Conductas urgentes y evaluativas en función del nivel de riesgo en situaciones de conducción

Abstract

Resumen: Las situaciones de riesgo en conducción requieren, en la mayoría de las ocasiones, una decisión de carácter urgente, distinguiéndose de lo que se ajustaría más a una conducta evaluativa que podría llevar a cabo un observador. Para explorar la diferenciación entre conductas evaluativas y urgentes, e intentar estudiar bajo qué condiciones pueden producirse, se diseñó una escala de riesgo subjetivo basada en una taxonomía de situaciones de riesgo en conducción. Este estudio refleja una falta de relación directa entre la evaluación de la situación y la decisión comportamental con carác-ter urgente que demanda dicha situación. Las conductas urgentes obtuvieron respuestas más conservadoras y diferencias en tiempos de reacción dependiendo del nivel de riesgo de la situación, lo cual abre la posibilidad de que nuestras conductas no se adapten exclusivamente a nuestra evaluación. Las diferencias encontradas pueden ser explicadas en base a los rasgos de la tarea en función del nivel de riesgo que conlleva la situación. Estos datos pueden ser una buena base para el diseño de futuros programas de educación vial y formación de conductores, centrados en el aprendizaje y entrenamiento a través de la ejecución de conductas urgentes. Palabras clave: Tráfico; toma de decisiones; percepción de riesgo; seguridad vial.Title: Urgent and evaluative behaviours according to the risk level in driving situations. Abstract: Risky driving situations require, in most cases, decision-making of an urgent nature, differing in this sense from those behaviours that would be classified as evaluative behaviour, which, for example, an observer may carry out. To explore the distinction between evaluative and urgent behaviours, and study under what conditions these differences may be caused, we designed a subjective risk scale based on taxonomy of risky driving situations. This study shows no relationship between the assessment of the situation and the urgent behavioural decision that the situation demands. Urgent behaviours were more conservative and differences in reaction times were found to depend on the level of risk of the situation. This opens up the possibility that our actions are not always in accordance with our evaluations. The differences can be explained, according to the characteristics of this task and taking into account the level of risk involved in the situation. This data could be an important basis for the design of future programs of road safety and driver training, focusing on driver learning and training through the execution of urgent behaviours.

The Passenger Effect: Risky Driving is a Function of the Driver‐Passenger Emotional Relationship

“…There was a significant main effect of risk level, F (2, 120) = 62.13, MSE = 1.74, p < .0001. The averages observed for the risk levels (1.34, 3.84, and 7.04, respectively for low, medium, and high risk) were close to those obtained in the parametric study (Megías, López‐Riañez and Cándido, , see preceding text). There was also an interaction effect between risk and sex, F (2, 120) = 3.48, MSE = 1.74, p < .0339.…”

“…A set of 84 road pictures obtained from the Honda Riding Trainer Simulator (see, Di Stasi et al, , for details on the Honda Riding Trainer) were presented to each participant. Each of these pictures (Figure ) was selected from a database previously evaluated through a parametric study on risk perception (Megías, López‐Riañez, & Cándido, ). From this database, we selected 28 slides for each level risk group (average risk scores were: 6.68, 3.30, and 0.97, respectively for high, medium, and low risk groups, 10 being the highest possible risk and 0 the lowest one).…”

“…From this database, we selected 28 slides for each level risk group (average risk scores were: 6.68, 3.30, and 0.97, respectively for high, medium, and low risk groups, 10 being the highest possible risk and 0 the lowest one). These three levels of risk were used because different risk levels cause dissimilar type of response and reaction times (Megías, López‐Riañez, & Cándido, ). For example, medium risk situations are characterized by greater uncertainty, one very influential factor in risk perception (Doya, ; Pushkarskaya, Liu, Smithson, & Joseph, ).…”

Neural mechanisms underlying urgent and evaluative behaviors: An fMRI study on the interaction of automatic and controlled processes

“…To address this issue, Megías et al [] proposed the dissociation between urgent and evaluative behaviors as evidence of dual processing in every‐day risk behavior. Urgent behaviors are performed under time pressure, triggered by a stimulus, and can lead to negative consequences if the action is unsuccessful.…”

Risk proneness modulates the impact of impulsivity on brain functional connectivity

“…Our aim, therefore, was to test if the associations between functional coupling in large brain networks and impulsivity and sensation-seeking traits are a function of risk proneness, as derived from the DOSPERT scale (Weber, Blais, & Betz, 2002), in a normal young sample. For this purpose, we used the brain current source density (CSD, determined using sLORETA) estimated from a risk perception task, described in other studies (Megías et al, 2015;Megías, López-Riañez, & Cándido, 2013). As an a priori approach, we depart from the influential work of Yeo et al (2011) 2.2 | Apparatus and stimuli…”