SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Psikoloji Yazıları / 2002 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 9

Sürücü Davranış ve Performansının Araştırılması:Yöntem ve Uygulama

Timo LAJUNEN
Pages
105–119
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The aim of this paper is to describe some of the most frequently used methods in traffic research and discuss about their pros and cons.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Traffic psychology is a truly inter-disciplinary field.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In addition to research methods and approaches of mainstream psychology, traffic psychologists use methods employed in other sciences, like civil engineering and city planning, ergonomics, economics and medical sciences.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The aim of this paper is to describe some of the most frequently used methods in traffic research and discuss about their pros and cons.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Traffic psychology is a truly inter-disciplinary field. In addition to research methods and approaches of mainstream psychology, traffic psychologists use methods employed in other sciences, like civil engineering and city planning, ergonomics, economics and medical sciences. Due to this methodological richness, a traffic researcher needs profound methodological and statistical knowledge. The aim of this paper is to describe some of the most frequently used methods in traffic research and discuss about their pros and cons.

Özet

Trafik psikolojisi disiplinlerarası bir alandır. Genel psikoloji içinde kullanılan yöntem ve yaklaşımlara ek olarak inşaat mühendisliği, Şehir-bölge planlama, ergonomi, ekonomi ve sağlık bilimler alanlarında kullanılmakta olan yöntemleri de kullanır. Bu yöntemsel zenginlik, trafik psikologlarının kapsamlı yöntem ve istatistik bilmesini gerektirir. Bu yazının amacı, trafik psikolojisi alanında sıklıkla kullanılan yöntemleri tanıtmak ve bunların avantaj ve dezavantajlarını tartışlmaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

LAJUNEN, T. (2002). Sürücü Davranış ve Performansının Araştırılması:Yöntem ve Uygulama. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 9, 105–119. https://ajindex.com/articles/128692

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Brown, I. D. (1990). Drivers' margins of safety considered as a fo-cus for research on error. Commission of the European Communities Workshop: Errors in the operation of trans-port systems (1989,
  2. Cambridge, England). Ergonomics, 33, 1307-1314.
  3. Chapman, P., & Underwood, G. (2000). Forgetting near-accidents: The roles of severity, culpability and experience in the poor recall of dangerous driving situations. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14(1), 31-44.
  4. Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation. Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Duncan, J., Williams, P., & Brown, I. (1991). Components of dri-ving skill: experience does not mean expertise. Ergonomics, 34(7), 919-937.
  5. Elander, J., West, R., & French, D. (1993). Behavioral correlates of individual differences in road-traffic crash risk: An examination of methods and findings. Psychological Bulletin, 113(2), 279-294.
  6. Groeger, J. A., & Grande, G. E. (1996). Self-preserving assessments of skill? British Journal of Psychology, 87, 61-79.
  7. Lajunen, T., Corry, A., Summala, H., & Hartley, L. (1997). Imp-ression management and self-deception in traffic behaviour inventories. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(3), 341-353.
  8. Lewin, I. (1982). Driver training: A perceptual-motor skill approach. Ergonomics, 25, 917-924.
  9. Maycock, G., Lockwood, C. R., & Lester, J. (1991). The accident liability of car drivers (315): Transport and Road Research Laboratory. McKenna, F. P., Duncan, J., & Brown, I. D. (1986). Cognitive abilities and safety on the road: A re-examination of individual differences in dichotic listening and search for embedded figures. Ergonomics, 29, 649-663.
  10. McKenna, F. P., Stanier, R. A., & Lewis, C. (1991). Factors underlying illusory self-assessment of driving skill in males and females. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 23, 45-52.
  11. Michon, J. A. (1985). A critical review of driver behaviour models: what we know, what should we do? In L. Evans & R. C. Schwing (Eds.), Human behavior and traffic safety (pp. 485-520). New York: Plenum. Naatanen, R., & Summala, H. (1976). Road-user behavior and traffic accidents. Amsterdam and New York: North-Holland/American Elsevier. Raesaenen, M., & Summala, H. (1998). Attention and expectation problems in bicycle-car collisions: An in -depth study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 30(5), 657-666.
  12. Rutter, D. R., Quine, L., & Albery, I. P. (1998). Perceptions of risk in motorcyclists: Unrealistic optimism, relative