Simulator versus traditional training: A comparative study of night driving training

Abstract

In recent decades, simulators have become an increasingly accepted part of training in sectors like aviation, medicine, and the petroleum industry. Some countries like the Netherlands, the UK, and Finland have accepted simulators as a part of driver’s education, but in Norway the use of simulators is both limited and restricted. This experimental study aimed to determine whether simulator-based training in night driving could be beneficial compared to traditional Norwegian training. Two equal-sized groups of learner drivers completed both simulator training and traditional training, and both training sessions were followed by a multiple-choice test mapping the learner drivers’ theoretical knowledge on the topic. The results show that theoretical learning outcome is higher from simulator training compared to traditional training, indicating that an increased use of simulators could be beneficial in driver training.

Supplemental Instruction. Volume 1: Digital Technologies

“…Regarding improved learning outcomes, what is tested in, for instance, dark driving with a multiple-choice test, resembles the lower levels of learning according to Bloom's taxonomy. The basic theoretical foundation of dark driving is found to be learned as well or even slightly better in a simulator than outdoors on a track (Saetren et al, 2019b). This is important learning, but for a simulator to be of extensional use, it should also be important also for higher levels of learning.…”

“…Curricula were revised to focus on reflections and understanding concepts such as risk and development of the learners' risk perceptions. This was a turning point from a more objectivistic view of training, in which elements such as the numbers of hours and technical handling of the vehicle were essential to a more constructivist and social constructivist paradigm (Saetren et al, 2019b). Thus the focus shifts from the lower levels of learning to also include higher learning levels according to Bloom's taxonomy.…”

“…Research from the past ten years focuses on learning driving skills using a simulator has included a health perspective for conditions such as stroke, sleep deprivation, motoric challenges, and age (McKay et al, 2011;Sawula et al, 2018), transferability to real-life driving (Gemou, 2013), or training related to dark or eco-driving (Jamson et al, 2015;Saetren et al, 2019b). However, there have been few studies about using driving simulators for standard learner driving (Saetren et al, 2019b), and there is a conspicuous gap from pedagogical, driving instructor, and student perspectives. Moreover, there is limited knowledge about which factors influence the perception and use of such simulators.…”

“…This study is a part of a four-year project exploring if and how driving simulators can improve driving instructor education and driver training, which is called the SitT-project (Simulation in Driver Education; Saetren et al, 2018Saetren et al, , 2019aSaetren et al, , 2019bSaetren et al, , 2020a.…”

How Constructionist Perspectives on Learning Can Improve Learning and Prevent Accidents in High-Risk Industries

“…What matters is not the physical fidelity level of the simulator, but the relevance of the content for job performance, the psychological fidelity so to speak [19]. Well-designed simulation training can enhance learning by creating a safe environment for learning by trial and error, context-sensitive instruction, and detailed feedback, particularly for tasks where actual mistakes can cause serious injuries or damage to equipment [19,39,41].…”