various aspects of motion acuity. The results of this research as summarized by Burg follows in part: 1. Acuity vs. Velocity - As the velocity of the test object increased from 10 degrees per second to 170 degrees per second, visual acuity deteriorated markedly. g 37Albert Burg, An Investigation of Some Relationship Eéfiyeen Dynamic Visual Acuity; Static Visual Acuityyand Qiiying Record, Report #63418, Department of English, University of California, April, 196A, p. 30. 21 2. Dynamic vs. Static Acuity — Individuals with the same static acuity could differ markedly and significantly in their dynamic acuity. No significant correlation was found between static and dynamic acuity performance. It was discovered that if one individual was superior to another at a low angular velocity it was not necessarily true that this superiority persisted for a high angular velocity.38 Burg in his investigation of relationships between dynamic visual acuity, static visual acuity, and driving record obtained evidence that suggests a positive rela- tionship between good visual acuity (primarily dynamic Visual acuity) and good driving record (specifically, lack of citations). Burg summarized the relationship between DVA and SVA in the following statement: It is possible that static acuity is but one determinant of DVA, while there maybe other factors underlying DVA performance, such as neck muscle coordination, perceptual reaction time and the like, that are also important to successful performance of the visual task in driving.39 Bartlett, et a1.“0 conducted a study on symbol recognition time in peripheral vision. They reported: ¥ Ibid., pp. 31-34. 39Ibid., p. 9“. uoNeil Bartlett, et al., "Recognition Time for Symbols in Peripheral Vision," Highway Research Board EElletin 330, January, 1962, pp. 87-91. 22 Of all the sensory capabilities exhibited by the driver, the sense of vision is almost wholly responsible for the processing of information in the driving situation. However, little is actually known about the time that this 'processing' requires. It was for this purpose of obtaining information on the visual reaction and eye movements, that this research was designed. The first part of the research consisted of developing a transportable recording system to record drivers' eye nmvements in a moving vehicle. The second phase consisted of the actual investigation of driver response time to signals in the peripheral. Four basic premises were tested and confirmed: 1. Response time was greater than simple movement responses. This premise was based on the latency concept. Latency was defined as the time interval between the appearance of a target in the peripheral and initial eye movement. 2. Response time increased as a function of angular displacement from the foveal area. 3. Response time was increased as the number of targets were increased. A. Time required for each of the three components or the response increased as the angle away from direct Vision increased. 23 Ittleson“2 stated that there were three conditions in which size served as a cue to distance: "(1) Relative size as a cue to relative distance; (2) Absolute size as a cue to absolute distance; and, (3) Change of size as a cue to change in distance."u3 That relative size served as a cue to relative distance was a generally accepted conclusion. That the absolute size of an object served as a cue to its absolute localization in space, however, was not, generally accepted. Ittleson measured the distance response for several observers viewing a variety of test objects (playing cards of various sizes, a matchbox, typewritten business letter, and.cut-out geometrical shapes) in an apparatus which con- sisted of an experimental field and a comparison field shown alternately in the same direction. The subject was given a monocular view of the test objects placed in the eXperimental field. The distance was fixed and all cues for distance except the size of the object were either Eliminated or controlled. A binocular view of the compari- son object (a cigarette pack or a checker board) was afforded in order to provide reliable distance indications in the comparison field. The subject's task was to move the comparison object so that it appeared to be the same \ “2W. H. Ittleson, "Size As A Cue To Distance: Static LOCalization," American Journal of Psychology, LXIV January, 1951). pp. 5A-67. u3Ibid., p. su. 2A distance from him as the test object. The results, accord- ing to Ittleson, demonstrated the dependence of the subject's measurements on retinal size and assumed size under these conditions. Ittleson stated that absolute size operated as a cue to absolute distance in the following manner: A perceptual integration is reached between the physiological stimulus-size related to that particular characterized stimulus-pattern. The object is localized by O at the point at which an object of physical size equal to the assumed- size would have to be placed in order to produce the given retinal size. In the 1950's, a visual training program for profes- sional drivers was developed by Smith, Cummings, and Sherman. The seeing system had appeal, the principles were logical, and the training objectives were clearly stated. The main purpose of the training was for: "(1) developing systematic search habits to detect potential driving hazards and (2) using driving strategies to dis- DOse of potential hazards before they became critical."u5 Payne and Barmack,“6 in a study entitled "An EXperimental Field Test of the Smith-Cummings-Sherman Driver Training System" attempted to test the actual __ qubid., p. 66. uSDonald Payne and Joseph E. Barmack, "An Experi— mental Field Test of The Smith-Cummings-Sherman Driver Tr‘ail’ling System," Traffic Safety_Research Review, 7 (March, 1963), p. 10. u6Ibid. 25 benefits of the training system. In the preliminary investigation questionnaires were sent to A9 fleets who had provided the training program for their employees. 0n the basis of 35 returned questionnaires the results indicated that there were slight improvements in accident rates for most companies. As a result of these findings, an experimental evaluation of the training program's effectiveness was justified. The general plan for the field test was as follows: 1. The drivers were to be divided into two groups, matched for seniority and accident history. 2. One of the groups was to be trained, using the Smith-Cummings-Sherman training system. 3. Following the training there was to be a 15-month waiting period. Individual records of the mileage and accidents were to be col- lected for each driver during this period. To minimize outside influences, no major changes were to be made in the fleet's safety program or accident recording procedures. A. At the end of the waiting period the records of the two groups of drivers were to be compared. If the training program was effective, the trained drivers would have better accident records than the untrained drivers. Accidents were classified into avoidable and unavoidable accident categories. Four judges, including Sm1th, determined if the accident was avoidable or unavoid- ab1e. When considering all accidents of the two groups, With a mileage criteria, no significant difference existed. 26 ". . . the difference in accident rates between the trained and untrained drivers could be explained simply by random as fluctuation." A comparison of trained and untrained for all accidents was made on a cost basis and no significant difference was found. However, ". . . comparisons involv- ing avoidable accidents . . . favored the trained drivers the trained groups did worse than the untrained group on all comparisons involving unavoidable accidents."u9 It might be concluded that the training program lessened driver's vulnerability to avoidable accidents and increased his vulnerability to unavoidable accidents. Payne and Barmack concluded: 1. Effectiveness of the Smith-Cummings-Sherman training system - as a system — in preventing certain types of accidents by experienced pro- fessional drivers, was not demonstrated unequivocally. Neither accident rates nor accident costs differed significantly between the trained and untrained drivers. 2. It is possible that the merits of the system might be demonstrated more easily and might pro— duce more convincing results with beginners rather than with professional drivers. 3. Effectiveness cannot be evaluated indepen- dently of the trainers. It is possible that the Smith-Cummings-Sherman system may produce useful results with some trainers. If some trainers are more effective than others, it is important to identify who will be an effective trainer. A. One important practical question is still unanswered. Should the Smith-Cummings-Sherman training system be recommended for fleet use? 27 A blanket answer is not possible. The field test results indicate that the fleet safety director who uses the training system may or may not get significant accident reductions, depending upon who does the training. Because of this uncertainty, the final decision must be an individual one.5O Driver Response Characteristics Driver response characteristics research generally tested hypotheses to determine the relationship between driver performance, accident involvement, and specific driver characteristics. Babarik51 conducted a study to investigate the operator's perceptual motor function in relation to auto- mobile accidents. One hundred and twenty-seven taxicab drivers, were employed as the sample population. The subjects had at least two years experience as taxicab drivers. The primary aim of this study was to determine the relationship between one pattern of per— ceptual-motor behavior and one type of accident. The perceptual-motor behavior considered was the ratio of simple reaction time to jump reaction time and the kind of accident was the rear-end collision or struck-from—behind.52 The struck-from—behind accident was chosen as the criterion Variable because of the common—sense link with reaction pattern and the frequency of this type of collision. ¥ 50 51Babarik, op. cit. 52 Ibid., p. A9. Ibid., pp. l3-1A. 28 In this study, response time was fractionized into initiation and movement time. Initiation time was the time required to begin the movement in response to the target. Jump reaction time was made up of initiation and movement time. . . it was hypothesized that drivers whose initiation time is abnormally long portion of their total perception reaction (drivers who have a high ration of RT JRT) would have a higher percentage of accidents in which they were struckikmml behind than would drivers whose perceptual-motor RT shows a typical ration . . . the corollary hypothesis that they would collide with vehicles in their headway less frequently was also tested. 53 The findings indicated that drivers with atypical reaction patterns were more likely to be struck~from-behind. This desynchronizing reaction pattern was heavily repre- sented in the multiple struck-from-behind category. The corollary hypothesis that drivers with the desynchronizing reaction pattern have fewer headway accidents was supported. The discussion of results was in terms of selection, test- ing, training, legality, and human engineering. 5A studied perceptual style and Barrett and Thornton driver reaction to emergency situations. Perceptual StYle was measured with the standard Rod and Frame Test (Witkin). The original sample consisted of 50 males, randomly selected from a population of 1200, between 30 53Ibid., p. 50. 5A Barrett and Thornton, op. cit. 29 and A5 years of age. The data was gathered on a sample of twenty because of simulator sickness and lessor reasons. Barrett and Thornton ". . . attempted to find a predictor which would have a logical relationship to the "55 emergency response. In this study: An analysis of the situation indicated that the main tasks were to detect and identify the ped- estrian. This appeared to be related to Witkin's concept of perceptual style . . . sudden pedestrian emergence into the field of view presented a figure in an embedded context. Since the behavior required of the subject in the simulated driving situation appeared to be related to perceptual style . . . it was hypothesized that the field-independent indi- vidual should be more effective in reacting to the emergency sitgation than would field—dependent individuals.5 The results of the perception test (RFT) were com- pared with the subjects response of: a) initial brake reaction, b) deceleration rate, and c) hit-miss dichotomy. "The results confirmed the hypothesis that perceptual style was significantly related to the ability to react to "57 emergency situations. Discomfort was not a significant factor in initial reaction time but was a factor in deceleration rate. 58 Moseley, in his article "Let's Train Drivers for That Last Crucial Moment," seemed to be supporting the k 551bid., p. 170. Ibid., p. 170. 57Ibid., p. 172. 58A. L. Moseley, "Let's Train Drivers for that Last (hmcial Moment," Traffic Safety (September, 1961) pp. 8-10. 3O reaction or response concept of driver characteristics. He suggested that we train drivers to make responses to such hazards as soft tires, brake pedal loss, sudden power steering loss, returning from the shoulder, and skidding. Moseley stated: Emergencies happen fast. When sudden danger looms on the highway, the driver has no time to analyze the situation and take deliberate action. He must act quickly and - if he is to survive — he must act wisely. Personality and Attitudinal Characteristics Personality and attitudinal characteristics were viewed as factors which contribute to successful or unsuccessful motor vehicle operation. For the most part research focused on the negative aspect of personality and attitudinal characteristics. Hence the majority of the research concerning personality and attitudinal char- acteristics was found in accident literature. Accident Proneness * In early studies of accident behavior the psycholo- gical aspects were encompassed in the concept of accident 60, 61 proneness. However, the proneness concept was * 59Ibid., p. 9. 60W. Haddon, E. Suchman, and D. Klein, Accident Phsearch (New York: Harper and Row, 196A). 61Major Greenwood and Hilda Woods, "The Incidence OfIndustrial Accidents with Special Reference to Multiple dedents," Medical Research Committee, Industrial Fatigue EEEEEQh Board, Report No. A, 1919. 31 questioned and partially negated by the work of Adelstein62 when he controlled the variables of time and population. Further, enlightenment concerning accident proneness was reported by Miller.63 He demonstrated statistically that those persons appearing to be prone to accidents could be expected to have several mishaps on the basis of chance. You Drive As You Live Focusing on the psychological aspect of motor vehicle operation, a recent concept, "We Drive As We Live," attempted to explain man's behavior as an automo— bile operator. Those who expounded this concept recognized driving as a human activity much like other activities that reflected patterns of life. Turfboer6u stated that: Driving a car is a form of human activity-- an activity which can and does express one's personality and social attitudes. Thus, driving a car is a form of expressive human behavior. Human behavior in a given society is subject to self-imposed limits of activity. This range of behavior is considered socially acceptable. It varies according to social attitudes. Social attitudes, expressing these limits of acceptable behavior, are spelled out in our laws. They also change according to contemporary attitudes. At the same time laws ‘ 62A. M. Adelstein, "Accident Proneness: A Criticism Cfi‘ the Concept Based Upon An Analysis of Shunters' Acci- dents,"Journa1 of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A» cxv (1952), pp. 35u—u00. 63Gene Miller, "Accident Repeaters May Not Be gecident-Prone," National Safety News, LXVII (March, 1953), 9- 3-6. 6“Robert Turfboer, "Do People Really Drive As They Live?" Traffic Quarterly, 21.1 (January 1, 1967). pp- lol~108. 32 spell out the consequences of trespassing legal limits. It is sometimes overlooked that the latter statement is incomplete without the addition: If one is apprehended! There are people who will trespass these limits if there is little or no danger of getting caught.6 66 This concept was further emphasized by Edwards ' when he stated: Every decision depends on a man's judgments about what's at stake; in analyzing the decision, we should start with a payoff matrix. But the entries in the payoff matrix should be subjective, not objective quantities On the highway, however, I believe that the bets accepted by drivers are typically, sub- jectively, quite favorable. That is, the sum of the products of the utilities and subjective probabilities of the favorable possible outcomes substantially exceeds the sum of the products of the utilities and subjective probabilities of the unfavorable possible outcomes. The reason, I believe, is simply that people fail to assess the negative value of disagter to be as highly negative as it really is. 7 It appeared that the motorist entered into driving much in the same perspective as he did other human activi- ties. Otherwise, he "drives as he lives." According to Turfboer, the "average" person drives in an "average" manner. The alcoholic drives in an aggressive manner. However, some do not drive as they live and they could be the real challenge. ¥ 65Ibid., p. 101. 66Ward Edwards, "We Drive As We Live," Analogy (Spring, 1968), pp. 20-22. 67Ibid., pp. 20-21. 33 Driving, as stated before, is a form of expressive behavior. It often expresses the driver's emotional state of mind, his atti- tude toward the world and his fellow citizens. Driving, then, is like other expressive emo- tions, such as anger, passivity, confusion, fear, euphoria. Thus driving can become an outlet for a state of mind, a mood, an atti- tude, Driving, as they say of a picture, can speak better than a thousand words. Through driving his car a man can express something which he cannot say in words. Why is this so? Psychiatrists call this type of behavior 'acting out.‘ And what is being acted out is a conflict of which there is no awareness, or of which there is only partial recognition. In other words, it is possible that an individual is unaware of a deeply rooted emotional or mental conflict which begs for a solution. But because it is unconscious it cannot be resolved as ordinary or reasonable action. There remain38only an emergency exit, through acting out. Identifiable Personalities 69 Lynnete Shaw studied behavioral and social factors of those persons employed by the Public Utility Transporta- tion Corporation in South Africa. The results of her ten year study demonstrated a relationship between subject's responses to items in the Thematic Apperception Test and §ppial Responsibiliterest and the subject's driving record. Operating from the perspective that persons with different driving records represented different risks as 68Turfboer, op. cit., p. 103. 69Lynnete Shaw, "The Practical Use of Projective Personality Tests as Accident Predictors," Traffic Safety Research Review, 9, 2 (June, 1965), p. 3A. 3A measured by accidents, Shaw classified rish into five descriptive categories: The Potentially Bad Accident Risk . . . The person who is emotionally unstable and extremistic . . . The Potentially Poor Acci- dent Risk . . . The person who displays little energy, stamina or interest. . . . The Potentially Borderline Accident Risk . The weak person who could be easily influenced. . . The Potentially Fair Accident Risk . The person who has his good points and his bad points, with the bias in favor of the good The Potentially Good Accident Risk . . . The contented person who is in no way outstanding but who is friendly, cheerful, adaptable and accepting provided he is reasonably intelligent, realistic and mature.7 Miss Shaw recognized that: "It would . . . be Virtually impossible to prepare a guide that would cover all contingencies, for . . . it is the totalypersonality pattern that matters and particularly the balance and "71 However, her categories hltegration of that pattern. were descriptive and could be used as guides for observ- ing behavior. Attitudes and Other Behavioral Characteristics Blumenthal72 in an article, "Value Conflict, Deci- sion Processes and Traffic Safety," identified the relationship of values with the kind of efficiency of k 70Ibid., pp. 6u—65. 71Ibid., p. 65. 72Murray Blumenthal, "Value Conflict, Decision ProCesses and Traffic Safety," Traffic Safepy Research m, 10, 3 (September, 1966), p. 89. 35 the transportation systems selected. Although Blumenthal's intentions were not directed towards the study of values as they influence the individual motor vehicle operator, he revealed several examples of values that could influ- ence safe motor vehicle operation in both a positive and negative manner. Some of the values associated with the use of the motor vehicle are near universal availability, mobility, speed, convenience, economic benefits, social and psychological gratifications such as the sensations of autonomy, status, power, pleasure, privacy . . The latter, dealing with social and psychological grati- fications, are of primary importance to psychologists and educators. Blumenthal further signified the impor- tance of appriasing values in traffic education by making a distinction between positive values and non-rational values. "By non—rational values, I (Blumenthal) refer to the cultural elaboration of the motor vehicle that enables it to foster the illusions of autonomy, power, privacy "7A Forbes75 identified attitudes, emotions, and other Peeponses of aggressive and passive behavior as personal- ity factors. He believed that specific knowledge of these factors could assist in the education or learning process ‘ 73Ibid., p. 89. 7“Ibid., p. 89. 75T. W. Forbes, "Human Factors in Highway Safety," gg§%§fic Safety Research Review, A, 1 (March, 1960, pp. 36 ruecessary to the development of personality. On a more basix:level, Forbes believed that knowledge, motivation, arui attitudes could influence the kind of reaction an (mperator made in the immediate situation. He stated: Knowledge about hazards in itself is of great importance in determining attitudes and moti- vations. The alertness the driver maintains may also depend, at least partly, on how strongly he is aware of its necessity and his knowledge about how to maintain it. We need more human factors research of the psychologi- cal and sociological type to find out how different groups of drivers, safety organiza- tions and others, affect each other.7 Forbes further indicated that many drivers do not know vfllat we think they know, including some driver education ins tructors . The President's Committee on Traffic Safety in Uneir conference on traffic behavior research,77 identified 131 their report a section referred to as "Psychology of Driver Behavior." The report described driver behavior as a system. The driver behavior system was composed of arree parts: input, organizations, and output. The report, which follows in part, made several statements and I‘aised many questions which further signified the impor- tance of the psychological aspects of motor vehicle Operation. 76 77 , "President's Committee on Traffic Safety, Conference on Traffic Behavior Research," Behavioral §£i2222. 3 (1958). pp. 3A7-355. Ibid., p. 8. 37 . . . How may 'big brother' controls substitute even for the more automatic driver behaviors? It is of special importance that the entire area dealing with attention (underlining added) be investigated, with particular reference to different driving conditions, and in a wide sample of drivers. Motivational systems account in large measure for the functioning of the organization factor. What are these systems? How do they develop? What is the role of anxiety, and how does it relate to enforcement on the one hand and good driving on the other? What constitutes effective rewards and punish- ments in the development of driving skills? How may these be incorporated into an educational program which has as its end point training for effective ang safe driving under pl; road conditions?7 The report raised these questions several years ago and unfortunately few solutions have been discovered in subsequent years. Dr. Goldstein,79 in a series of lecture-discussions on traffic problems in the United States, provided insight :hnto the difficulty of finding solutions when dealing With the psychology of the driver when he stated: . . . knowledge of the facts . . . is often not enough to adjust people's attitudes. People must be informed, yes, but attitudes are the result of many things . . . Habits of living, habits of thinking, and habits of feeling are developed in a social setting, and it is diffi- cult for an individual to change his attitudes or his behavior or his habits unless such change is in harmony with tae attitudes and behavior of his social group. 0 78Ibid., pp. 350-351. 79Leon Goldstein, "Psychological Aspects of Traffic Ageigents," Traffic Digest and Review (July, 196“), PP- Ibid., p. 11. 38 Modifying Attitudes for Driving The study Of personality theories provided evidence on whether or not attitudes could likely be changed. According to theories attitudes could be encompassed by either the core tendencies of an individual or by the periphery of personality. However, only one major per- sonality theory denied the possibility of attitudinal change beyond childhood; that being the pure psycho- sexual theory. Frued shows vividly his emphasis on the essentially unchanging nature of adult personality. Any changes taking place beyond puberty are not basic or radical. In contrast, the fulfillment positions see personality as a rather continually chang— ing thing . . . the emphasis is also strong in some perfection theorists, like Allport, who sees life as a series of cganges toward ever increasing individuality. 1 Mann82 identified three causes of accidents. The projection of personality was included as one of the causative factors. He divided the concept of projection 0f personality into two parts: (1) a more or less normal group and (2) people with some degree of mental illness or anxiety. From Mann's report, both groups appeared to be of major concern to safety-minded people. Almost every individual at one time or another could be in an unsafe emotional state. Mann, further asked the more basic \ 81Salvatore R. Maddi, Personality Theories (Homewood, Illinois, Dorsey Press, 1968), p. 21A. 82William Mann, Building Attitudes for Safety, presented at the National Safety Congress, 1960. 39 question: ". . . What can we do to improve the situa- tion?"83 The general solution to the question was to provide knowledge and develop safer driving attitudes tfllrough a new and different approach in driver education.8u In driver education particular emphasis would be directed toward why we behave as we do. Mann's article also included a definition of atti- tudes and factors which determine attitudes, but of most importance, the following suggestions were included for developing satisfactory attitudes. 1. The driver education teacher, as a person, must be a well adjusted individual with genuine liking and concern for his students. 2. The driver education teacher must be broadly educated in traffic safety. He should have informed opinion of everything from selective enforcement to the advantages of one-way streets. 3. The driver education teacher should be well versed in the dynamics of human behavior so that he can understand why individual students behave as they do and can help them to gain insights into their feelings and actions. A. The curriculum should include a unit on attitudes and effects of personality that goes much deeper than that covered by our present textbooks. 5. Attitudes and personal responsibility should be woven throughout the course as opportunity presents itself. 6. In the car, courtesy to other drivers and pedestrians should be stressed and errors of \ 83Ibid., p. 6. BuWilliam Mann, Let's Talk It Over," Analogy, ChaI'ter Issue (1966), pp. A-9. A0 other drivers, which result from faulty attitudes, should be pointed out. 7. Class projects, such as a community survey of driving irritations, can bring the importance of attitudes to the students in an effective manner as well as giving them a feeling of realism in their studies. 8. Orientation of the entire school faculty to the breadth and depth of driver education so that unprofessional remarks of colleagues will not inhibit the growth of the student. 9. The class should make field trips to traffic courts, the traffic division 6f the police depart- ment, and the city traffic engineer so that the student can better understand the functions of these agencies. 10. Talks by traffic judges and police officers on policies and problems to help the student in his understanding of the errant driver and the difficulties enforcement agencies face. 11. Projects or discussions of the physiological and psychological effects of alcohol and drugs. We have tended in the past to omit or handle poorly the psychological effects, and have thus left doubts in the minds of our students. 12. Cooperate with the school counselors and other teachers in helping individuals who exhibit symptoms of maladjustment and anxiety. 13. Make clear to the students that personal behavior in accepting the responsibility that is necessary in driving is an integral part of the course. Fail students whose attitudes cause the teacher to feel that they will be unsafe drivers. 1A. Inform the parents of the goals of driver education, its limitations, and any individual weaknesses of their youngsters. 15. Conduct an adult education program including violator schools, releases to newspapers, radio and TV programs, and talks to community organizations. Al 16. The driver education teacher must practice what he preaches and should encourage other teachers to follow acceptable driving behavior. 5 According to Pepyne86 attitudes regarding driving were developed by a complex interaction of social and personal factors. Pepyne reported that attitudes could actually affect the psychological aspects of driving which were identified by him as attention, perception, inter- pretation, decision, and action. He further stated that attitudes were acquired by adoption, integration, corre- lation, and traumatization. Once acquired, attitudes tended to be self-preservative in nature. In spite of the self-preservative nature of attitudes, Pepyne felt atti- tudes could be changed by a person who understood the role the attitude served for the individual. He stated: By combining his general knowledge of his students with information the specific attitudes of each, a driver educator can institute and effective program to change undesirable attitudes . . . 7 Stewart88 in an article published in Educational and Eéychological Measurement, stated that we need more research in methods of changing attitudes of the individual operator _* 85Mann, Building . . ., op. cit., pp. 10-12. 86Edward Pepyne, Changing Driver Attitudes, An address delivered to the Driver Education Section of the MBA Regional Conference at Ann Arbor, October 12, 1956. 87Ibid., p. 7. 88Roger Stewart, "Can Psychologists Measure Driving Attitudes?" Educational and Psychological Measurement, 18 (1958). pp. 63-73. A2 and of the motoring public. The methods employed to pre- sent have been adapted from classical psychology and sociology. Stewart reported that, "While some studies have shown changes in scores on tests designed to measure driv- ing attitudes, no studies have shown that the changes thus produced were reflected in subsequent driving behavior "89 Some approaches to changing attitudes may work on one individual and not another. Future trends may be more successful in changing attitudes because of more comprehen- sive and systematic research into the total personality of the driver. The use of indirect and projective techni- ques may reveal the ego-involvement of an individual in performing the driver's task. Interrelation of Personality and Behavior Related to Driving It has become apparent to traffic educators that the driver can only be behaviorally segmented for purposes of study. In actual performance his psychological tendencies influence his behavior as a driver. Perchonok and Hurst90 studied the decision-making processes of drivers in a merging situation. For experi- mental purposes lane closure for merging was compared 891bid., p. 70. 90Kenneth Perchonok and Paul Hurst, "Effect of Lane- Closure Signals Upon Driver Decision Making and Traffic Flow," Journal of Applied Ppychology, 52,55(1968) pp. lO-Al3. A3 under two experimentally manipulated methods: 1) signal closure and 2) conventional closure. The decision-making model employed, permitted inferential measurement of responsiveness versus confusion and risk-taking, predis- position, as well as direct measures of risk—taking and hazard. The information was gathered with an elevated camera placed above a three-lane section of the John C. Lodge Freeway. The difference between the conventional closure and experimental signal closure was the provision of advanced warning for the signal closure via an overhead sign 1200 feet from the exact closure. Traffic volume under the two methods was essentially the same. The results indicated that the signal closure method, which provided earlier warning of the closure, was superior to the conventional closure in terms of lower hazard (number of small gaps accepted) and greater response- ness versus confusion of the operators. The primary purpose of the signal closure was confirmed by a general improve- ment in traffic flow. Drivers under the signal closure exhibited a greater risk-taking predisposition--a willing- ness to accept smaller gaps--but their lower level of "confusion" permitted drivers to better behave in corres- pondence with the requirements of merging. The amount of risk was no greater under the signal closure than the conventional closure. The unexpected risk-takipg predis— position of the signal closure group was explained by AA aggressive, non-aggressive behavior. Finally, it was con- cluded that measured "hazard" was greater under conven- tional closure than signal closure. 91 Adams and Weinstein developed a device to measure the judgment of an impending hazard by a stimulus accre- tion technique. They constructed a device to present to a driver the problem of reacting to a test situation which duplicated the moment when a hazard was perceptible immediately ahead and a decision had to be made. The stimulus employed was a picture of a traffic hazard. Each stimulus picture was projected via a mirror to a ground glass screen held in a horizontal position before a seated subject. The picture screen was covered on top with a set of small blocks which hid the picture from view. The sub- ject removed the blocks and as he did the picture came into view. Time pressure was induced by having the blocks removed by audible clicks of a metronome. Three scores were taken: number of blocks removed (B), number of errors of interpretation of hazard (E), and the discrepancy between time allotted by the metronome and time actually used (Dt)' The technique was first tried with a group of 16 drivers. Those drivers who accreted a relatively smaller 91James Adams and Sanford Weinstein, "Measurement Judgment of Impending Hazard by a Stimulus Acceleration Technique," Synopsis of paper presented at the annual meeting of the Highway Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, January, 1965. A5 stimulus (low B score) and also had relatively more errors (high E score) were the drivers with higher accident rates. This finding was tested with a second sample of 103 Peace Corps Volunteers in training for service overseas. The significantly higher accident index of the Lo Hi cate- gory (low blocks and high errors) confirmed the results of the pilot study. If a low block removal score could be interpreted as impulsive action tendency, and high error score as inaccurate judgment, then it was the impulsive inaccurate driver who was associated with high accident experience. As a final example of the interrelation of personal- ity and behavior related to driving, attention was directed to Bloomer's article, "Perceptual Defense and Vigilance and "92 Bloomer said motor vehicle operation Driving Safety. was a perceptual—motor response which was primarily con- trolled by perception of the environment. Research in perception indicated that a stimulus-target could be available, yet not attended to by the driver. Under this condition perception was selective. Selectivity in this case was because a driver had assigned priorities to the targets in his driving field. However, the phenomenon of selective perception resulted in more subtle psychological ways which could contribute to unsafe behavior. 92Richard Bloomer, "Perceptual Defense and Vigilance and Driving Safety," Traffic Quarterly (October, 1962) pp. 549-558. g A A." A6 Psychologists have long sought an answer to the question: What makes a person select some things to perceive and avoid seeing (perceiving) other things. One explanation is that people tend to perceive everything except those elements which they do not want to perceive. This is called perceptual defense. The alternative position is that people select certain important elements to perceive and basically ignore the rest. This explanation is called perceptual vigilance (or accentuation).9 Within the theoretical construct of defense and vigilance the emotional climate of the individual played an essen— tial role. The person's perception of an event was related to his past emotional milieu. If the past per- ceived event was positive the individual seeked that positive emotional event in the future for reinforcement. 0n the other hand an individual tended not to perceive emotional negative events. However, many emotionally negative events, if not perceived, lead to dire consequences for the individual . . . Driving, of course, is full of just such dangerous elements with potentially negative consequences.9u In the application of perceptual defense~ in driving the closer an individual approached a hazardous event, the more negative that event became. Clearly the position of perceptual defense does not describe reality, for the reverse is true . . . Illustrations of perceptual defense are not so commonly recognized, since the individual does not remember elements he defends himself against. 93Ibid., pp. 5A9—550. gulbid., p. 550. gslbido. pp. 550-551. A7 Bloomer attempted to test the theoretical constructs of perceptual defense and vigilance in an experimental laboratory investigation. In the study Bloomer paired shock (negative emotion) with non—driving events for the subject to recognize. A control group was given the same non—driving event material but the events were not paired with electric shock. The results indicated a significant tendency for subjects to perceive the shock letter (event) more frequently than did the control group. The results further indicated that both perceptual defense and vigil- ance may be enduced in the same person simultaneously. In the discussion Bloomer described general threatening stimuli which influenced all drivers, i.e. heavy traffic and bad weather. However, he stated that each driver had a series of vigilances that were specific to him, and there was not necessarily a rational rela- tionship between the events in which a person was sensitized and the importance of the event in the driving situation. Human Functions The human functions required of a motor vehicle operator could be classified as part of driver character- istics. However, in this paper human functions were treated separately because the focus of driver character- istics was typically on input (vision) and output (reaction). Human functions serve as a structure for that which takes A8 place in a cognitive form within the operator--internal to man. In addition, the study of human functions was more task oriented and less dependent on accident research. Information on human functions required in motor vehicle operation was sparse and generally was descriptive in nature with only single human functions treated experi- mentally. As early as the l950's, traffic safety people had been aware of the need to study the human functions required of the motor vehicle operator. This need was aptly demonstrated by the publication: The Federal Role in Highway Safety which follows in part: In any examination of the human factors in highway safety, there appear to be two classes of relevant characteristics. One of these is a group of fac- tors that is required of all drivers by the very nature of driving, and includes sensory functioning, perception, judgment, analysis, decision making, integration, and translation into action. The second class comprises characteristics specific to the individual, and includes factors of intelli- gence, personality, emotion, and social forces.9 Michaels,97 an engineering psychologist, believed that before human functions could be delineated, it was necessary to define the system in which the human oper- ated. Once the highway transportation system was defined, ¥ 96The Federal Role in Highway Safety, 86th Congress, lSt session, House Document #93, p. 30. 97R. M. Michaels, "Human Factors in Highway Safety," Igaffic Quarterly (October, 1961), pp. 586—599. A9 the focus would no longer be on errors (accidents) but upon component interreaction to perform tasks. An excerpt from Michaels' article, "Human Factors in Highway Safety, pro- vided for a descriptive presentation of what human func— tions he felt were important to motor vehicle operation. Driving requires the human to guide his vehicle. This means he must operate upon his perception. For example, if a curve is per- ceived while driving it is necessary to operate upon that perception to determine the corrective action that must be taken to stay on the road. Thus, some kind of analysis must be performed in order to determine the kinds of responses required. In the present example, the human is required to estimate the degree of curvature in the road, the speed that will be required to mention just a few . . . There is little doubt that driving often imposes upon the driver demands such as these which are at or near the limits of his capa— cities. Consequently, the highway system must function unreliably under these conditions.98 There are several other writers, Gibson,99 Fox,100 and Safren and Schlesinger101 who described driving in terms of the human function concept. They primarily saw driving as a continuous series of integrated perceptions, judgments, and decisions which were influenced by feed- back and other psychological aspects such as risk-taking. 981b1d . pp. 593-59u. 99J. J. Gibson and L. E. Crooks, "A Theoretical Field-Analysis of Automobile Driving," The American Journal of Psychology, 51, 3 (July, 1938), pp. A53-A7l. 1008. H. Fox, Alcohol and Traffic Safety, U. S. Public Health Service Publications, No. 10A3, Chapter 8. 101Safren and Schlesinger, DrivingfiSkill and Its Measurement, George Washington University, Washington, D. C. (April, 196A). 50 Forbes102 perhaps provided one of the more easily understood descriptions of the human functions required in driving when he stated: In analyzing the driver's task, we find that perception of rapidly changing situations, judgments based on these perceptions plus background knowledge, and responses adeauate for each situation are the essentials.1 3 Although Forbes' description was a simplified version of driving, the human function components were identified and the interaction of the components was clear. Human Functions: Measuring and Developing The three primary human functions as indicated in the previous section are perception, judgment, and decision— making. From the available literature, the study of perception was emphasized most by the traffic educator with judgment receiving some attention in the research. Decision-making as it is related to driving has received little attention. References in preceding sections referred to the decision-making process in driving. For some insight into the decision-making process, the writings 10A 105 of Perchonok and Hurst, Fox, and Edwards,106 were available. 102T. W. Forbes, "Human Factors . . ., op. cit. 1”Ibid., p. 8. lo“Perchonok and Hurst, op. cit. 105Fox, op. cit. 106Edwards, op. cit. 51 Perception The study of perception, usually, was designed to determine the number of events an observer could recognize in a limited time span. The perceptual research dealt with perception and driver records, perception and teaching methods, and perception and intellectual abilities. The perceptual research was further limited to visual percep~ tion (capability required) of the motor vehicle operator. 107 Spicer conducted a research project in Hawaii which tested four variables, including visual perception, to distinguish between accident—repeaters and accident— free drivers. In order for Spicer to conduct his research he had to develop and construct a visual perceptual evaluation test. His test, "Visual Perception Test," consisted of motion picture footage from the area in and around Honolulu, Hawaii. In order to determine the observer's response he developed a checklist based on the films. The checklist included positive weighted items which were relevant to safe driving, negatively weighted items which were irrelevant to safe driving, and items even more negatively weighted which reflected misperceptions of the traffic situations. The "Visual Perception Test" was first administered to 26 college students. The results indicated an ineffectiveness of the test which led to a 107Robert A. Spicer, Human Factors in Traffic Acci- dents, Research Grant No. AC-SS, U. S. Public Health Ser- vice, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Washington, D. C. S2 revision of the checklist. The next p0pulation tested consisted of 209 professional bus drivers. For profes- sional drivers the "Visual Perception Test" was the only measure that significantly differentiated the accident- repeaters from the accident-free group. The test was further refined by administering it to a group of lay peOple with significant results. The final phase of Spicer's research was directed toward the adolescent operator. The sample consisted of 875 teen-age applicants for operators' licenses. The chronological age of the applicants was between 15 and 17 years. A follow—up system was employed to determine which teenagers in this study were involved in reportable acci— dents. The results of the "Visual Perception Test" allowed the investigator to distinguish exhibited behavior that resulted in adolescent accidents. In summary the four variables investigated by Spicer were attitudes, frustration response, problem solving, and visual perception. His findings indicated that only visual perception significantly differentiated the acci— dent-repeater from the accident-free driver for the pOpu- lation studied. McPherson and Kenel108 investigated the perceptual ability of in-school youth prior to licensing. The 108Kenard McPherson and Francis Kenel, "Perception of Traffic Hazards: A Comparative Study," Traffic Safety Research Review, 12, 2 (June, 1968), pp. A6-A9. 53 researchers employed three different I.Q. groups. Percep- tual training was conducted in driving simulators with each group receiving the same amount of instructional time. In order to measure the perceptual difference of the sample groups, a perception test and evaluation checklist had to be developed. The "Perception of Traffic Hazards Test" was constructed from the Shell Filmstrip series. In the test development hazards and pseudo-hazards were identified by expert judges. The scoring procedure for the "Perception of Traffic Hazards Test" follows: Different hazards present a different apparent danger to a driver so the identified hazards were assigned a positive numerical value +1 to +3 depending on the severity of the hazards. Since the pseudo-hazards must be of a discrete nature in order to be a worthwhile distractor, they were assigned a negative numerical value of -2 or -3. A student's raw score on either the pre—or post-test was the difference between his perception of actual hazards and pseudo— hazards. For the pre-test, the total positive points were 80 and the total negative points were A6. For the post-test the total positive points were 79, with a total of 29 negative points. A multiple-choice answer sheet was used. The student merely placed an "x" by the choice designated A-E. The responses to the test were pre-recorded on tape. By employing this method, all participants received the same auditory cues and hence were not influenced by inflections of the voice or by facial expres- sions of the examiner. The investigators concluded that: 1. Traffic simulators provided a method to improve a student's visual perceptual ability in identifying traffic hazards. 109Ioid., p. A7. 5A 2. Those students who received instruction (experimental group) did better on the postvtreatment on the "Perception of Traffic Hazards Test" than did the students who did not receive instruction (control group). 3. Traffic simulator instruction provided a means (method) of improving a student's ability to perceive traffic hazards regardless of his measured I.Q. A. Although there was some apparent need to group students for traffic simulator instruction on the basis of measured I.Q., no statistical significant differences in growth of experimental groups existed when comparing one experimental group with the other. Robinson,110 in a study employing the same evalua— tion device, "Perception of Traffic Hazards Test," com- pared the influence of two traffic simulated methods on the subject's visual perception. He attempted to determine: 1. If there was a significant improvement in visual perception of traffic hazards when providing instruction by a simulated method (using traffic simulator programmed instructional films in a classroom). 2. If there was a difference in visual perceptual development when comparing simulated method (1) above with the conventional usage of driving simulators. 110Allen Robinson, The Influence of Programmed Instructional Films on Perception of Traffic Hazards, an unpublished master's thesis, Illinois State University, June, 1968, 58 pages. 55 The two groups received instruction over the same traffic simulator films and were given the same amount of instructional time. The researcher concluded that: 1. visual perceptual ability required to identify hazards and events could be developed by employing the simulated method of using traffic simulator films in a typical classroom setting, and 2. that there was no significant difference in measured perceptual ability as developed by the two simulated methods-—the typical classroom treatment as compared with the conventional traffic simulator method. Streeterlll developed a classroom visual training approach. In his program the sample was presented static input through a tachistoscopic technique. The visual perception instructional program consisted of 18 lessons of 26 minutes in duration. He employed the "Perception of Traffic Hazards Test" as the measuring device. Streeter concluded that visual perceptual ability could be improved and developed in a classroom setting employing static input. He further stated that visual perceptual training could be accomplished without expensive sophisticated apparatus (simulators). lllGerald Streeter, A Classroom Visual Perception Program for Beginning Motorists, an unpublished master's thesis, Illinois State University, August, 1968, A2 pages. 56 Judgment The research concerning judgmental ability of the operator focused on the components of speed and distance, the two primary factors which provide for an operator's safe field of travel. Olson, et al.112 reported that a driver was continu- ously faced with the problem of determining the velocities of other vehicles in relation to his own speed, and that no one had attempted to verify experimentally the cause for errors in the driver's judgment of speed. They fur- ther indicated that there was a need to assess the ability of people to make relative velocity judgments. The purpose of this investigation was twofold. First, to learn how accurately drivers can determine whether the gap between their own and a preceding car was opening, holding con- stant, or closing. Second to determine how well drivers can discriminate among different rates of change of this gap.113 Twelve experienced drivers participated in the experiment. They were passenger-judges in a vehiCle which travelled at a constant speed of A0 miles per hour. The lead car in which the subjects were to base their judgments on, travelled at a speed from ten to seventy miles per hour and changed speed in ten mile per hour intervals. Communication was maintained between the vehicles with 112Paul Olson, et al., "Driver Judgments of Relative Car Velocities," Journal of Applied Psychology, A5, 3 (1961), pp. l6l-16A. 113Ibid., p. 161. 57 jportable short—wave radios. On signal, the participants in the subject-vehicle were directed to look-up and observe the lead vehicle for seven seconds. The subject's judg- Inents were made during the observation time. There were 15A judgments made, 62 were correct and 92 were incorrect. Of the 92 incorrect responses, 62 were conservative responses indicating the judge underestimated the speed of the lead car. The researchers made the following conclusions, based on the data collected: 1. In the range of speed differences tested, people tend to be quite accurate in determin- ing whether the distance between their car and a preceding one is increasing or decreasing. 2. People exhibit a better than chance ability to discriminate between opening and closing rates at least as fine as 10 mph. 3. The accuracy with which judgments such as these can be made increases as the distance between the vehicles decreases. A. Judgments are made more accurately when the gap is closing than when it is opening. 5. In the range of speed differences studied, subjects tended to underestimate the relative speed differential beEween their car and the one in front of it.11 It appeared that people do rather well in making the type of judgments required in this study. There was little reason to believe that frequent dangerous driver actions ll”Ibid., pp. 163-16A. 58 would result because of information supplied by this type of judgment. 115 conducted a study to investi- Wright and Sleight gate following distance behavior associated with mental sets and the use of additional visual cues in maintaining following distance. This approach primarily allowed drivers to judge the amount of headway available for manueverability. Two vehicles were employed in the investigation. The lead vehicle controlled speed of travel and the follower-vehicle controlled distance (headway) on the basis of pre-trial instructions. The distances were mea— sured by a motion picture camera mounted on the front of the follower vehicle.116 The sample consisted of 26 subjects which were predominantly male. The sets that were induced by the researchers were habitual, maximum safety, and emergency. The investigators concluded on the basis of the sample employed: 1. Following distance is a stable measure of driving performance. 2. Both speed and emergency instructions affected following distance, with the higher speed resulting in longer distances and the emergency mental set resulting in shorter distances. 115Stuart Wright and Robert Sleight, "Influence of Mental Set and Distance Judgment Aids on Following Distance,‘ Highwgy Research Board Bulletin, No. 30, 1962. 116T. F. Forbes, et al., Measurement of Drivers Reac- tions to Tunnel Conditions," ARB Proc., 37 (1958), pp. 3A5- 357. 59 3. Percent of error was significantly less at the longer of the two requested following distances. A. Use of the visual and timing aids resulted in significantly lessening the tendency to follow at a greater than requested distance. 5. On the average, drivers drove at about the same following distance under both habitual and maximum safety instruction, at 30 mph. Particularly significant for this study was the fact that at both 30 and 50 mph subject drivers made the judg- ment that their habitual following distance was equal to the set of maximum safety. Task Analysis and Requirements Few attempts have been made to describe and analyze the task of the motor vehicle operator. Task analyses which have been completed were treated in one of two approaches. Some driving tasks were treated in a descrip- tive manner and others have been organized and constructed into schematic models. Frequently, tasks were not developed as comprehensive statements of the requirements for motor vehicle operation, but were designed to provide focus or perspective for research purposes. In many ana- lyses the authors were aware of the limitations of the task models and identified the limitations. The historical concept of the driving task was developed by Gibson and Crooks.118 They developed a 117Wright and Sleight, op. cit., p. 59. 118Gibson and Crooks, op. cit. 6O description of the task based on a systematic set of con- cepts which was felt to have both psychological and practical validity for automobile operation. Gibson and Crooks felt that driving an automobile was predominantly a perceptual task, with overt behavior being relatively simple and easily learned. They further recognized and developed their concept within the constraints of what man could do with a tool (vehicle) for locomotion. Accord- ing to the authors an operator was limited to speed and direction change. Hence he manipulated his vehicle con- trols in an effort to achieve a field of travel and maintain a minimum stopping zone. Prior to a description of "the field of safe travel" and "minimum stopping zone," Gibson and Crooks asked the basic question: "What initiates and maintains locomotion itself."119 In answering the question, they purported that speed of locomotion was a function of the individual's desire to arrive at his destination. This desire was represented by the hurry motive. When people were not motivated by hurry or destination arrival then driving was considered pleasure: ". . . the using of a tool or a skill for its own sake."120 Acceleration then was a function of a motive of either hurry or destination arri- val or both. Deceleration was, however, an avoidance llgIbid., p. A56. lZOIbid., p. use. 61 reaction to obstacles which ultimately supported the motive of destination arrival. The human response of steering was defined as follows: ". . . a perceptually gpverned series of reactions py the driver of such a sort as to keep the car headed into the middle of the field of safe travel."121 According to Gibson and Crooks, the field of safe travel was visually attended. The attending involved a process of selecting pertinent events to locomotion while not selecting non-pertinent events. The field was defined as ". . . the field of possible paths which the car mgy 122 The field of safe travel perceptually take unimpeded." had a positive valence. However, within the total road system both positive and negative valences existed. "For instance, a hot-dog wagon had a negative valence with respect to locomotion, but a positive one with respect to appetite."123 Further the field was a spatial field but was not physically fixed. That is to say the roadway shoulder which was generally conceived as possessing a negative valence acquired a positive valence in an emer- gency situation. Gibson and Crooks identified the minimum stopping zone as the second component of automobile driving. The 1211616., p. A56. 122Ibid., p. A5A. 123Ibid., p. A55. 62 size of the minimum stopping zone was dependent on vehicle speed and other vehicle and road factors. The minimum stopping zone also covered less physical space than the field of safe travel. In summary, Gibson and Crooks defined driving as a perceptual task and perceptual field dependent task. The task was directed by motive and was individual and compe— titive in nature. Successful task performance was mea- sured by the product of human functions, perceptual response, resulting in a safe field of travel or a minimum stOpping zone. A second model was developed by Schlesinger and Safren,12’4 and was further refined by Schlesinger.125 Their model relied largely on the historical model. Schlesinger and Safren viewed motor vehicle operation as a form of locomotion which was guided by perception, especially visual perception, so that paths were identified within the perceptual field which led to a collision-free destination. Visual perception was considered more impor— tant than motor responses which were easily mastered and invariant. The objective visual field of the driver was constantly changing and required continuous organization 1213L. E. Schlesinger and M. A. Safren, "Perceptual Analysis of the Driving Task," Highway Research Board Record 8A (January, 196A), pp. 5A-61. 125L. Schlesinger, "Objectives, Methods, and Criterion Test in Driver Training," Traffic Safety Research Review, 11, 1 (March, 1967), pp. 18-2A. 63 by the operator. "On the basis of this organization, the driver is seen as making compensatory motor responses to the vehicle in the form of speed and direction changes."126 Decision-making was viewed as that part of the model which enabled the operator to select from alternatives the correct response for driving situations. In both Schlesinger and Safren and Schlesinger's articles, the driving process was described in terms of critical tasks to be performed by an operator and behaviors which were prerequisites for performing the tasks. In part, the critical task requirements were: 1. The perceptual organization from moment to moment a path or series of paths, the 'field of safe travel,‘ where the driver can move without colliding with obstacles or leaving the roadway . . . should be in reasonable accord with objective reality. 2. The perceptual organization from moment to moment of the smallest region within which the driver could come to a full stop if necessary, the 'minimum stppping zoney: . . . should also be in reasonable accord with reality . . . 3. The comparison of these two fields in order to assess the optimal state . . . The driver maintains a field of safe travel greater than the minimum stopping zone . . . A. The translation of the overall route leading to the destination into a series of momentary courses to follow, with planning far enough in advance so that at any instant the course lies within the field of safe travel 126Schlesinger and Safren, op. cit., p. 55. 6A 5. While carrying out the tasks . . . a driver is continually making compensatory changes in the car's direction 3nd spged to achieve an optimal state . . .1 ’ Schlesinger then identified what he called procedures, i.e., passing, stopping, etc., but indicated that an analy- sis should not be confined to the driving situation alone, but the behaviors (human functions) of the operator in relation to the situations. He delineated two broad classifications of driving behavior--guidance and control. The driving behavior classes were further delineated into required human functions. The first class, guidance behavior, was sub—divided into three sub-tasks (functions); search, identification, and prediction. They were all perceptually derived functions: These sub-tasks tell the driver where and when to look, what to look for and what to make of it. They answer the questions: Is anything going on that should influence my driving? What is it? What can be expected to happen?1 9 The control behavior was divided into two sub-tasks (functions), decision-making and execution. "Decision- making procedures were concerned with the question of what Ibid., pp. 55-56. 128Schlesinger, op. cit., pp. 18-19. 1291bid., p. 19. 65 to do, and execution . . . with the drivers responses to the vehicle."130 Schlesinger and Safren then viewed the operator's role as a task of attending to a continuously changing perceptual field which could be successfully transversed to a destination by employing two broad classes of behavior--guidance and control. 131 Ross developed driving models to explain the causes of highway collisions. He stated that driving was a process which could be conceptualized by the interaction of operator-vehicle and road. He further indicated that the possibility of failure existed in the simplest of driving tasks. Ross said: The task of driving is to get cargo to a spatio- temporal goal. The cargo may be people, goods or both. The goal is arrival at a geographical location within some limited period of time, although the location may be stated broadly (e.g.‘the country') and the time limits may be very flexible (e.g. 'this afternoon').132 Ross' first model was a non-social model in which the operator was seen to guide his vehicle with no other operator-vehicle units on the road. The second was a social model, a more realistic model, which added the presence of other highway users. l3°Ibid., p. 19. 131H. L. Ross, Schematic Analysis of the Driving Situation, Traffic Institute, Northwestern University, 1960 o Ibid., pp. 12-1A. ... vulv- "V‘, .- an... 66 The simple non-social model could result in failures because of conditions external to the basic system (man- machine-road). Such events as moisture, surface, and markings could vary which result in failure. The operator in the social model was more likely to experience accidents because of the presence of additional vehicle-operator units operating independently to achieve independent goals. As vehicles travel over a roadway network in different directions and at different velocities, an operator must be able to predict the behavior of all other drivers during the period in which there is a relatively high probability of their becoming obstacles in the path.l33 In order to make these predictions an operator needed to make certain assumptions. In the social model these assumptions were based primarily on rules of the road. Ross viewed the driving process as being motivated by a desire to arrive at a destination within a specific time limitation. In functioning as an operator an indi- vidual was operating simultaneously with other independent goal oriented operators. Thus the task of driving in the social model was complicated with a high probability of failure. 133Ibid., pp. 12-15. 67 13“. 135. 136 Forbes identified in several articles the human functions required in performing the driving task, and developed a schematic model to illustrate his concept of the driving process. He analyzed the driving task in terms of perceptions, judgments, and responses. In analyzing the driver's task, we find that perception of rapidly changing situations, judgments based on these perceptions plus back~ ground knowledge, and responses adequate for each situation are the essentials. The judg- ments made by the driver are based upon infor- mation about the highway situation and about possible hazards which may be so well learned that it is automatically rather than consciously used. Knowledge, attitudes and motivations also influenced driver reactions. Forbes' diagram in Figure 1 provided for the study of a number of functions. However, Forbes stated that the analysis was an oversimplification of the driving task. Platt138’ 139 measured the probability of events in highway situations, and his analysis has been employed by 13“T. W. Forbes, "Human Factors . . .," op. cit. 135T. W. Forbes, "Traffic Engineers and Driver Behav- ior," Traffic Safepy Research Review, 9,3 (September, 1965), pp. 87-89. 136T. W. Forbes, "Predicting Attention-Gaining Char- acteristics of Highway Traffic Signs: Measurement Techni- que," Human Factors, 6, A (August, 196A), pp. 371-375. 137T. W. Forbes, "Human Factors . . .," op. cit., p. 8. 138Fletcher Platt, "Operations . . .," op. cit. 139Fletcher Platt, A Unique Method of Measuring Road, Traffic, Vehicle and Driver Characteristics, presented at the IV World Meeting of International Road Federation, Madrid, October 1A-20, 1962. 68 .mm .o .pfio .mo=.. . .mnmmsfiwqm pawmmnez .monnom .3 .B 11 _ 2238.8... 3.9m 39:22 o a H ona.mfimmfimnm peoenomfl>noiocfinomelcmzll.a onzwfim .895 5:382. c2558... 28881.. 1 l l l l l l I l I l I J _ _ 225% — 9.38.3.0 — 9.9m u.3o.deo.r > _ £03.50 .mwowwwumw‘ _ macaw m_o_cm> actuano 23585! — «9.88. - mafihwfimom rm mczofiEtomE 338.. . coEmoa . 2963‘ 22...? :30 m _ 267:5 % _ 9.3889. A. .m:m_> m . 9.39:. _ 2022, .35 9:23 _ _ ooom — _ Eat. __:E_~m _ 59:0 _ Sac. llllllllllllL .9830 55:: n-r v-“' l\ 1m Ia 69 many educators as a model of the driving task. Platt recorded the frequency and total number of events occurring as an operator moved along the roadway. He further identi— fied required driver responses appropriate for coping with events. His data was gathered in an instrumented vehicle (Drivometer) in conjunction with a 16 mm camera with both a front and rear view. Platt stated that a driver was confronted with a variety of events as he moved along the road. The opera- tor observed some events and from the observations he reached a decision. The decision was in regard to vehicle control and communication between vehicle-operator units. As a result of the operator's decision, action was taken which resulted in a space-time relationship of the opera- tor vehicle unit through direction and speed control. If the operator committed an error the probability of failure was increased. Platt indicated that errors resulted from incorrect decisions, unobserved events, or chance. He concluded that the probability of a traffic situation occurring was as follows: Highway and Traffic Events - 10 or more per second Driver Observation - 2 or more per second Driver Decision - l to 3 per second Driver Actions - 30 to 120 per minute Driver Errors — at least 1 every 2 minutes A Hazardous Situation - every hour or two 70 A Near Collision - once or twice a month A Collision - every six years of driving An Injury - every A0 years of driving A Fatality - every 1,600 years of drivinglul In addition, Platt described the behavior of drivers and developed a schematic model (Figure 2) of the behavior of a motor vehicle operator. Platt also defined driving as a process with four conditions or functions from input to output: -Stimu1i (events) are some form of physical energy which activates receptors. ~Receptors or sensory processes (observations) are classified in eleven or more sense models such as vision, audition, etc. -Perceptions (decisions) derived from sensa- tions, are guides to behavior. -Responses (actions) are derived from per- ceptions.“l2 In summary Platt, described driving as primarily a visual observation task in which the operator made related driver observations of highway and traffic events. Per- ception, in his model, was the predominate human function required of the operator. Staff members of the Traffic and Safety Education Section at Illinois State University developed a descrip- tion and schematic model of the driving task. The schematic model relied extensively on Platt's previous 1“Ibid., p. 3. l“P'Platt, "Operations . . .," op. cit., p. 18. 71 I Highway Events , _ ’ TOTAL Unrelated , EVENTS Events Traffic Events ('"“""—I 7 Other Visual DR'VER Sense I - w l Observations OBSERVATIONS Observations | Driver 4 r- -) —r Motivation H DECISIONS l I Steering BASIC DRIVER Acce'e'ato" I I A Wheel ACTIONS Reversals - I Reversals , I Brake I _L Applications .1. Risk . ’ Road I Feedback ' Location VEHICLE Speed and | Feedback T - Direction DYNAMICS Speed Change L. .1 Tracking - I * I - 9 — - Hazardous HAZARDOUS I Events SITUATIONS Unnecessary L. , Actions — — — - _ — 6 - NEAR COLLISIONS ,njury ' COLLISIONS Egg: Collisions Collisions I { INJURIES J FATALITIES 1 A 3 Figure 2.--Schematic diagram of highway traffic situations. l“3Platt, A Unique. . .y op. cit., p. 2. 72 efforts in task analysis. The task description classified driving as a mental, social, and physical task and identi- fied the performance required of an automobile operator. Driving an automobile consists of making skilled and properly timed actions, under varying road and traffic conditions, based on sound judgments and decisions: these decisions are, in turn, dependent upon previously acquired knowledge and the gathering of accurate information pertinent to the immediate traffic situation.1 The schematic (Figure 3), which follows, identified behavior required from input to output. Driving success in this model was dependent upon stored knowledge, a motivated operator, and information processing. Goellerll45 constructed a driving task model within a highway accident prevention frame of reference. The accident model was designed in a temporal ordered series of phases. The temporal sequence series included a pre- accident stage, intra-accident stage, and post-accident stage. The pre-accident stage was further sub-divided and was the structure within which the driving task was located. "The pre-accident stage consists of four phases: Predispositions, initiation, juxaposition, and evasion."ll46 1““ , Description of the Driving Task, Illi- nois State University, undated and unpublished, p. l. l“SB. F. Goeller, Modeling the Traffic-Safety System, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California, April, 1968. lu6Ibid., p. 13. HIGHWAY EVENTS TRAFFIC EVENTS 73 ’— ENVIRONMENTAL EVENTS UNRELATED EVENTS VISUAL DR'VER SEJSSSY OBSERVATIONS OBSERVATIONS OBSERVATIONS MOTIVATION RISK FEEDBACK JUDGMENT KNOWLEDGE ROAD FEEDBACK STORED PERCEPTION * I I BASICDRIVER ACTIONS | STEERING WHEEL » REVERSALS SIGNALING ACCELERATOR REVERSALS BRAKE APPLICATIONS DECISIONS l I VEHICLE DYNAMICSLI LOCATION DIRECTION TRACKING SPEED SPEED CHANGE INCORRECT#rT CORRECT UNNECESSARY ACTIONS ERRORS NEAR COLLISIONS COLLISIONS rCOLLISION FREE DRIVING J Figure 3.--The driving task. lu7lbid., p. 2. 1147 7b The driving task was actually developed from the initiation phase (Figure A). The model relied on Platt's analysis, but added additional concepts especially risk, hazard, and vulnerability. Goeller has delineated driving in terms of the human functions required including observation, perception, Judgment, decision—making, and response. Briggslu8 studied the automobile operator as an information processor and controller in the Operator- vehicle—highway system. The driver . . . is an information processor. He must detect a variety of visual, auditory, and proprioceptive signals and process them in order to generate movements of thelfigeering wheel, accelerator, and brake pedals. Briggs, however, explained that the driver was not a simple transmitter, but that his behind the wheel task was most complex. Briggs considered the information process- ing task to be both intermittent and continuous, with both aspects being interrelated (Figure 5). In addition, the operator developed strategies for selecting informa— tion as he moved along the roadway. The operator then terminated with decisions and actions only to be recycled by a feedback loop. I ll‘BGeorge Briggs, "Driving as a Skilled Performance,‘ Driver Behavior, Proceedings of the Second Annual Traffic Safety Research Symposium of the Automobile Insurance Industry, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. luglbid., p. 12a. 75 Mechanical Limitations 41’— l Perception I A Observations Related to Driving Unobeerved Events Decisions Unrelated to Driving Related 0 . to rIVIng Driving . Decisions Am” \_ Unrelated to Driving l / Correct Incorrect Decision Decision Perceptual Judynental Vulnerability Vulnerability l_____ iv _v Vulnerable Driving Figure A.--Initiation phase. 150Goeller, op. cit., p. 17. 76 .NMH .Q ..pfio .mo «wwwfipmama HmH.mcoauo:5m po>figo mo sapwoao xooan s +h+ mgswfim Q o a I 3...... E + .vZS-(fi 20.9“; d . 3.9.3 325 - .— wm 02(3300 _ r . . 5528 85.23 m I *L 3...: E 52.5 as . . 3.2353. .38 . _ . [— 8:36.: , 3.2.5 8. Jan S~u( 3.2.0 932...: 8.35.0.3; 92...: m 3.85 law See 8293:. we. eel-Dot 20:92: 5 9.302203 3. 69.3.8: 3 £3 69": [I #9351 82 twig F 35835.83 ix 77 152 also constructed a mathematical Senders, et a1. uncertainty information processing model of the driving task on which Briggs based parts of his task analysis. 153 Michaels' concept of the driving task was essen- tially an information processing task which emphasized those aspects which over-load human capability. ". . . it is the ways in which the demands of the task are adapted to the characteristics of the human being that will determine the safety or reliability of the highway "15“ Michaels purported that the transport system. behavior required of the human operator by the driving task was tremendously complex. He indicated that driving required sensing, perception, analysis, estimation, and problem solving which could all be Classified into a guidance concept. Thus for Michaels, the driving task was a guidance task. Christner155 developed a task model with an informa- tion processing and communication perspective. The analysis was partitioned into three levels (Figure 6). In Level 152Senders, et al., An Investigation of Automobile Driver Information Processing Final Report, U. S. Depart- ment Of Commerce, The Bureau of Public Roads, Washington, D. C., April 26, 1966. 153 15A Michaels, op. cit. Michaels, op. cit., p. 591. 1550. A. Christner and Horace w. Ray, Final Report on Human Factors in Highway Traffic: Intervehicular Communication to Bureau of Public Roads, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio, 1961. 78 .m .a .pfipHomH wma.w:HGOHpflust Hm>oa moss» < ”EOHQOLQ one no paoozoo HmposowII.w whsmflm _ 65:00 ears> _am>wo i— EOZmoEsEEoo 332523.... 83:88.30 peom cozoflmm $500 __ 4w>w4 .5323 cram; _: 4w>w4 79 I it was assumed that the vehicle would respond without error to the operator's control efforts. Level III, traffic behavior, was designated the responsibility of the engineer. Level II dealt with the individual opera- tor performing with other highway users with special focus upon that individual's information processing and decision-making ability. The operator's task was to select a course within given traffic patterns and the constraints imposed by the configuration of the roadway. Perhaps the key notion underlying our approach to the problem is that the human being has a limited channel capacity for information pro- cessing . . . as load increases, the driver makes the following kinds of responses: (1) Restrictive filtering (2) Elimination of tasks (3) Concentra— tion on the immediate demands of the situation (M) Increasing lag time (5) Missed data (6) Incorrect responses (7) Increased accident probability.1 7 Within Level II the operator's major task was the determination of the route and route cues (perception), determination of alternatives within the roadway (Judg- ment) and determination of direction of other road users (Judgment). Christner, then, defined driving in terms of infor— mation processing and communication tasks, with both tasks relying on the human functions of perception and Judgment. 157Ibid., pp. 6-7. 80 158 developed a task model to evaluate Lybrand et al. driver education as an accident countermeasure. They reported that the driving task objectives were: 1. To move the vehicle from one location to another location within specified time limits; 2. on defined roadways; 3. in paths and velocities coordinated with paths and velocities of other independently controlled vehicles and pedestrians on the roadways; 4. without collision with other vehicles or pedestrians on or near the roadways, or with fixed objects near the roadways; 5. within the bounds of applicable operational rules of the motor vehicle transportation sub- system (laws and prudential norms).l Proceeding from the objectives of the task, Lybrand et al., then divided driving into driving modes or driver's tasks which included open road driving, entering and leav- ing traffic, and traffic flow task. The modes served as a broad descriptive classification of the driving process. Following the construction of the objectives and modes, a functional analysis of driving performance was developed. The functional analysis (Figure 7) was based on the concept that motor vehicle operation was primarily a guidance task. On the basis of perception and effect of perceptions, the operator strived for spatial-distance 158Lybrand, et al., A Study on Evaluation of Driver Education, The American University, Volume 1 of 1, July 31, 1968. 159Ibid., pp. 59-60. 81 .HHH-OHH .ag ..cHnH oma.mxmmp meEm>oE oH0fi£o> CH mQOHpUQSQ Loampmqo COHpmpComthom oapdEmnomll.n mpsmfim 89:23) «coEco.._Em c. . 8830 SQMMHHMW N 3.: >233 .82 .556: B. 5.83 33.5 .0530 .— u:- >§z 55> .N 0.02.) 385E555 82.6%.... 9:- Bsuaau 8.2.; .26 5.? .. 83.8 5 38.6252 . 1 ' - ' ' ' J 82% 0C. asap—2.3g“ >~_8—0>\£u.& 35> . £8; . 825.558 .228 .5582 22.; . . .323 8882.. .n . 5: " .Efianuoho-u 25-533 . flifiuotc 3.500 10.0 v:- :23qu "hzmiflwcszw "III .888 . 292; 8862.. ._ I] 58.8. 3.30 - h2w2w>0§ . 25... gnu-oz... use... €3.83. .32 use“. >363: 802 .v P 30.19, 3.250 8955.“.88dw $.33: 2.83 B. ' ' 1 ' ' 2035532200 330.325... 5.3 Sign :55 .9200 382% .n 02( 40¢h28 .0 cow-326 .3.o_i> 850 .N 83580; acne-.62 B. fiasco 22.58.. 25.88... a... as £862.22 8.92; .25 832; .26 882 .. .8383 as; .o Esteem. ...§o.i> .26 .« 02.252.20.903 33.3.22 5:230:50 8.538820 2.83) . u:- cfiauxfi >253: .p 23.. «332 a 87,532.: E6236w .858..Em 8.5.6 8.88386 2°..Cm:48< UZ-QUUKOK Ad(z< 4(ZO_Po vacuum amp was» moanmfipm>ii.oa mpswfim oomqm oEmm masooo wcH>mm3 wcfiuawafima wamcwfim mmawm mamas wcHLOOOm Lopczium>o cofiumfiam> booom oooqm r LO>HLQ has wcogs ozmaqohbzz pmom “do omopom Odom umo :31 ACOHpooLHQ vcm Lozomv wcfioofixm w2HHHMsm QOOm eacmm oomagzm zwzom 00H mom 30cm cfimm cofiuosgpmbo stwfi> zmsomom aogam: memom co>gso momom Ozwflmnue (C CowmeH53aaH CH mogopoxm mcofipoomgoucH do mocflx mcofiuommhoocH mocmq mo Lopez: wcfixpmu Ucm wcficmflm oommgzw do mocfix wflaapm mfiofinm> mCOHpmcfipEoo OHOH£o> mczfieam armed :ofipoczwamz mcfiwcm 3m» wcflgocpoo ucoficmflfi< ogzaflmg Laos w;memi no moHHw tool mOLdfiflnm QLM. axofiuu godmgofiooiq coflpocSCHm: cofipmgoHoooq :oHpocdemE oxmgm mCOHpozgumno zgomcmm mcofipocsafim: wcHhmoOm mcofipaocoo ambawoaosommm OCHOHOOZ .mmocaaH meowcommmm phomEoo .mCOHpowpumHo mmsam>.mmnspfiup¢ Homooflsocx psorwcfiuo¢ .czwho inch; .m>Hmmmcm< ”hofi>mcom mmsga mpHHfiOMQwo Agomcmm new conH> zuwascomgom hpOch< mcoHOoEm mswfisaa HOBOOHa coapaecoo Hmscmz cofiaeecoo Hmoamssa mmdsaamm coaumcfinEoo moaocowcoucoo pcoECOLH>cm mcoapfiecoo mfiofinm> mogsafimm Oapfimmom Lo mnongm poumpoao 99 The sub-task descriptions in Model B are composed of sub-sub tasks which are prerequisite to successful performance. The sub-task performance by an operator depends on the application of previously acquired skill, knowledge, and inventive behavior. Many sub-task compo- nents overlap, i.e., communication, which results in difficulty in time sequencing of the driver's sub-tasks. Consequently the sub-tasks are only partially time sequenced. Within Model B, however, traffic educators should be able to develop lessons for beginning operators which are task oriented, i.e., selecting a hazard free path within a route in a city driving environment. Tasks included in Model B are also difficult to define and describe. Hence two assumptions were made. First, traffic education teachers currently have defined procedures for accomplishing the sub—tasks and components of the tasks. These procedures may be individualized by the teacher, but each teacher is consistent in his pre— sentation of procedures. The value of the model, then, would provide for better sequencing of lessons and would focus individual teaching procedures on sub-tasks to be mastered. The second assumption was that research is needed and is forthcoming which will experimentally sequence and define procedures and components which con- stitute many of the sub-tasks included in this project. In the interim traffic education teachers have the lOO responsibility to define and analyze the driver sub—tasks for their students and determine if the student has the knowledge and competencies to perform the sub-tasks. The identified sub-tasks proceeding from Model A to Model B provide the basic laboratory teaching sequence spiral, the foundation for which may be established in the classroom. Two similar tasks are included in both Models A and B. The monitoring of the environment and operating of controls are required of an operator in both routine and problem solving tasks. These two tasks are periodic and continuous in nature, and can be categorized as time shar- ing tasks.168 It further appears that the monitoring task can best be achieved when the operator employs a systematic method of searching and scanning. However, there may be difficulty in developing performance skills and monitoring skills simultaneOusly with a beginning driver. Conse- quently monitoring instruction should not be stressed by the teacher until skilled performance of the routine sub- tasks are demonstrated. This prerequisite division should facilitate the learning of skilled performance of routine sub-tasks, monitoring functions, and problem solving tasks. 168B. w. Stephens and R. M. Michaels, "Time Sharing Between Compensatory Tracking and Search and Recognition Tasks," Highwangesearch Board Record 55 (196“). 101 General Abilities Required of An Automobile Operator The previous section on sub-task descriptions indi- cated some of the major tasks that are required of an automobile operator. However, the abilities required of an operator to accomplish these tasks in the operator-vehicle- environment sub-system were not included in the description. In this section a description and model of the general abilities logically required of a beginning automobile operator in driving situations regardless of the driving sub-task is presented. The driving abilities required for an automobile operator are presented in an input-output model. Further, the description and discussion is restricted to the general abilities within the input-output model. Frequently the general abilities are referred to as human functions or 169 functions. These functions can be general in the sense that they are common to man or may be specific in the sense that they are required in a given task. The impor- tance of general abilities or functions are evident in view of the prime objective of the highway transportation system: the safe, efficient, and convenient movement of 169Harold E. Bamford, "Human Factors in Man-Machine Systems, Human Factors, 1 (November, 1959), pp. 55-57. 102 people and goods is predicated upon the abilities of the human being who uses the system.170 Using the information derived from the sub-task des— criptions, defined as tasks to be performed by the opera- tor, it was possible to design a model of general operator abilities required in automobile driving. The model of general operator abilities is presented in an input-output box. The oval shapes of input and output link the opera- tor to his environment through physical stimuli and vehicle response. The triangular symbols of sensing and performance represent the operator's initial and terminal response in driving situations. In this phase the opera- tor is dealing with the physical components of the vehicle-roadway system. The rectangular symbols represent the required general abilities or functions of an operator. These symbols depict the operator cognitive components of driving. (Model C, Figure ll, page 103.) The general abilities or functions model was designed for curriculum development and provided for a philosophical orientation to the teaching-learning process. The orienta- tion included the mental aspects of driving as well as the physical aspects. From Model C it is apparent that driv- ing depends on stored information and mental processing in a dynamic situation. Physical skills are important to 170Lee W. Cozan, "Engineering Psychology and the Highway Transportation System," American Psychologist, 16 (1961), p. 263. .o HoooE .Hoooe EmpmmmIOSm mmznwdnimfiOH£O>IhopmgOQOII.Ha muzwfim w x9389. 8:383 9.2.5 8:32.84. 2:85 \ / cot-.2804. .v 3.358 .n 20...... 5.3 838.... .u .22.... 2...... .2... 22:. .. 8.825 .. £2525. \I 3223,. ( 39...; .SfinoUA iv 103 _.. L 3338... E - . - ES;- >.o>em 22:2. :30 fillll'el'lll‘lllel'e'llllla 80:). 05.3503 /\ _ _ 0530.3 2.8 >322... 53.2 0.3.... c.2200 Btu; _ x5. :2: .m is. .m 3.3.5.5. .m _ 2.38:. .N Ea... 3:26 .u 3,3368 .e .803 .v 3:23:60 .v 68;. 38.2.4. 20...; _ .53.: .m 83m .n reassess .n _ E33. .2...) «caucuszu 29:5 N 5:822:88 .N 326.200 .N :8. ac. :22! 2‘64 .9 £2. 88.; ... _ 2E... ._ €8.25... .. 828.0 .. _ . . . . L #332. , E _ _ . . _ _ no 33.565 _ 29559.2. 3.65 r Fore: 95 its..— 10“ automobile driving but are easily mastered and invariant.171 Although a physical and mental classification of driving abilities is indicated, a second dimension of this orien- tation is apparent. Training in physical skills of vehicle operation and the attainment of a functional efficiency level is a prerequisite requirement for instruc- tion in mental processing. The training in physical skills parallels the mastery of the routine sub-tasks in Model A, whereas mental processing largely parallels the problem solving sub-tasks in Model B. Interaction of Human Functions The various segments of mental processing (percep- tion, judgment, decision-making) are difficult to distin- guish when they occur together in the same driving situation. The abilities or functions can not be observed directly but can be inferred from total performance. There is also a close relationship between sensing and percep- tion, perception and judgment, and judgment and decision- making. Some perceptual theorists consider sensing and perception as separate processes, while others indicate that we are definitely moving away from the two process 172, idea. 173‘ Perception and judgment are sometimes used 171J. J. Gibson and L. E. Crooks, 0 - Cit-: p. “53' 172James J. Gibson, The Senses Considered as Percep- tual Systems (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1956)} 1733. Howard Bartley, Principles of Perception (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1958). 105 inter—changeably although this appears to be erroneous, because judgment may include several perceptions and 17A, 175 A measurable dis- certain concepts and memories. tinction between perception and judgment would depend on the criteria variable and previous experimental defini- tions. Judgment is sometimes employed to include both judgmental and decision-making properties resulting in the identification of only one human function. When this syn- thesis is made judgment is defined as the final function before. performance and is described in response V terms.l76’ 177 There is a definite interrelation in terms of the interaction and overlapping among the general abilities required in driving. Also in certain driving situations, there is filtering in which only part of the available information is used and shunting in which some functions are by—passed. Filtering and shunting can be both an asset or a limitation in driving depending on teacher instructions and specific driving sub-tasks. (Figure 12, page 106.) Ibid. 175Lawrence Schlesinger, op. cit. 176 177 Ward Edwards, op. cit. T. W. Forbes, "Traffic . . .," op. cit. 106 .Jmnmm .Q nopflo .QO n. .Hmofiwoaonuwmm .oswmo 0.: oma.m:0fipogsm mo doapmaomgochii.mH opsmfim i. 02....ZDIm c2380 . 59:25.. cotamobmiT—lmfimcom é cotaoobn. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0...00.0.0000... _ .8380 123.93.. mEmcom PDmZ. ”.0 02.xm...:u. m mc_v.m2-co_m_ooo MESSEM c2383.. HafimcmmU ZO_._.U EwEEPE. 2>>O mcococgms. _I mccaom new «$9.88... I— HmH .955 60:83.8... .220 .COZmEEE: acetamzmm pcm 96.0 .pflo .mo «headphpm Oaxaca .mpco>m .powhme 20.83.35 9.3035 .6333. Hma "OSQCHII.MH opswfim mm: _..... Sm Eoofipd. .3830 next; .EuE 39% $.38”. . >368: 83.5 >m>>umom ucmm .o 853 £25 .mmoccmaom — 3.23. an... .o am< _ mmmm; msEE< mmxeo mw.o_cu> .305. wh2m>m $.an .mmtno 5:550 .523 I. egg 8.0558“... mcmtwwmbwm mco_uomm._0uc. 93.36:... “.0 ._.sz_ —I .mEmmmn. .mEak .95.. mantras. >m§pmom 32:52 >z>=o< a< 39.8.". mJOmEzoo mjcsk 2.39m . was. old/Eh. 00-3% 22m we... .35 £339.90 \— 5.3.5 £2825 $283) .95. L r 3.30 5.5525 SECS—sue... _ llO variables are usually increased. Thus "traffic controls" and "other users" should be emphasized in the problem- solving tasks. With a systematic approach to input the beginning driver should develop competencies to cope with the most pertinent events and events from all four classi- fications in most driving situations. Sensing Sensing is defined as the process of input reception. Some of the input is further processed and utilized in driving and some is disregarded. It appears that the senses are continually receiving stimuli impingements but that the human being is limited in the number of percep- tions he can make per time unit.182 The human being receives impingements from at least 11 senses but not all have significance for driving, and those that are significant are not of the same importance in driving.183 In Model C, the sense modelities used in driving are visual, auditory, haptic, orienting, and savory systems. The visual system is recognized as the most important input reception channel for driving. The auditory, haptic, and orienting are important and the lBu savory system is important in emergency situations. These five sensory systems can be viewed as channels in 182Fletcher Platt, "Operations . . .," op. cit., p. 20. 183Ibid. 18“ Ibid., p. 20. 111 which input travels but is not yet processed into meaning- ful information for driving. Some systems perform a sensory inquiry into the environment when the operator searches and scans. In driving the operator's visual and auditory systems can search and scan. These are his active senses which pro- vide primarily for a space extension of the operator into his field of travel and receive various kinds of roadway information and information concerning vehicle malfunc- tions. The other systems are more passive or are recep- tive of information. The division between active and receptive systems of sensing input provides for a needed distinction between training and experience required in driving. The traffic educator should provide training in a systematic method of actively searching and scanning the driving environment. A system of seeing was developed which appeared logical and was founded on sound principles for seeing. The system was field tested with experienced motor vehicle operators.l85’ 186 Presently there is neither a system for auditory sensing nor a system for visual sensing for beginning drivers. Within the limits of this project, it is sug- gested that the scanning and searching activities be 185 186Donald Payne and J. E. Barmack, op. cit. H. L. Smith and J. J. Cummings, op. cit. 112 systematically implemented on the basis of the four input categories and parallel the previously identified sub- tasks. The receptive sensory systems do not readily lend themselves to training. In fact, frequently, the beginning motorist is not aware or fails to process the input received by these systems. The beginner further, fails to identify his less than proficient performance. This limitation could be overcome by the use of experimental driving simulators. However, this is not a practical approach for the education of large numbers of drivers. It appears that the traffic education teacher needs to structure a variety of road experiences which provide for sensory impingement of the receptive systems. Further he should provide hints and instructions in order to facilitate driver awareness of input from these senses. Perception Driving is guided by perception. The guidance task is primarily a visual sensory perceptual task. Sensory perception provides for the organization of dynamic input resulting from the interaction of man-vehicle and roadway. This involves both the sensing and identification of events. Several definitions of perception were available for use by traffic educators, and two components were generally included in the definitions. First, sensory contact with an energy source was required, and an organism response to 113 the energy source was needed. "Perception is the overall activity of the organism that immediately follows or accom— panies energistic impingements upon the sense organs."187 Secondly, "Perception may be termed the first transforma- tion of environmental stimulation into meaningful human information. Its determinants are complex depending in part on what has immediately preceded, on expectations, and immediate as well as long-term needs."188 It is apparent that an educator must be concerned with two elements of the perceptual processes. The first element focuses on perceptual training. This may be con- sidered as providing input energies for the organism to respond to or transform. This first element is of primary concern in this section. The second element deals more with the determinants of perception which influence the organism in any behavior or activity. These determinants encompass the frequently labeled psychological concepts of perception. They go beyond training or driving and are reflected in all human behavior. These determinants are prerequisite for a receptive learner and influence the quality and quantity of learning. To a large extent the determinants of perception are present in all teaching-learning situations, and influ- ence how the teacher or learner perceives himself or the 187 188 8. Howard Bartley, op. cit., p. 22. R. M. Michaels, op. cit., p. 593. llu task involved. An understanding of perception from this point of view sets the climate for how the student and teacher react to each other. The perceptions can be fear oriented or can include mutual trust and respect. The determinants can be classified as part of the study of social perception.189 In perceptual training, both for laboratory and classroom, the beginning motorist has to ask himself: where and what should I look for? what is each event and what can it do? what should I make of it? what is the event actually doing? and what is the relationship and interaction between various events? In order to answer these questions the motorists must receive sensory data, maintain awareness, and select relevant cues and events for organization and interpretation. The operator selects relevant cues and events from both the vehicular and environmental displays. Hence the operator's perceptual task can be divided into a display monitoring task and an environmental searching and scan— ning task. The ultimate objective of the perceptual task is to select a safe field of travel from the possible fields. 1 The monitoring, searching, and scanning task can be categorized as a time—sharing task in which the operator must divide his perceptual time to an Optimum degree. 1898. Howard Bartley, op. cit. 115 These two perceptual tasks interact and can interfere with performance when the perceptual tasks compete for the 190 The monitoring task of the operator operator's time. is usually defined as a discrete perceptual task. The searching and scanning task is ongoing and is defined as a continuous task. In both tasks man has limitations which can be compensated for by task oriented training experiences.191 Perceptual training for beginning motorists should be conducted in a systematic manner in order for the operator to determine the optimum time-sharing relationship for various environments and driving situations. Even though the training has to be systematic the actual operator's perceptual performance should be flexible since he has to select task relevant cues. A prerequisite for perceptual independence of the operator depends on the mastery of motor skills necessary for performing the various sub-tasks identified in Model A. Where flexibility of behavior in the performance of procedures is desired, one or more of the following conditions should be met. The operator should have 'automatized' many of the stimulus- response relationships. He should also have had sufficient practice so that he is at least fairly adept at handling the short-term recall require- ments during task performance. The task situation should permit him some degree of anticipation of 1903. w. Stephens and R. M. Michaels, op. cit. 191Albert E. Hickey and Wesley C. Blair, "Man as a Monitor," Human Factors, 1 (September, 1958), pp. 83-84. 116 the next stimulus in the action series, so that he is not stimulus-response bound in time.1 2 The actual perceptual independence of the operator is developed during instruction on problem—solving sub-tasks identified in Model B. The monitoring training task should be based on the input of "own vehicle" included in Figure 13, and be taught in conjunction with the sub-tasks in Model A. The searching and scanning task is dependent upon input classes of "high- way, traffic controls, and other users" and should be developed as an integral part of the problem solving sub- tasks in Model B. The trained observer does not necessarily sense or perceive better than the untrained but apparently attends to relevant task cues more effectively. The attending of task relevant cues seems to improve as familiarity with the events is increased by either practice in observ- ing or recalling pertinent events. Motorist's perceptions may be further facilitated by an observation routine.193 The perceptual training in event detection and recognition should be accomplished in task-simulated situations or through actual practice. Hence perceptual training can be accomplished in part through both class— room and laboratory traffic education experiences. The 192 p. 221. Robert M. Gagne, Psychological . ;_!’ op. cit., bid., pp. “6, 219. 117 operational routine for perceptual training should focus on the input classification. The beginning motorists should be provided with repetitive and systematic experi- ences which facilitate the development of perceptual ability needed for automobile operation. The sequencing of perceptual training based on the input categories should provide for both familiarity and the establishment of an observational routine. Each input classification (Figure 13) contains several events which influence the operator's performance. The instructor should provide for visual observation of these events individually until the beginning motorists can define_the class. When all classes are defined the observer should be visually exposed to mixed classes of events until he can identify the most relevant cues in either simulated or actual task situations. The primary training concept which guides the traffic education instruc- tor in perceptual training is to systematically increase the number of events within a class of class mix while decreasing the amount of observational time allotted to the potential motorists.1914 When perceptual training takes place on street the teacher needs to select practice routes on the basis of 19“ School and College Safety, National Safety Congress Transactions, Vol. 23—TChicago: National Safety Council, 1958). 118 input classes and cue student operators to events within the defined classes. The instructor should further have an understanding of several principles of perception which can facilitate perceptual development for motorists. First, perception by the operator takes time. Perceiving driving input is a process which involves the mind and senses. The organism must receive, select, and organize the driving events. The time required for perception can be lessened by training and experiences.195’ 196 However, there is probably an upper limit of the number of events that can be perceived by an operator. When this limit is reached, the operator's perceptual ability becomes overtaxed. Perception is a selective process. Since the auto- mobile operator can not perceive all events in a driving scene he must be selective. Those events that are selected will depend on past experiences. The traffic educator can control the experiences through perceptual training, hints, 197, 198 and instructions related to crucial driving events. 195Warren Quensel, "Teaching Visual Perception in Driver Education," ADEA News and Views, 3, 2 (May, 1963), pp. 3-12. 196Crow and Crow, An Outline of General Psychology (Paterson, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams and Company, 1961). 197 198Samuel Komorita, et al., Review Outline of Psycho- 1o (Paterson, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams and Company, 1 8 9 2). Warren P. Quensel, "Teaching . . .," op. cit. 119 A mental or perceptual set can be established by the operator on the basis of instruction or training. In essence the beginning operator can be taught to perceive certain events, and in all probability will perceive these events first when confronted with a driving 199, 200’ 201 This set can be established as situation. part of short or long term memory and can be established in relation to specific driving sub-tasks or the general operating environment. The operator is actually taught to search for relevant cues while filtering non—relevant cues. Lastly, the operator will tend to perceive those events that are logically grouped or that interact collec- tively. The operator will require less time to perceive those inputs that are related or classified. The classi- fying of events by an experienced observer may appear natural, but the perception can be facilitated by repeti- tive observation of grouped events. The classification of input in Figure 13 is based on the grouping principle.202 These various principles should determine the focus of the training and the nature of the training media. g 199 Warren P. Quensel, "Teaching . . .," op. cit. 200Crow and Crow, op. cit. 201Robert M. Gagne, Psychological . . ., op. cit. 202 H Warren P. Quensel, "Teaching . . ., op. cit. 120 Judgment Judgment is the second link in the mental processing task required of the motor vehicle operator. Judgment may be defined as a process of categorizing input in terms of effects rather than in terms of appearances. Thus judg- ing is identifying the meaning of inputs in terms of 203 The process involves the ability to expected results. size up the situation, make comparisons, make estimations, and make assumptions and appraisals. If the Operator asks himself the following questions, he is employing his judgmental ability: what will it do and how much? what is the degree of quality of event or object? is it a threat or can it become one?2ou Judgments further, depend on alternatives. When a person is required to make a choice beyond habitual responses judgment is involved. Hence judgment appears to be of particular importance in problem solving operator sub-tasks. Judgmental ability actually goes beyond the immediate situation. Judgment brings into context, information that is relevant to the task. The information that most fre- quently assists the motor vehicle operator in judgment 203Robert M. Gagne, Psychological . . ., 0p. cit., pp. “9-53. 20“ The Introduction, Rationale, and Basic Outline for the Revised Program of Instruction (Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, State of Illinois, April 25. 1969). p- 33. 121 making consists of rules or laws, human characteristics, vehicle characteristics, and physical forces.205 Motor vehicle law serves as a basis for making judgments about other operator-vehicle units in the sense that law establishes what is required and permitted. By establishing what is prohibited, required, and permitted, laws provide a basis for judging or determining the likeli- hood of conflict free space for manipulating the vehicle. This common basis (law) for making judgments will continue to be important information to the driver as long as the driver must operate in close proximity with other vehicles of different sizes and speed capability on a wide variety of unfamiliar streets and highways. The closer the highway user conforms to the rules and regulations, the greater the probability of accurate judgments. Information concerning human characteristics can provide relevant assistance in making driving judgments. There are general behavioral tendencies which can assist in judging. For example, impatience, anxiety, and the like can be induced in certain driving situations. Likewise there are specific characteristics which can be recalled in context that provide a foundation for making driving Judgments. Some of the human characteristics are age, Sex, personality, physical conditions, and experience.206 ¥ 205 H Lawrence Schlesinger, "Objectives . . ., op. cit. 206William Lybrand et al., op. cit., p. 117. 122 In addition to the human characteristics, the immediate behavior of other operators can provide information for judging further operator unit interaction. Stored information concerning vehicle characteristics can aid in judgment making. Information on vehicle charac- teristics is especially important in terms of timing, determining gaps, and determining space. In order to achieve proper timing, select gaps and conflict free space, the operator must judge the performance capabilities of his own vehicle and other users. He must also be able to judge the probable traffic patterns due to a mix of road users and possible consequences resulting from this mix. Specifically the operator should have stored information to assist in making proper judgments, concerning the acceleration, braking, steering, cornering, and stability parameters of all motor vehicles using the highway trans- portation system.207 A The final informational storage source is physical forces. The understanding of natural laws determine from a judgmental perspective the limits of the vehicle- environment interaction. From the operator's point of view he must judge or interpret the constraints imposed by the environment. Further he must determine and make pro- per time—space judgments to remain within the parameters of the conditions imposed by highway design. 207Ibid., p. 62. 123 The operator makes three special kinds of judgments within the context of his environment and driving situa- tion. He makes lateral, longitudinal, and angular judg— ments. All three judgments are directly related to the operator sub-tasks identified in Models A and B. For example, in passing a vehicle all three kinds of judgments are required. Some form of judgment is employed in all driving situations. But beyond the judgments which pro- vide for space and time to perform sub—tasks, the operator has another critical task of judging hazards. The ability to judge the probability of other operators creating hazardous situations is a difficult task. The operator must command a variety of stored information plus have accurate perceptions of the immediate situation. Thus judgment is based on the behavior of other operator units as reflected by the characteristics of the operators, the kinds of vehicles being operated, the existing roadway, and traffic patterns. Further for each of the hazards inter- preted, it is necessary for the operator to estimate the consequences. The chance of serious conflicts or colli- sions must be appraised in terms of the alternatives avail- able. In the event a collision appears unavoidable, then consideration should be given as to how to minimize the hazard. A judgmental training program should provide the capabilities for a potential Operator to manipulate the direction and speed of his vehicle in such a manner as to 124 have space and time to perform the various sub—tasks and avoid hazardous situations. The training program should focus on driving input, sub—tasks to be performed, and relevant stored information. The potential operator should be provided with simulated and actual instruction and experiences in making driving judgments. Decision-Making Decision-making is defined as the cognitive formu- lation of a course of action with the intent to implement or execute the decision.208 In the highway transportation system the motor vehicle Operator is entrusted extensively with the responsibility of making decisions in terms of desired trips and actions within a chosen trip. In decision-making the Operator must decide when, where, what, and how much action to take from known alternatives. The decisions the operator makes are many and varied. He selects a general route to follow and a time to start in order to reach his destination. Within the selected route he decides on a series of specific pathways to guide his vehicle. These decisions can be very complex, but appear simple because the observed product of decision- making is limited. The operator can only manipulate a limited number of controls and the vehicle response is limited to speed and direction change. 208 p. 22. H Lawrence Schlesinger, "Objectives . . ., Op. cit., 125 Many driving situations have limited alternatives, hence, decision-making in some cases is simple. Most simple decisions probably become habitualized by the oper- ator. This appears to be the case for the sub—tasks identified in Model A. Operator decisions should be habitualized for Model A sub-tasks, but for Model B the operator should perform in a non-habitualized manner. If simple decisions are in fact habitualized, then, the operatOr should be free to make complicated decisions when the need exists. Complicated decison-making is required when time for mental processing is limited, when several alternatives are available, and when there is a need for the operator to depend on both long and short term memory of information to make his decision. Risk is also involved in Operator decision-making. Decisions have to be made in a limited time, the best alternative may not be available, and driving is performed under conditions of uncertainty. Operator decision—making involves mental processing that leads to the selection of a response from among a known set of response alternatives. Even in the simplest decision-making task alternatives are available to the operator. This means that practice in making various types of driving decisions should be required of the beginning motorist. The practice should reflect the content Of the sub-tasks of Models A and B. The training media, both 1i 126 simulated and actual, should focus on driving situations that depict uncertainty, unpredictability, complexity of events, limited time, and conflict among alternatives.209 Training and actual route selection for instruction of beginning motorists should also be based on principles Of decision-making applicable to driving. These principles, which should assist both the teacher and operator, follow: 1. decision-making depends on both long term and short term memory210 2. decision—making is dependent upon the quantity and quality of information 3. simple and routine decisions should be habitualized, allowing time for decision— making in complicated situations A. decision—making in unfamiliar situations is more difficult than in familiar situa- tions and requires more time 5. the capability of the operator to make rapid decisions decreases in proportion to the number of choices and complexity of the situation.211 In summary, the general abilities or functions required in automobile driving were identified. These Ibid. 210Robert M. Gagne, Psychological . . ., op. cit. 211 Op. cit. The Introduction,gRationale, . . ., 127 functions were discussed in terms of mental processing as it related to driving and how the traffic educator could approach the teaching—learning process. P§ychological Factors and General Driving Abilities Contained in this section is a treatment on how psychological factors influence the general abilities required of an automobile Operator. This section is of special importance because the human Operator does not perform skilled tasks or processes in a behavioral vacuum. He performs the task of driving within the behavioral or psychological influences attributed to man in any activity. Man is a psychological being and is vulnerable to a host of temporary and permanent psychological factors. Psychological factors are of importance to the curriculum developer in traffic education because the factors influence the general abilities required in driv- ing. Studies of personality and behavior should be included in the school curriculum as a separate entity, but are of significant importance to traffic educators as an applied discipline. Figure 1“, page 128, provides a schematic example of the influence of psychological factors on general driv- ing ability. This model presents only a sample of possible factors to be included in traffic education instruction. Likewise the organization of psychological factors is 128 .mmfipfiafinm Hmhmcmm Una maocomm HMOHwOHonozmmll.:H waswfim P292002. 85 _mcozoem _ mmocmzmcfloo _ mmBESQEoo mocmuzcoo _ mcotmtt. _ 853:5 .omn. \— ww.h_...m< 4mmnon pm>fihc wnfiosOSHmcfi mEoumzm 4<>Em< ZO....o.aE. 83.0 Iw>_mo phOQQSm 90mmzll.ma whdwam 3.2.34. 0.53.652... EwEEo>oo .235“. 1— Ech.w>oo 83m _ EwEEm>OO .83 h 8.2:“; .905. .O .cmEtmamo .8595 _ taood 026.1. Ewhm>mé3w 136 courses. The figure presents the sub-systems and an exam- ple Of the tools these support systems may use. These support systems contain a body of knowledge which is important for beginning motorists. The engineer— ing and enforcement sub-systems perhaps would be part Of all traffic education courses. However, the other sub- systems may well change or be expanded, depending on cur— rent issues concerning the highway transportation system. The area identified as "tool" in Figure 15 is only an example of some of the functions the sub-systems perform. Additional functions of these systems should be taught in order for the beginning motorist to understand the basic tools, procedures, and purposes of each of these major support systems. The method employed by the traffic educator concern— ing support systems should be attitudinal in nature. Basic information is important to this attitudinal mode of instruction but instruction should not terminate with information dispensing. The beginning motorist should be able to reveal his current feelings of the systems in general and evaluate and re-evaluate his feelings in terms of the functions these sub-systems perform for the highway transportation system. 137 Curricular Model Delineating Major Instructional Units in Traffic Education In this section the major units in traffic educaton are presented in an instructional model. This instructional effort would require both classroom and laboratory experi- ences. Further the accomplishing of the instructional units depends on the interaction and integration of class- room and laboratory instruction. The instructional model was designed for the purpose of structuring a theory of traffic education into one curricular model which includes: (1) the objectives of the highway transportation system; (2) the major sub-tasks of an automobile operator; (3) general abilities required of an automobile operator; (u) psychological factors; (5) support systems; and (6) other concepts. The instructional model should provide suggestions for high school teachers for further formulating a mean- ingful and quality traffic education program. The curricular model, Figure 16, page 138, depicts the major instructional divisions and units in traffic education. The units were structured with the learner in mind. The conceptual structure of the units is designed to provide for motivation and appeal. The stu- dents are quickly given driving experiences, and should be aware that the task they are performing is only part of a highly complex system. The units are structured in I38 I'— —' _ —'I HIGHWAY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM} — — — — _ — — —‘| KNOWLEDGE - SKILL - PROCESS Operator Task DIVISION I PERFORMANCE TASKS I UNITA UNITB I UNITC UNIT D [ Basic Control J LRoutine Operation 3 L Problem Solving J I Critical Control 1 DIVISION II MAN-MACHINE-ENVIRONMENT READINESS TASK ”N'TA. I UNITB , ] UNITC Psychological Vehicle Environmental and Maintenance Features and Physical Appraisal and Trip Planning Inspection OPERATOR AND SYSTEM TASK l KNOWLEDGE — SKILL — PROCESS I DIVISION III CONTROLLING SYSTEM AND TASK FAILURE I UNITA UNIT 8 Design and Packaging Systems Failures I I L__ DIVISION IV I. UNITC I UNITD Accident F inancial Procedures Re5ponsibilities SELF AND SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT TASK UNIT A Strategic Driving UNIT 8 Highway Transportation System Support and Improvement Figure l6.-—Major instructional units in traffic education. 139 such a manner that mastery of one unit is a prerequisite for following units on either a performance or motiva- tional criteria. The curriculum model is further struc- tured to provide for both horizontal and vertical flow. Each unit (horizontal) in a division assists in accomplish- ing subsequent units, and each division (vertical) assists in accomplishing subsequent divisions. The units and divisions are task oriented in terms of necessary know- ledge and performance skills to be Obtained by the poten- tial motorists. It should be apparent that only unit and division titles are provided in the model. Hence, detailed content will need to be developed for these units. The assigning of content to laboratory or classroom and the interrelation of the units for classroom and laboratory instruction will need to be defined. However, in a general sense, division l should be accomplished in laboratory with classroom interrelated and integrated. Division 2 is designed primarily for classroom instruction. Divisions 3 and U are designed primarily for classroom instruction with some laboratory instruction. Summary The six preceding sections were proposed as a theoret- ical basis for curriculum development in traffic education for beginning motorists. The models were not designed to be all conclusive, but an attempt was made to provide a lUO conceptual framework for traffic education. This material could provide a starting place for traffic educators to further define and structure objectives and content for traffic courses for beginning drivers. CHAPTER IV THE FINDINGS Chapter IV contains the findings based on the responses of the three expert judges who reviewed the traffic education curriculum material and the course of study for traffic education. The course of study con- sists of objectives and instructional content. In addition to Objectives and content, content for both laboratory and classroom instruction is identified in this chapter. Those content areas which require instruc— tional integration and correlation of classroom and laboratory instruction are also indicated in a parallel presentation. Comments and observations made by the eXpert judges which pertain to the course of study are identified prior to the outlining of each instructional unit. The course of study should serve as a guide for teachers, not an an entire curriculum. The traffic education teacher who uses this course guide will have the task of determining method, time allocation, degree of detail for content treatment, and the need for simu- lated or actual driving experience. Further, the 1141 1&2 objectives are titled enabling and performance Objectives. In writing the objectives performance terminology of "can" or "will" was employed. However, this pro- either ject was an initial stage of curriculum development. Hence, the Objectives should serve only as a guide for determining exact behavioral Objectives. The stating of exact behavioral Objectives for daily lesson planning was considered as a next step in curriculum development and was not included in this project. If the course of study is further developed by curriculum specialists or driver education teachers, the Objectives should be detailed and stated in Operational terms to include the terminal behavior, the conditions for performance, and a measurable criterion. Findings Based on Judges' Review This section contains the responses of the judges to the three questions provided to guide their critiques plus a summary of the judges' critiques as they pertain to the course of study. The judges' reviews of the material covered the six sections contained in Part I of Chapter III entitled "Curricular Models." In their review, some of the judges made comments regarding the models that were previously incorporated into Part II, "The Course of Study." These comments are included in the judges' responses to the three guide questions. 143 Repponses From the Expert Judges Responses from the three judges regarding the review questions follow: Question 1: Does the material reflect what a begin- ning motorist should know or should be able to perform? The judges reported that the topics of interrelation Of functions, the input classification, and the distinction between the kinds of perception were necessary for a beginning motorist to know. The judges felt that the content in the models was important. One judge reported that the content and con- text of the project was excellent and for the most part was what a beginning driver should be taught. He further indicated that the content and sequence of the skills in Models A and B were the most helpful. Parts IV and V (Interacts with other operator-vehicle units and main— tains control when confronted with contingencies and con- ditions) were the sections of Model B that received the most favorable comments. Another judge indicated that Models A and B would serve as a foundation for training the driver's human functions. Question 2: Is this approach to curriculum develop- flgpt apprppriate for driver education? The reviews of the Judges indicated that the approach to traffic education Curriculum development was appropriate for the most part. In response to the task descriptions, one judge felt the luu approach was effective. He said that the task descrip- tions would aid in curriculum development, would assist in identifying human functions required for motor vehicle Operation, and that the task descriptions would aid in developing a performance criteria. The judges indicated that the unit structure was also appropriate. All judges felt that the unit structure would help driver education teachers. In reference to the unit structure, one judge stated that a driver education teacher should be able to develop a driver education curriculum from the models. However, there was a question of the appropriateness of this approach that depended on the Objective of the project. It was felt that if the Objective Of the curriculum models was to aid driver edu- cation teachers in planning their teaching the program would be unsuccessful. The judge indicated that teachers lacked the time and imagination to progress from the con- ceptual curriculum structure to a day by day plan for teaching. Question 3: What suggestions or recommendations do you have for imprpving the_project? The judges' suggestions for the improvement of the project included specific and general topics. The judges felt that the topic of per- ception should include two areas: (1) The treatment of perception should have covered the potential as well as the existing hazards confronting an Operator. The judge l” W 1MB felt that the change in emphasis would allow a driver to plan in advance of driving situations. This emphasis on perception was conceptualized as the defensive driving technique or as driver tactics and strategies; (2) One judge felt that perception should be linked to specific environmental characteristics. He indicated that per- ceptual abilities and knowledge of driving environments could be developed simultaneously. The general comments for improving the project were: 1. Define the term traffic education. One judge stated that traffic education and traffic educators should be defined either when the models were presented or elsewhere in the study. 2. Establish a separate unit on man and infor- mation storage. One judge felt that infor- mation storage and retrieval was a separate human function required of a motor.vehic1e operator. 3. Develop a rationale for the introduction of psychological factors. One judge felt that a rationale for when to teach the unit on psy- chological factors would aid the teacher. He further suggested that the unit be taught following the unit containing general abilities required of the operator. 1H6 A. Explain the content within the unit structure. This judge felt the unit structure was logical, but that a brief statement of content for each unit would be helpful for a driver education teacher. This reference was to Figure 16, page 138. 5. Develop a college program based on this curri— culum approach. One judge felt that this curriculum structure should be included in college and university course Offerings. He further felt that the curriculum structure should be treated in workshops throughout the country. Summary of Judges' Comments 9y Division and Unit The judges made Observations and comments in their critique of the curriculum models which had bearing on the unit and divisional structure of the course of study. The reactions of the judges to the curriculum models, outlined in Figure 16, page 138, as the models related to the course of study Overview Division, Highway Transportation System, and Division I, Performance Tasks, Units A, B, C, D follow: 1. Overview Division, Highway Transportation System In the judges' critiques pertaining to the overview of the highway transportation system, 1&7 the reviews focused on the Objective of driver education, the Objective of the highway trans- portation system, and the relation between the education and transportation objectives. One judge stated that the objectives were accept- r. able. Another judge questioned the need for a . beginning driver to know the Objective Of the 1 highway transportation system. The final judge I believed that the highway transportation system “j objective was adequate, but that driver educa- tors had failed in developing educational objectives. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit A,L Basic Control The basic control tasks Of the Operator as presented in the curricular models were accept- able to the judges. The judges approved of the skills and the skill sequence contained in Model A, and the visual input classification. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit B, Routine Operation The routine Operations of the operator as presented in the curricular models were accept- able to the judges. The judges approved of the skills and skill sequence contained in Model A and the visual input classification. 1U8 Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit C, Problem Solving The problem solving tasks relating to perception of hazards, sequence of human functions, visual input classification, and the procedures and processes contained in Model B were acceptable to the judges. However, the emphasis and nature of developing driver judgmental abilities was questioned. Specifically the judges felt more emphasis should be placed on driver experiences and road-traffic characteristics and less emphasis on motor vehicle law as a basis for making driver judgments. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit D, Critical Control The critical control tasks contained in Model B were approved by the judges. However, one judge felt the method of training should stress cognitive problem solving and simulated situa- tions. The reactions of the judges to the curriculum models, outlined in Figure 16, page 138, as the models related to the course of study Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Units A, B, C follow: 1. Division II, Man-Machine—Environment Readiness Task, Unit A, Ppychological and Physical Appraisal A variety of responses were received from the judges concerning this unit. One judge questioned 1H9 the need for a driver to be aware of psycholo- gical and physical information concerning the driver because of the low correlation of such characteristics and accident involvement. A second judge felt a rationale for when to teach the psychological and physical appraisal unit was needed. However, this judge believed there was a logical relation between such factors and driving. Another judge accepted the psycholo- gical factors model and the unit structure. 2. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit B, Vehicle Maintenance and Inspection The responses of the judges to this unit were limited. Two judges did not comment, and one judge felt the unit was acceptable. 3. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit C, Environmental Features and Trip Planning The responses of the judges to this unit were limited. One judge felt the unit was necessary in driver education. Another judge felt trip planning was significant in driver education. The third judge did not comment on the unit. The reactions of the judges to the curriculum models, outlined in Figure 16, page 138, as the models related to the course Of study Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure Units A, B, C, D follow: 150 The same response from the judges was made concerning all four units, Unit A, Design and Packaging, Unit B, System Failures, Unit C, Accident Procedures, Unit D,,Financial Responsibilities, in Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure. One judge did not comment on the units of the division. The second judge accepted the units and unit struc- ture contained in Division III. The third judge reacted favorably to the units. The reactions of the judges to the curriculum Inodels, outlined in Figure l6, page 138, as the models :Pelated to the course of study, Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Units A, B follow: 1. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit A,,Strategic Driving In response to this unit, one judge felt the emphasis should be altered to include both strategies and tactics of driving. Another judge expressed the idea that the development of strategic driving within the structure of self and system improvement tasks was accept- able. The third judge did not comment on the unit. 151 2. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit B, Highway Transportation System, Support and Improvement One judge felt that the method of teaching for this unit should be expanded to include problem solving situations. A second judge accepted the unit structure, and the concepts presented in the model depicting the relationship between the managerial sub-systems of the highway trans- portation system and general operator abilities. The third judge did not comment on the unit. The Course of Study The Course Objective To prepare the learner to perform the sub-tasks required in driving in a competent manner and to enter the highway transportation system with potential for growth as a competent and responsible person in both Operator and non-operator roles. Overview: The Highway Transportation System The overview of the highway transportation system should consist of a brief identification of system concepts, road users, Objectives, and evaluation. The basic purpose is to identify driving as part of a highway transportation system endeavor. The overview should be related through projects to the terminal unit, "Highway Transportation System Support and Improvement." 152 Judges: One judge questioned the need for beginning drivers to know the objective of the highway transportation system. A second judge indicated that the Objectives Of driver education should be derived from the Objective of the highway transportation system and that the problem of communicating the objective of the highway transportation system did not originate with the highway transportation system objective but in the failure of determining educa- tional Objectives. Another judge indicated that the driver education Objective and relation of the objective to the highway transportation system was accepted. Epabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. identify and define in general terms existing systems; 2. identify components of the highway transpor- tation system at the man-machine-environment level; 3. define the goals Of the highway transportation system; u. identify major managerial sub-systems of the highway transportation system; 5. define criteria for evaluating the highway transportation system's effectiveness; and 6. describe the highway transportation system employing system elements. 153 Performance Objective The beginner can: 1. define the highway transportation system as a man-machine system with the purpose of safe, efficient, and convenient movement Of people and goods from place to place along given highways. Content 1. The Highway Transportation System A. Systems 1. definition of systems 2 kinds Of systems 3. purpose Of systems A evaluation of systems B. Highway Transportation System 1 . components of highway transportation system a. man b. machine c. environment 2. goals and purpose of highway transportation system a. safety b. efficiency c. convenience 3. management of highway transportation system a. forces 1. local 2. state 3. federal b. tools 1. laws and ordinances 2. legislation 3. standards 0. interaction of forces u. evaluation of the highway transportation system a. criteria for evaluation 1. number of people and amount of goods moved 2. roadway access 3. time to move between locations 15“ b. performance of system and management 1. design 2. operation 3. conjestion A. delay c. performance of system and the individual 1. stress 2. errors 3. fatigue u. safety d. cost 1. training 2. accident frequency 3. loss of life and resources Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit A, Basic Control The unit on Basic Control is the first laboratory oriented unit, and is the first unit that depends on classroom and laboratory integration. Judges: The response from one judge was favorable towards the skill sequence for basic control and the classification of input for driver sensing. Another indicated that Models A and B reflected what a driver should know, they were easy to follow, and the content was well sequenced. Enabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. identify and define the natural forces which affect driving; 2. identify the factors associated with man- machine-environment which could minimize 155 or maximize the influence of the natural forces; define the positive relationship between the forces and the basic control task; identify and describe the controls, devices, and instruments necessary for automobile control; and define the traffic and equipment laws related to the basic control task. Performance Objective The beginner can: 1. operate the controls of the vehicle under the supervision of an instructor, in a simulated and in an actual highway environ- ment for pre—start, start, move, guide, and securing a motor vehicle. 156 Content Classroom 1. II. III. IV. Natural Forces Hffecting I. the Control Task A. Friction B. Gravity C. Inertia D. Centrifugal Sub—system Factors and II. Vehicle Control A. Vehicle 1. tires 2. brakes 3. steering u. suspension 5. speed 6. vehicle design B. Road and Environment 1. weather 2. substance 3. surfaces u. condition Influence of Forces III. A. Moving B. Stopping C. Changing Directions Seeing Techniques IV. A. Events 1. own vehicle 2. highway Laws V. A. Equipment 1. brakes 2. signals 3. other B. Traffic 1. speed 2. signalling 3. parking requirements and restrictions VI. VII. Laboratory Vehicle Familiarization A. Location Of Controls B. Function of Controls C. Relation Between Control and Vehicle Response D. Limits of Vehicle Response Because of Natural Forces Pre-operational Checks A. Periodic B. Outside C. Inside Ire-start A. Reading Instructions B. Adjustments C. Setting of Controls D. Procedures Starting A. Starting Checks B. Starting Procedures Moving Vehicle Procedures A. Acceleration Techniques B. .Braking Techniques Steering Techniques Mirror Setting Mirror Usage FIDO Holds Vehicle in Path A. Steering B. Seeing Technique C. Speed Control D. Direction Control Securing, Procedures 157 Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit B, Routine Operations In order to develop proficiency in routine procedural operations, the classroom and laboratory should be inte- grated and students should be assigned to each in a sys- tematic manner. Judges: The response from one judge was favorable towards the hierarchial progression of skills for routine tasks and the systematic treatment of driving events within the input classification. Another judge felt that Models A and B reflected what a driver should know, they were easy to follow, and the content was well structured. Enabling Opjectives The beginner will: 1. define the procedures for each routine sub-task; 2. identify the senses used in driving; 3. identify the kinds of information received by each sense; u. define how vision Operates in driving; 5. identify the critical cues and driving events in each sub-task; 6. define man-machine-environment impediments for seeing; and 7. identify and define traffic laws that apply to routine procedural sub—tasks. 158 Perfermance Lbjective The beginner can: 1. under the supervision of an instructor in a highway environment. Content II. III. IV. VI. VII. =1mulated and in perform the routine procedural sub-tasks an actual ”rm Lat gat‘rv Routine Sub-task Priceiure I. Mcritoring Input A. Lateral Mcvcncnt: A. Own Vehicle r. Hill larkin; 8. Highway C . 'T urns 1;. Eu tiring b. Turratauts F. lurking Channels frr Sen'urv Inf rra— IT. ."icra. ' vcreht: tion During Ferrarnuuée A. Touch and M=verwnt A. Speed C ntrol h. Balance r. Sheel H<.ewcnt: C. hearing 3 Signalling Laws D. Crelling f. fii'ual fine";' 5. Seeing Information Re elven 11!. Hill 'arrirg A. Ccntrol A. Wheel Piacemcnt B. Currective ‘. Tierrinfi C. Perfcrnance ‘ Legility D Vi"4al Check: Visual Sense VJ. urn? A. Observing A. Ilacement B. Fixation and Mcvement . Steering C. Fixed and Plank S are J. Lexulity .. 7evihg ”l‘ror 3:9 I ,, V . ». -.>..4.. 1.1"’~I I. [’91 CCUrAtrC'l L. Apprr ch 1. L1?” Selection Input Classifictti'n rackir; A. Our. Vehicle A. 1405:3113" b. highway 8. ’: .ticn ‘. fli:r*r T ape '- Vi”v S atrcl Sign: Direction lmpediment; of Vi ivn Y1. Jrnutouts é pneral «:omcwwwzc nvmznuw wrbi—aw-C‘Hr) 1’. V.‘ 1. View obstructions 2. design 3. blind spots U. viewing area C. Environment 1. illumination 2. Obstructions 3. design U. natural occurrences Traffic Laws VII. A. Signalling 8. Lane Changes . Turning Backing Turnabouts . Parking Speed . Sign: and Markings IQ’IJFIUO C. Steering D. Position E. Sight Direction Parking A. D :3 .12 5.: 0 procedures techniques problems legality visual checks rallel . procedures . techniques . problems . legality a: mthH'Umchb-a 9;. visual checks 159 Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit C, Problem Solving Operations This problem solving unit depends on a positive inte- gration of classroom and laboratory instruction. In many instances concepts should be introduced in the classroom and the application made during laboratory. The problem solving operation further depends on knowledge, skills, and general driving abilities. Stored knowledge and con- tent related to the driving process are initiated in the classroom and refined and reinforced in the laboratory. The process of driving is actually applied through the previously identified sub—tasks. The classroom instruc- tion would be based on a visual training media approach. In outline form judgment and decision-making are presented last. In actual teaching these functions would be inte- grated through the various problem solving tasks Of the Operator. Judges: The response from one judge indicated that ‘the emphasis on the judgmental task should be altered. fie indicated that less emphasis should be placed on motor ‘Vehicle laws and more emphasis on developing driving .ludgments through experience. The problem solving orienta- tion and human functions were accepted by two judges, eSpecially the treatment of the interrelation of functions. Further, the input classification which extends into problem solving situations received favorable comments. One judge felt that Models A and B reflected what a driver 160 should know, they were easy to follow, and the content was well sequenced. Enabling,Objectives The beginner will: 1. define the perceptual process required in driving, and identify factors which influence both the physical and mental aspects of the perceptual process; define the principles of perception and factors which influence the perceptual process; identify human functions needed to determine safe and legal speeds and determine how vehicle speed and driving events influence the effec- tiveness Of information processing; define and classify the process involved in perceiving actual traffic situations; perceive and interpret the meaning of traffic signs and other controls and classify the controls by meaning, shape, and color; classify driving events into defined classes of own vehicle, highway, traffic controls, and other users; identify driving events within appropriate defined classes; identify, define, and employ appropriate seeing habits in highway driving; 10. 11. 12. 13. l“. 15. l6. 17. 161 identify and define traffic controls and conditions which frequently exist in highway driving; identify and define procedures for sharing and interacting with other road users in highway driving; identify, classify, and determine legal requirements for intersection controls in city driving and define procedures for performing manuevers; define pedestrian, Operator, and pedestrian- Operator responsibility for simultaneous use of the roadway; define vehicle and trip preparation necessary for expressway driving; describe entrance and exit ramps on express- ways and identify procedures necessary to manuever each kind of ramp; identify and define signs and speed laws for expressway driving; define how to park and mark a disabled vehicle on an expressway; define the relationship between operator judgments and driving, and define factors which influence Operator judgments; 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Performance Objectives 162 identify and define how the knowledge of laws, human characteristics, and vehicle and road capabilities aid in Operator judgments; define how judgment of own vehicle functioning can assist in safe Operating conditions; make time-space judgments in manuevers or intersecting right-Of-way situations; define and judge other Operator behavior in given situations; define define define making define the the the and the elements of decision-making; principles of decision-making; relationship between decision- operator risk acceptance; and relationship between operator decision-making and automatic response. The beginner can under the supervision of an instructor: 1. identify the principles of perception, define the perceptual process, and employ attention and alertness while Operating an automobile. determine that perception takes time and that time needed to perceive driving events can be lessened by the selection of critical driving cues on the basis of instruction and experience. 163 identify and define the meaning Of traffic controls and can respond to controls appro- priately. define and classify driving input into defined classes and perceive and respond correctly to events in simulated and actual driving situations. control his vehicle at legal speeds and employ correct amount of speed in driving. safely interact in highway, city, and express- way driving employing correct procedures and making adjustive responses in simulated and actual situations. assess judgment situations in any driving environment as the judgment relates to laws, vehicles, roadways, manuevers, malfunctions, other operator's behavior, and hazards. make his own decisions in driving when con- fronted with alternate operator choices. 164 Classroom Lwi rat??? I. tercertual Prficr‘ ‘. 'trrtifi_at::n of Traffic Crhtrrl: A. Lef'hiti n cf :er :tt: : L. “lastification E. Relation tr T-ui .~ s. Kenning Orcratrr 1. EL.1.-I (‘1‘ E. (”)8 Ruth: J. Lfc‘htl'ufl'l D. Means of Recrgniti2h II. r "5 :1 (J P. "I F1 (I; C] (‘i *‘J I'D H i. I J "1 I4 in V C rv I .; I: :D .1. w 994 "I (D H H J O ’D '3‘ fl Fl ’\ :3 U I- ,1 w ._J I A. Attenfirn a. Paced c. hinxs «f Vehicles E. Alertness :. rnjed on Environments C. Time C. Common Speeds C. Selectirn ’. Sr;ed and lnfcrratirn Procesring P. Meaning 3. Speed? hid Kanucvers F. Reason; for Speed Ptguiations III. Percepti n Cf ':'ut ‘.. Percepticn of Input Mir upihg:) lr~uping33 A. ‘nn Ver’cle A. n "ehicle P. r‘tnwwv . -ir-Wu' (3. LI ai‘fi " ‘r “t:' l . t‘. LI-af‘fi<' Ciozitrw c L. ‘fiwd*"ers l. thsr C en‘ In, Sc: or prectahéy “f I‘. ‘.: I“ ere*tancy of Exi'irrzrh nt Irn’ut Th;virvixient ng.ut (Rental Set) ;Uuntzi Get) A. .lgnwfi'ixivin; . 'lwnWQ'Prizing l .eeing i~v.ni:ue' 1. ‘(VILE techniques a. :yrte'itic L. sitliticnal c. envirenrental L. input cl..:e: P. rign: 'ri markings . ,4 A." I‘i I H J .v ’Jo v.4 , II _, ‘,¢- egulatcry .. s and situations A) (1 ’U (D (I: kl.) {1‘ ”a ’7‘ m {a t3 C n‘ k. a s. C. F1 "It-"f-‘u'fiy A. on-comihg tr.:fi: U. interacting witn other a. lane control b. speed control c. enter and exit ccnditions d. meeting vehicles e. enter and leave curves f. following distance g. passing h. being passed 1. hill driving j. traffic mix k. train-car intersections intersections at grade (3. C *3 < (D t. l warning signs . slow moving vehicle: C) \O CYDN (TVJW J (.1. H l——-‘ (.4 B. C. 165 11. secondary roads 12. narrow bridges l3. rail crossings 1a. variety of surfaces 15. various shoulder conditions Procedures for Operating (Interacting) _ B. Legality of Manuevers C. Problem Solving City Driving I. seeing techniques 2. input classes 3. input and situations a. heavy traffic volume b. lane signals c. traffic signals d. pedestrians e. obstructions f. lane markings g. signing h. reversed traffic flow 1. channelization J. one-way streets City Driving I. seeing techniques a. systematic b. situational c. environmental 2. increased input resulting from: traffic b pedestrians c intersections d parking e control devices f. manuevers traffic controls a. right- of-way b.1ega1-requirements c. meaning pedestrians a. right—of-way b. vulnerable c. age d. patterns 5. manuevers and legal requirements a. lane selection and usage b. lane changing and passing c. intersection observations d. turning e. right- -of-way Expressway Driving 1. seeing techniques a. systematic b. situational c. environmental 2. vehicle and trip preparation 3. speed laws a. minimum b. maximum h. entrance and exit usage a. diamond b. Cloverleaf c. others ' d. entering freeway l. hazards of entering 2. lane selection . 3. merging e. leaving freeway l. hazards of leaving 2. speed f. emergency stops and disabled vehicle 166 k. alleys and drives 1. intersections driving procedures legality of manuever problem solving xpressway Driving seeing techniques input classes input and situations higher speeds multiple lanes overhead signing sign colors merging conditions ramps and kinds limited access high speed lanes rest area . toll gates A. vehicle preparation and trip planning 5. driving procedures 6. legality of manuever 7 problem solving *IJ LUMP—‘D’IO‘xUlc- bHSWH‘DQOUW V. Judgmental Process Definition Process Kinds of Driving Factors Influencing Judgment Stored Knowledge Application in All Driving Environments Required in Specific Laws Influencing Dynamic Judgments Conditions and Contingencies J. Judgmental Training EEC) “13(7) DOCD :9 H VI. Decision-Making Process VI. A. Definition B. Process C Principles D. Risk Taking E. Automatic Response F. Driver Responses 1. braking response 2. steering response G. Habit Formation H. Application to Trip Objective I. Application to Situation, Environment J. Problem Solving Judgment in Driving A. Recognizes and Applies Rules of Road R. Communication Between Operators C. Judging Meaning of Signs, etc. D. Speed of Own Vehicle E. Speed of Others F. Vehicle Capabilities G. Natural Laws H. User Characteristics 1. Immediate Situation J. Hazards K. Manuevers l. passing 2. intersecting 3. meeting A. stopping 5. blending L. Environmental Design and Conditions M. Own Vehicle Functioning N. Time and Space Determination Decision—Making and Driving A. Operator Choices B. Selects Proper Control C. Uses Controls in Proper Sequences D. Selects Best Alternative E. Minimizes Hazards and Assesses Risk F. Controls the Situation G. Makes Own Operator Decisions H. Plans Actions in Advance I. Follows Planned Course 167 Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit D, Critical Control Operations This section contains many concepts that may require treatment in either a classroom or simulated environment. However, some conditions must be coped with through on- street instruction as natural occurrences. Judges: The response from the reviews did not alter the content for this unit, but observations regarding method were stated. One Judge felt the method of teaching should include simulated situations, cognitive problem solving, and case studies. Another Judge stated that the rationale for selecting and teaching critical tasks in driver education was good. Enabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. define and describe the conditions and problems of lessened visibility in night driving; 2. identify and determine appropriate means of compensating for darkness as an operator; 3. identify and determine procedures for inter— acting with other highway users in low visibility; A. identify driving procedures in conditions of lessened visibility not imposed by darkness; 5. identify faulty visibility equipment and determine when to replace equipment; 10. ll. 12. 13. l“. 15. 168 identify problems and procedures for operating in snow, fog, and rain as it effects highway user's behavior, vehicle control, and visibility; define procedures for freeing a stuck vehicle in snow, mud, sand; define procedure for preventing a vehicle from becoming mired; define procedures for controlling a vehicle in acceleration and deceleration skids; define conditions and identify means of preventing a vehicle from hydroplaning; define the kinds of brake failures and identify the symptoms of failure with probable failures; define what to do in the event of steering loss and how to cope with steering control in the event of a tire failure; define the procedures to follow if the accelerator pedal sticks, the brakes fail, or the headlamps fail; define procedures for involuntarily leaving and re—entering the roadway; define procedures for starting a stalled vehicle in traffic; and demonstrate appropriate seeing techniques when confronted with lessened visibility and traction. 169 Performance Obiectives The beginner can under the supervision of an instructor: 1. operate a vehicle in simulated and actual driving during conditions of lessened visibility. employ correct and legal procedures under conditions of lessened visibility and traction even when other road users fail to exhibit self—control. determine the effect of the elements on vehicle traction and control his vehicle when confronted with actual or simulated loss of traction. control his vehicle in simulated and actual conditions with minimum consequences when reacting to a vehicle failure. Content Classroom I. II. Conditions of Lessened‘ Visibility A. RY 1‘ ight Driving 1. reduced vision 2. visual adaptation 3. overdriving headlamps a. judgment of speed 5. highway lighting 6. glare 7. interior lights 8. smoking 9. speed 10. headlamps a. aiming b. cleaning ll. legality of lamps 12. use of sun glasses 13. emergency flashers and vehicle marking 13. headlamps of other operators 15. pedestrian problems Weather 1. speed laws 2. visual distortions 3. reduced view A. vision 5. visibility equipment a. regulation b. usage 0. repair Conditions of Lessened Traction A. S Ml—‘UJ WMHMtWNHmmthH now and Ice . starting stopping change direction pedestrian behavior temperature changes and Rain traction sensory feedback vehicle failure . foreign substances tuck Vehicle prevention equipment freeing O o (I? kidding kinds procedures 170 I. Conditions of Lessened Visibility A. Night Driving 1. seeing techniques 2. lighting a. legality b. usage concealed bjects headlamps operating on curves reading panel display legal speeds meeting on-coming vehicles overtaking and passing following vehicles O\O CDN mk“ CLU l—-‘ 8. Weather 1. speed control and adjustments 2. use of lights 3. seeing techniques A maintaining sight a. wipers b. washers c. defrost II. Conditions of Lessened Traction A. Snow and Ice . acceleration techniques . braking techniques . steering . hazards surface testing B. cg and Rain visual techniques road types . engine and brake testing C. tuck Vehicle . rocking . application of power . spinning . slowing or stopping D. kidding . braking . accelerating l 2 3 u 5 F l 2 3 u. speed for conditions 8 l 2 3 U S l 2 3. steering III. Vehicle A. O 171 Hydroplaning E. 1. definition 2. causative factors 3 preventing and responding to pianing Failures breaking Failure A. o O c a (f o WDQHCnt-er—‘Omxfi atom»: I 4 .h. f a 5.4 I (D O a fibur‘Jk-‘IMHD‘Jmkn boom 0. re Failure-Steering adlamp Failure sinking fading spongy grabbing wet mechanical rrective Procedures Ed pumping park brake downshifting escape route eering Failure C. vehicle stalls power steering preventive maintenance f—4 front rear direction of pull blow out securing vehicle prevention tire option: celerator Pedal Stick: E. causes procedures checking replacing cleaning procedurer during failure Engine Stalls G. l. 2. conditions a. stop and go traffic b. turning and press- ing traffic c. time is limited procedures Run-off-the-road H. l. 2. 3. lost control a. causes pushed off road a. stopping b. on-coming vehicle left by desire decisions and alternatives consequences procedures re—entry operating when other traffic leaves road factors influence control and operator procedures hydroplaning 1. vehicle control 2. speed adjustments 3. direction control a. passing b. lane changing c. curves Vehicle Failures Braking Failure 1. test 2. symptoms 3. procedures Minimize Consequences P) 1. low speeds 2. low gear Steering Failure 1. quick start procedures 2. starting drill 3. si'ns and symotoms ‘ I D ‘ire Failure—Steering . procedures a. steer straight b. grip wheel c. engine braking d. brake pumping e. select safe route 2. replacement Accelerator Pedal Sticks 1. procedures 2. precautions Headlamp Failure 1. pre-drive check 2. high low beam 3. switch and dimmer location A. procedures during failure Engine Sta ls l. simulated conditions 2. procedures Run-off-the-road 1. moving vehicle leave roadway a. procedures for leaving b. procedures for re-entry 2. identifying hazardous features 3. steering and braking control 172 Division II, Man-Machine—Environment Readiness Task; Unit Ai Psychological and Physical Appraisal This unit is primarily a classroom unit with oppor- tunities available for students to express their feelings. However, many behavioral characteristics and cues to future driving behavior will be demonstrated by the stu- dent in the laboratory. Judges: The response from the reviews questioned the section on psychological and physical factors. One Judge's question focused on whether or not a driver needs to be aware of physical attributes (vision) and his psychological make—up as measured by test instruments. This question was raised because of the low correlation between psychological and physical factors and accident causative factors. Further, one Judge suggested that the title be expanded to include social factors and the method be expanded beyond an attitudinal approach to include problem solving. Another Judge commented that the unit structure was acceptable, easy to follow, and allowed for additional develOpment by the driver education teacher. Further, the structure permitted the adding of future driver education concepts. Enabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. identify and define internal forces which determine or influence his behavior; 10. 173 recognize temporary and permanent personality factors in his own make-up; identify and describe his personal code of behavior which would allow for both expression and control of internal factors at appropriate times; identify and describe significant physical factors which influence operator performance and define precautionary measures for minimizing the hazards involved in driving; identify and classify the sources and nature of fatigue; predict effects of fatigue on driving; and identify measures to prevent driving fatigue or fatigue from impairing driver performance; define how various major disabilities relate to the ability needed in driving; describe what happens to ethyl alcohol when consumed, and to classify the variables which affect this process; classify and describe the effects of alcohol on body functions; identify the relation between accidents and alcohol and determine the effects of alcohol on the general abilities required in driving; identify and describe the reasons for chemical tests and levels of intoxication; ll. 12. 17h assess the role of alcohol usage with youth and determine the problems of youthful driving and drinking; and classify various kinds of drugs, identify the effects on body functions, and predict the possible consequences of drug misuse for a highway user. Performance Objectives The beginner can: 1. identify internal elements and acts of expres— sion which facilitate operator performance and identify those which interfere with his capa— bility (general ability) to perform as a highway user; assess his behavior and driving behavior in order to make optimum use of his assets and to compensate for his liabilities as a highway user. identify the effects of internal and external physical factors on the process of driving and define a set of procedures for compensating for physical factors. define and subscribe to a set of principles to guide his behavior when confronted with situations that suggest the use of alcohol/ drugs when driving and in other activities. Content I. II. III. 175 Internal Factors A. Temporary Psychological Factors risk 2 peer influences 3 driver irritations A driver confidence 5 competiveness 6 defensiveness 7 emotional disturbances 8. worry Permanent Psychological Factors 1. personality 2. attitude 3. A 5 6 7 A l. 2. H motivation values self-concept feelings maturity ppraisals self—expression self-control Physical Factors Internal and External A. Q'IIJIUUO Major Disabilities 1. epilepsy 2. heart disease 3. diabetes A. hearing and visual deficiencies Minor Health Problems 1. colds 2. hay fever Carbon Monoxide Smoking Fatigue Drowsiness Monotony External Factors A. Alcohol 1. absorption and distribution . effects on body functions accident data alcohol and youth intoxication and testing reasons for drinking and driving assessing alcohol usage influence on operator performance CO\10\U'I zoom 176 B. Drugs 1. types and classification 2. abuses 3. uses A. effect 5. over-counter consumption 6. drug combinations 7. effect on body function 8. influence on operator performance IV. Influence on Operator Behavior and Performance A. Sensory B. Perceptual C. Judgmental D. Decision-Making Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit B, Vehicle Maintenance and Inspection This unit contains content for both classroom and laboratory instruction. The basic information should be presented in the classroom with application of informa- tion in the laboratory. Judges: One judge stated that the unit structure was acceptable, easy to follow, and allowed for additional development by the driver education teacher. Further, the structure permitted the adding of future driver education Concepts. Egabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. identify when his vehicle in malfunctioning and is in need of maintenance; 2. define procedures necessary for maintaining one's own motor vehicle in operating condition; and 3. develop a maintenance and inspection schedule. Performance Objectives The beginner can: 177 I. recognize the need for a safe vehicle. 2. maintain his vehicle in such a manner as protect himself and other highway users. rntent I. Signs and Symptoms and ' -, ‘r\ zabsratcry 1. Signs and Symptoms and Vehicle Systems Malfunctioning Vehicle Systems Halfunctioning A. Ignition System 1. starting 2. power 3. tune up B. Fuel System starting loss engine smoothness compression and power A. Ignition 8y: slow sta grinding battery care uel System flooded carburetor fuel cneck setting automatic choke tem rt "loomed [A] to b—l acceleration capability uspensi n 3Y?t€m ~73 ~.,"1 L-co n) r—J (I) t.- uu m H q C. Suspension System to v-..:ti n; l. shock check trackin» 2. suspensi:n evaTJati n S "._I "‘v ", - vuzelal Lr”JrlC6 . stalili’y D. 11 and Filtrati'n Ty.ten~ E. Oil and Filtriticn Nyrte"' 1 level 1. u ier ntvd ;; TAU 2 fire 3 mi l+ ge 3. pre;.u"e ? rraker ‘I-ke 1. low 1 . :la‘*i III. State Regulation of Financial Responsibility for Highway Users . Compulsory Insurance Protection Bonding Uninsured Motorists Fund Uninsured Motorists Protection Future Proof of Responsibility Penalities and Requirements for Unresponsible Users ’IJETJUOCDZD 189 Division IV, Self and System Igprovement, Unit A, Strategic Driving This is a classroom unit which provides for a summary of other units and states a plan for future operation beyond the limits of formal instruction. Strategic driving depends on a personal code of behavior and a driving code. This unit should have a positive influence on advanced laboratory lessons and on the student's future driving behavior. Judges: The response from one judge indicated a need to change the emphasis of strategic driving. The suggested focus would include both strategy and tactics. The suggested driving strategies go beyond a recognition of actual hazards and situations and focus on the potential situations. This approach to strategies allows for the use of stored knowledge and driver general abilities for planning in advance of driving situations. Another judge stated that the unit structure was acceptable, easy to follow, and allowed for additional development by the driver education teacher. Further, the structure per- mitted the adding of future driver education concepts. Enabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. define acceptable levels of risk worth taking in driving; 190 2. identify a level of perceptual reality which reflects safe driving requirements; 3. identify individual differences in driving and perform in a manner which reflects his strengths in driving; A. evaluate the competencies of other highway users; 5. define his highway behavior within limits of legal and moral responsibilities rather than allowing group influences to determine his highway behavior; 6. operate a motor vehicle within a mental state which will assist him in being a strategic (defensive) driver with the aim of preventing collisions and congestion; 7. identify the basic principles of accident prevention and apply the principles in driving situations; 8. define strategic (defensive) driving; and 9. define the requirements for strategic driving and apply the requirements in specific traffic situations. Performance Objectives The beginner can: 1. reflect sound principles of behavior in his driving and operate a motor vehicle in Content I. II. 191 such a manner as to protect himself and others against system failure. accept the responsibilities of operator decision-making for the safe and efficient movement of system users as part of his membership requirements in the highway trans- portation system. Personal Behavior Code A B C D. E. F. G S A. Perception of Reality Realistic Self Concept Risk Assessment Risk Acceptance Individual Differences Evaluation of Highway Users Group Influences on Behavior trategic Driving Code Concept of Strategic Driving 1. driving habits 2. state of mind 3. protection Principles of Accident Prevention 1. recognition of hazards 2. elimination of hazards 3. compensation for hazards A. avoid creating hazards The Need for Strategic Driving 1. collisions and human errors 2. complexity of driving a. actions of other highway users b. weather and road conditions c. motor vehicle breakdowns 3. legal responsibility for accident prevention The Objective of Strategic Driving 1. operator control 2. collision avoidance 192 E. The Requirements of Strategic Driving 1. knowledge and observance of laws 2. efficient sensory habits 3. ability to perceive, judge, and decide in operating A ability to achieve time—space vehicular placement 5. ability to make adjustment to conditions a. traffic b. roadway c. weather d. illumination e. own vehicle f health and state of mind confidence in personal performance desire to improve performance \10\ Division IV, Self and System Improvement, Unit B, Highwgy Transportation System Support and Improvement This unit covers some of the official support systems in the highway transportation system. The student, as a member of the highway transportation system, will need adequate knowledge which will allow him to intelligently support sound improvements in the highway transportation system. Judges: The response from the reviews indicated that this unit is necessary in driver education. However, one judge stated that the method of teaching should include problem solving activities. Another judge commented that the unit structure was acceptable, easy to follow, and allowed for additional development by the driver education teacher. Further, the structure permitted the adding of future driver education concepts. 193 Enabling Objectives The beginner will: 1. identify the major official support managerial sub-systems of the highway transportation system; 2. define the tools or vehicles these agencies use in performing their system duties; 3. identify how the managerial sub—systems aid the highway users and strive to meet the system objectives; A. identify the joint or interrelated efforts of the sub-systems in performing their duties; and 5. define how these systems influence highway user membership and assist the operator's task. Performance Objectives The beginner can: 1. identify and define the major support systems in the highway transportation system. 2. describe their respective tools (i.e., driver licensing). 3. support the sound efforts of the sub-systems in both operator and non-operator roles. Content 19A I. Highway Transportation System Sub—systems A. State and Local Levels 1. driver licensing limitations examinations re-examinations driver improvement revocation, suspension, and cancellations trends in examination quality of operator otor vehicle registration state standards' registration requirements compliance penalty related to registration proof of registration quality of vehicle motor vehicle inspection a. purpose of inspection b kinds of inspection 0 standards d. trends in inspection e quality of vehicle police traffic law a. b c d e (DQOU'W WWQOO’WSOQH) purpose of traffic law traffic law as a social device uniformity operator motivation and the law traffic law enforcement 1. tools 2. procedures police traffic supervision operator behavior quality of operator raffic courts purposes and procedures correcting and educating attitude toward judicial system quality and enforcement raffic engineering . purpose highway planning uniformity turbulence warrants speed zoning signing OQWIDQOU'WdQOU'deJ'OQF-b 195 relation to operator urban improvement quality of roadway quality of highway user interaction 7. nature of laws and ordinances a. legislation b. local jurisdiction c. quality of standards and officials B. Federal Role 1. standards a. uniformity b. quality of transportation system c. financing C. Operator and Sub-Systems 1. total support a. interrelation of systems 2. determination of sub-system-—safe highway users a. screening b. removal 3. sub-system's influence on driver ability and performance supervision enforcement improved system performance 1. sensing 2. perceiving 3. skilled performance A. deciding D. Private Efforts individual influences on system groups industry quality of officials quality man-machine-environment X1*F*U CLOUD! UT-E‘WNH Summary This chapter included the objectives and content of a traffic education course of study. This course of study Was designed for teachers to use as a guide in content selection. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter contains the summary, conclusions, and recommendations. The conclusions and recommendations were based upon the project in general, the insights the author gained through the process of developing the material, and the responses from the expert judges who reviewed the curricular models. Summary Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was (1) to develOp curri- cular models depicting a conceptual scheme of traffic education which could be used by teachers in selecting content and providing instruction for future automobile operators and (2) to develop a suggested course of study, including guiding instructional objectives and a content sequence to be used in classes for beginning motorists. Methods of Procedure Based on a search of pertinent literature, curri- cular models which depicted a conceptual scheme of traffic 196 197 education were produced. Following the construction and description of the curricular models, a suggested course of study, containing both classroom and laboratory content, was derived from the models. Expert judges, who reflected a broad concept of highway traffic safety, were selected to review and critique the traffic education curricular models. The judges' observations were reported and those observations which related to the course of study were identified. Findings The following is a summary of the major findings of this study. The findings are reported in terms of positive and negative acceptance of the units in traffic education by one or more judges. The units in traffic education were derived from the curricular models. 1. Positive Responses About Units a. Overview: The Highway Transportation System b. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit A, Basic Control 0. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit B, Routine Operations d. .Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit C, Problem Solving Operations e. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit D, Critical Control Operations 198 f. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit A, Psychological and Physical Appraisals g. Division II, Man-Machine—Environment Readiness Task, Unit B, Vehicle Maintenance and Inspection h. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit C, Environmental Features and Trip Planning 1. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit A, Design and Packaging j. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit B, System Failures k. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit C, Accident Procedures 1. Division III, Controlling System and Task Failure, Unit C, Financial Responsibilities m. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit A, Strategic Driving n. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit B, Highway Transportation System Support and Improvement Negative Responses About Units a. Overview: The Highway Transportation System 199 b. Division I, Performance Tasks, Unit C, Problem Solving Operations 0. Division II, Man-Machine-Environment Readiness Task, Unit A, Psychological and Physical Appraisals d. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit A, Strategic Driving e. Division IV, Self and System Improvement Task, Unit B, Highway Transportation System Support and Improvement In summary, each unit derived from the curricular models received positive comments from at least one judge and five units received comments which suggested that a potential driver did not need to know the information or that the content within the units required a change of emphasis for total acceptance. Conclusions The following are the conclusions of this project. I. This approach to curriculum development was assessed by direct opinion, but the actual effectiveness of the curriculum approach can only be measured through controlled experimentation. The judges made comments which indicated that the curriculum approach could be used in driver education. However, many components of the curriculum are new and would require controlled experimen— tation to determine their effectiveness in driver education. 200 2. This approach provided for the development of a curriculum structure. The structure required a content sequence of a developmental nature. The altering of the unit sequence would in all probability lessen the effec- tiveness of the developed curriculum. This is especially true for units sequenced on a performance Criteria. Division I, Performance Tasks, provided an example of a unit structure designed on a performance criteria. 3. The teaching behavior or the teacher-learner relationship was not structured by this curriculum approach. A teacher could use this curriculum structure regardless of his philosophical concept of the teaching- learning process. The teacher still needs to determine teaching method for many units in this curriculum struc- ture. The methods could include small group discussion, the discovery method, independent study, and student projects. A. Teaching media did not exist which could be employed for improving the Operator's general driving abilities. The media for this purpose needs to be developed and assessed before this curriculum approach can be entirely evaluated. The general guidelines for developing the media could come from Chapter III and from the expertise of learning theorists. This media should include both visual training media and media which relies on the discovery or inquiry method. 201 5. The performance objectives by definition tended to indicate that learning had terminated with formal instruction. In actuality the performance objectives did not state terminal learning achievement but permitted continuous growth of the operator during his driving career. Further the performance objectives need to be further developed if they are to be used in an instructional driver education guide. The objectives need to be expanded to include the terminal behavior, conditions for learning, and a measurable criteria. 6. This material was developed to provide guidee lines for teachers of traffic education. Hence detailed content and objectives were not developed. It was felt that detailed development would restrict the use of the curriculum structure. However, the curriculum should provide a structure for further curriculum development. 7. If the major units in this curriculum structure are accepted, the current minimum time standards for driver education instruction needs to be re—evaluated. In fact, if some of the attitudinal objectives are to be achieved, driver education would need to be integrated into the school curriculum as well as being treated in a specific course. Traffic education could be incorporated into a K-12 curriculum with specific courses in pre-driver education, driver education, and post-driver education. 202 8. The driver education curriculum can not be limited to a skill training course. The operator's general behavior or psychological make-up as well as the system in which he performs the driving task influences his performance. Driver education should be viewed as part of the behavioral sciences and taught in terms of its relationship to the highway transportation system. 9. An integrated and correlated classroom and laboratory scheduling method is required in order to employ the curriculum structure and resulting course of study. The most difficult area to employ an integrated and correlated scheduling method is with problem solving tasks and general driving abilities. These two areas, problem solving and general driving abilities, are also the areas which are most dependent upon the integrated and correlated scheduling method for successful learning. 10. The curriculum was based on a theory of traffic education for beginning motorists. The material could be refined and expanded through an interdisciplinary effort in traffic education curriculum development. This curriculum could be developed to the degree that it could serve as the structure for daily planning by driver education teachers. 11. The judges, in accepting or rejecting content within units, tended to reflect their profession within the profession of highway traffic safety. Specifically, 203 the judges reflected a concept of driver education based upon their professional backgrounds. 12. Some judges focused on specific areas within the curriculum models rather than assessing the entire curriculum structure. 13. Judges' recommendations for improvement in content were identified. The judges did not suggest the position or relationship between their suggested additions and the curriculum structure. 1A. Many of the judges' recommendations for improv- ing the project were already included in various chapters and these recommendations would not have been made pro- vided the judges had reviewed the entire project. 15. Division III units received few comments in the judges' critiques because they only appeared in one figure, Figure 9, "Major Instructional Units in Traffic Education." Further these units had a less empirical relationship to driving than other units in the curriculum structure and related to failure rather than successful performance by an operator. 16. All the judges approved the content and content sequence of the units as presented in the model titled, "Major Instructional Units in Traffic Education." However, all the concepts presented in the curricular structure were not accepted. 20A Recommendations The following recommendations are made for this project: 1. Determine realistic operator performance criteria for evaluating the product of driver education. 2. Evaluate this curricular structure and other curricular approaches in driver education on the basis of educational objectives rather than with standardized tests. 3. Substantiate this approach to curriculum development by actual field testing and evaluation of results. A. Determine realistic instructional time for accomplishing traffic education instruction as conceptual- ized in this curriculum structure. 5. Evaluate this curriculum structure in experi- mental difference studies. a. Measure the effectiveness of this traffic education curriculum when employing the separate scheduling method. This study should be conducted with beginning drivers. The classroom should precede and terminate before laboratory instruction begins. b. Measure the effectiveness of this traffic education curriculum when employing the integrated and correlated scheduling method. This study should be conducted with beginning drivers. The 205 classroom and laboratory instruction should be simultaneous. c. Employing the separate scheduling method, compare the effectiveness of this curriculum structure with the conventional approaches to driver education instruction. This study should be conducted with beginning drivers. The classroom should precede and terminate before laboratory instruction begins. d. Employing the integrated and correlated scheduling method, compare the effectiveness of this curriculum structure with the conventional approach to driver education instruction. This study should be conducted with beginning drivers. The classroom and laboratory instruction should be simultaneous. e. Determine which existing laboratory instructional facilities or combination of fac- ilities are most effective when employing this curriculum structure. 6. Make a detailed task analysis of all driver tasks and determine a criteria measure for evaluation. 7. Design a program for systematic re-evaluation of the operator's task as various components within the high- way transportation system are added or modified. 206 8. Design a study to determine if the operator currently has the ability to perform the driver's tasks which are required for automobile operation. 9. Design a study to determine the tasks, sub- tasks, and required operator abilities for operators of all vehicles (two-wheelers, fleet vehicles, etc.) in the highway transportation system. 10. Determine a realistic criteria for the evalua- tion of driver education on a short and long term basis. 11. Determine the contribution of driver education as an accident counter-measure in the highway transporta- tion system. 12. Develop a driver education program based on this curriculum structure and implement the curriculum structure in schools of various sizes and with various facilities available to accomplish the curriculum goals. 13. Develop textbooks and other instructional materials based on this curriculum structure. 1A. Develop and conduct workshops with high school driver education teachers to determine further usefulness of this curriculum approach. 15. Develop this curriculum structure into an instructional guide for driver education including detailed daily lesson plans with measurable behavioral objectives. 16. Encourage high school teachers to further define the traffic education curriculum, especially the 207 objectives. This recommendation should provide for teachers to begin their detailed development with the conventional elements of driver education. For example, the teachers could start the development with the basic procedural skills in driver education. Their development of units derived from this curriculum structure should include daily plans with measurable behavioral Objectives. 17. Encourage state departments of education to consider this curricular structure for designing their state instructional driver education guides. 18. Develop driver education teacher preparation programs based on this curriculum structure. Where driver education preparation programs already exist this curriculum approach should be integrated into the existing structure. In situations where driver education teacher preparation programs are being developed, this curriculum should be employed as the foundation for further development. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Anderson, William G. In—Car Instruction Methods and Content. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1968. Bartley, S. Howard. Principles of Perception. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1958. Crow and Crow. An Outline of General Psychology. Pater- son, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams, and Company, 1961. Gagne, Robert M. Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Gagne, Robert M. Psychological Principles in System Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966. Gibson, James J. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966. Haddon, W., E. Suchman, and D. Klein. Accident Research. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 196A. Komorita, Samuel, et al. Review Outline of Psychology. Paterson, New Jersey: Littlefield, Adams, and Company, 1962, Third Edition. Maddi, Salvatore R. Personality Theories. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1968. Newsletter Instructional Simulation Newsletter. Teaching Research, Oregon State System of Higher Education, Monmouth, Oregon, Vol. 2, No. 1, February, 1969. 208 209 Periodicals Adelstein, A. M. "Accident Proneness: A CritiCism of the Concept Based Upon an Analysis of Shunters' Acci- ' dents," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, CXV (1952), pp. 35A1AOO. Babarik, Paul. "Automobile Accidents and Driver Education Pattern," Journal of Applied ngchology, 52 (1968) pp. A9-5A. Bamford, Harold E. "Human Factors in Man-Machine Systems," Human Factors, 1 (November, 1959), pp. 55—57. Barrett, Gerald V. and Carl L. Thornton. "Relationship Between Perceptual Style and Driver Reaction to an Emergency Situation," Journal of Applied ngchology, 52 (1968), pp. 169-176. Bartlett, Neil et a1. "Recognition Time for Symbols in Peripheral Vision," Highway Research Board Bulletin 339 (January, 1962), pp. 87—91, Bloomer, Richard. "Perceptual Defense and Vigilance and Driving Safety." Traffic Quarterly (October, 1962), pp. 5A9-558. Bloomfield, Gary J. "Remember the Classroom." Safety (January-February, 1969), pp. 13—15. Blumenthal, Murray. "Value Conflict, Decision Processes and Traffic Safety." Traffic Safety Research Review, 10, 3 (September, 1966), p. 89. Brody, Leon. "Personal Characteristics of Chronic Viola- tors and Accident Repeaters," Highwgy Research Board Bulletin 152 (1957). Cozan, Lee W. "Engineering Psychology and the Highway Transportation System," American Psychologist, 16 (1961), p. 263. Cushman, W. and Ray Wahl. "Driver Education - What it is - and What it Isn't." Traffic Safegy (August, 1968), p. 18+. Edwards, Ward. "We Drive as We Live." Analogy (Spring, 1968), pp. 20-22. Forbes, T. W. "Human Factors in Highway Safety." Traffic Safety Research Review, A, 1 (March, 1960), pp. 8-11. 210 Forbes, T. W. et a1. "Measurement of Drivers Reactions to Tunnel Conditions," ARB Proc., 37 (1958), Forbes, T. W. "Predicting Attention-Gaining Characteristics of Highway Traffic Signs: Measurement Technique," Human Factors, 6, A (August, 196A), pp. 371-375. Forbes, T. W. "Traffic Engineers and Driver Behavior." Traffic Safety Research Review, 9, 3 (September, 1965), pp. 87-89. Gibson, J. J. and Laurence E. Crooks. "A Theoretical Field Analysis of Automobile Driving." The American Journal of Psychology, 51, 3 (July, 1938), pp. A53-u71. Goldstein, Leon C. "Human Variables in Traffic Accidents: A Digest of Research." Highway Research Board Bibliography 31 (1962). Goldstein, Leon C. "Psychological Aspects of Traffic Accidents." Traffic Digest and Review (July, 196A), pp. 10—12. Greenshields, Bruce D. "Investigating Traffic Highway Events in Relation to Driver Actions." Traffic Quarterly (October, 1961), pp. 66A-676. Greenwood, Major and Hilda Woods. "The Incidence of Industrial Accidents with Special Reference to Multiple Accidents." Industrial Fatigue Research Board, Report No. A, 1919. Hickey, Albert E. and Wesley C. Blair. "Man as a Monitor," Human Factors, 1 (September, 1958), pp. 8-11. Ittleson, W. H. "Size As a Cue to Distance: Static Localization." American Journal of Psychology, LXIV, 1 (January, 1951), pp. 5A¥67. Lauer, A. R. "A Comparison of Group Paper and Pencil Tests with Certain Psychophysical Tests for Mea— suring Driver Aptitude for Army Personnel." Journal of Applied Psychology, 39 (1959), pp. 318-321. Low, F. N. "The Peripheral Motion Acuity of 50 Subjects." American Journal of Physiology, 1A8 (19A7), pp. 125-133. Mann, William A. "Let's Talk it Over." Analogy, Charter Issue (1966), pp. A-9. 211 McPherson, Kenard and Francis C. Kenel. "Perception of Traffic Hazards: A Comparative Study." Traffic Safety Research Review, 12, 2 (June, 1968), pp. A6-A9. Michaels, R. M. "Human Factors in Highway Safety." Traffic Quarterly (October, 1961), pp. 586-599. Miller, Gene. "Accident Repeaters May Not Be Accident- Prone." National Safepy News, LXVII (March, 1953), pp. 3-6. Moseley, A. L. "Let's Train Drivers for that Last Crucial Moment." Traffic Safety (September, 1961), pp. 8-10. Myrick, R. and L. E. Schlesinger. "Driver Improvement or System Improvement?" Traffic Quarterly (January, 196A), pp. 92-lOA. "The NEA Has Its Say." Traffic Safepy (December, 1968). Olson, Paul et al. "Driver Judgments of Relative Car Velocities." Journal of Applied Psychology, A5, 3 (1961), pp. 161-16A. Payne, Donald and Joseph E. Barmack. "An Experimental Field Test of the Smith-Cummings-Sherman Driver Training System." Traffic Safetijesearch Review, 7 (March, 1963), pp. lO-lA. Perchonok, Kenneth and Paul M. Hurst. "Effect of Lane- Closure Signals Upon Driver Decision Making and Traffic Flow." Journal of Applied Psychology, 52, 5 (1968), pp. AlOiAl3. Platt, Fletcher. "Operations Analysis of Traffic Safety A Classification of Traffic Situations." Traffic Safety Research Review, 2, A (December, 1958), pp. 17-23- "President's Committee on Traffic Safety Conference On Traffic Behavior Research." Behavioral Science, 3 (1958), pp. 347-355- Quane, W. Laurance. "New Approach to Classroom Instruc- tion." Safety (May-June, 1969), pp. 26-27. Quensel, Warren P. "Teaching Visual Perception in Driver Education." ADEA News and Views, 3, 2, pp. 3-12. 212 Schlesinger, Lawrence. "Objectives, Methods, and Criterion Tests in Driver Training." Traffic Safety Research Review, 11, 1 (March, 1967), pp. 18-2A. Schlesinger, L. W. and M. A. Safren. "Perceptual Analysis Of the Driving Task." Highway Research Board Record 83 (January, 196A), pp. 5A-61. Shaw, Lynnete. "The Practical Use of Projective Person- ality Test as Accident Predictors." Traffic Safety Research Review, 9, 2 (June, 1965), p. 3A. Smith, H. L. and J. J. Cummings. "Let's Teach Drivers How to See." Traffic Digest and Review, A (March, 1956), pp. 7-13. Stephens, B. W. and R. M. Michaels. "Time Sharing Between Compensatory Tracking and Search and Recognition Tasks." Highway Research Board Record 55 (1963), pp. 1-16. Stewart, Roger G. "Can Psychologists Measure Driving Attitudes?" Educational and Psyphological Measure- ment, 18 (1958), pp. 63-73. Turfboer, Robert. "Do People Really Drive as They Live?" Traffic Quarterly, 21, 1 (January, 1967), pp. 101- 108. Wright, Stuart and Robert B. Sleight. "Influence of Mental Set and Distance Judgment Aids on Following Distance." Highway Research Board Bulletin 30 (l962): pp- 52‘59- Publications of Organizations Asher, J. William. Do Driver Training Courses Produce Better Drivers An Alternative Hypothesis. Purdue University, undated. Brody, Leon. Personal Factors in Safe Operation of Motor Vehicles. New York: New York University Center for Safety Education, 19A1. Burg, Albert. An Investigation of Some Relationship Between Dynamic Visual Acuity, Static Visual Acuity and Driving Record. Report #6A-l8. Department of English, University of California, April, 196A. 213 Christner, Charlotte A. and Horace W. Ray. Final Report on Human Factors in Highwaerraffic: Intervehicular Communication to Bureau of Public Roads. Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Memorial Institute, 1961. A Commentary on Recent Reports Relating to Qgiver Education Research. Washington: National Commission on Safety Education, June, 1968. The Environment and Man, Research Through 1966. Hartford, Connecticut: The Travelers Research Center, Inc., January, 1967. The Federal Role in Highway Safety. 86th Congress, lst Session, House Document #93. Fox, B. H. Alcohol and Traffic Safety, Chapter 8. U. S. Public Health Service Publication, No. 10A3. Goeller, B. F. Modeling the Traffic-Safety System. Santa Monica, California: Rand Corporation, April, 1968. Goldstein, L. C. Research on Human Variables in Safe Motor Vehicle Operation; A Correlational Summaryjof Pre- dictor Variables and Criterion Measures. The Driver Behavior Research Project, George Washington Univer- sity, June, 1961. Highwaijafety Program Management. Washington, D. C.: Automotive Safety Foundation, August, 1968. Highway Safety Program Manual, Transmittal 11. Washington, D. C.: National Highway Bureau, January 17, 1969. The Introduction,jRationale, and Basic Outline for the Revised Program of Instruction, Department of Safety Education. Springfield, Illinois: Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, April 25, 1969. Lybrand, William A. et al. A Study on Evaluation of Driver Education. The American University, July 31, 1968. » Policies and Practices for Driver and Traffic Safety Education. Washington, D. C.: National Commission on Safety Education, 196A. 21A . Rgport of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Traffic Safepy. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, February 29, 1968. Ross, H. Laurence. Schematic Analysis of the Driving Situation. Evanston, Illinois: Traffic Institute, Northwestern University, 1960. Safren and Schlesinger. Driving Skill and Its Measurement. Washington, D. C.: George Washington University, April, 196A. School and College Safety, National Safety Con- gress Transactions, Vol. 23. Chicago: National Safety Council, 1968. Senders, et al. An Investigation of Automobile Driver Information Processing, Final Report. Washington, D. C.: The Bureau of Public Roads, April, 1966. Spicer, Robert A. Human Factors in Traffic Accidents, Research Grant No. AC-55. Washington, D. C.: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Stack, Herbert J. Historyjof Driver Education in the United States. Washington, D. C.: National Com- mission on Safety Education, 1966. Speeches Adams, James R. and Sanford Weinstein. Measurement Judg- ment of Impendinngazard by a Stimulus Acceleration Technique. A synopsis of paper presented at the annual meeting of the Highway Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, January, 1965. Mann, William. Building Attitudes for Safety. Presented at the National Safety Congress, 1960. McGuire, Frederick L. Personal Factors in Highway Acci- dents A Study in Prediction and Methodology. A Progress Report on the Mississippi Project. Pre- sented at the National Safety Congress, 1967. Pepyne, Edward. Changing Driver Attitudes. Presented at the Driver Education section of the MEA Regional Conference at Ann Arbor, 1956. Platt, Fletcher et al. A Basic Plan for a Highway Trans- portation Systems Study. Prepared for the Fifth World Meeting of International Road Federation, September, 1966. 215 Platt, Fletcher. A Unique Method of Measuring Road, Traffic; Vehicle and Driver Characteristics. Presented at the IV World Meeting of International Road Federation, October, 1962. Unpublished Materials Cobb, P. W. "Automobile Driver Tests Administered to 3,663 Persons in Connecticut, 1936-37, and the Relation of the Test Scores to the Accident Sustained." Washington, D. C.: Highway Research Board, 1939, Unpublished. "Description of the Driving Task." Illinois State University, undated. Robinson, Allen. "The Influence of Programmed Instruc- tional Films on Perception of Traffic Hazards." Unpublished Master's thesis, Illinois State University, Normal, June, 1968. Streeter, Gerald M. "A Classroom Visual Perception Program for Beginning Motorists." Unpublished Master's thesis, Illinois State University, Normal, August, 1968.