What do driver educators and young drivers think about driving simulators? A qualitative draw-and-talk study

Abstract

Evaluation research suggests that professional driver education and training has little effect on reducing the crash involvements of young drivers. Driver education and training programs have been criticised as being unsystematically designed and lacking an empirical or theoretical basis. The Goals for Driver Education (GDE) is a theoretical framework developed to address these criticisms. The GDE defines four hierarchical levels of driving behaviours and influences on driving and three individualised Person-specific factors that should be considered in driver education and training programs. The aim of this study was to compare and contrast, in a methodologically rigorous manner, the perceptions that young drivers (n = 22; Mage = 17.80 years, SD = 6.54 months) and driver educators (n = 10; Mage = 54.5 years, SD = 9.21 years) have of a professional driver education and training course they participated in or facilitated. Eight semi-structured focus groups were conducted and the GDE was used to direct the collection and analysis of the data. Young drivers mainly discussed basic driving skills located on the lower levels of the GDE rather than higher level abstract factors that increase risk for young drivers. Driver educators tended to group particular GDE levels and Person-specific factors together when discussing the driving course and paid limited attention to Goals and contexts of driving. Results suggest that driver educators should provide direct instruction regarding the more abstract social and contextual factors that influence driving to potentially increase the efficacy of driver education and training as a safety countermeasure.

What, Who, and When? The Perceptions That Young Drivers and Parents Have of Driving Simulators for Use in Driver Education

“…The current research expands upon, but is separate from, previous studies investigating professional driver education and the GDE [13] and the views that professional driver educators and young people have of driving simulators [23]. The current study concentrates on the perceptions that young people and parents, rather than professional driver educators, have of driving simulators using a quantitative methodology rather than a qualitative methodology.…”

“…In response to Parkes and Reed [21], the current study also aimed to examine perceptions of "who" should be taught with a driving simulator and "when" in the licensing process simulator-based driver education should occur. In line with Rodwell and Hawkins [23], a "simulator invention" visualisation task was used to increase the cognitive engagement of participants in the study.…”

“…This study was part of a larger project investigating young driver education and technology [13,23,33,34]. Participants completed a young driver or parent version of an online questionnaire.…”

“…To deepen the cognitive engagement of participants and minimise simplistic responding, participants were asked to complete a "simulator invention" visualisation task immediately prior to responding to the items examined in this study. This task was based on a qualitative draw-and-talk methodology employed by Rodwell and Hawkins [23] but adapted to suit an online questionnaire. Participants had to imagine an "ideal" driving simulator for use in driver education and consider what it would be used for, who it would be used with, and when it would be used in the driver education process.…”

Development of Simulated Scenarios for Quadricycle Safety

“…The design of an efficient set of scenarios to assess the crash likelihood of a young driver required not only knowledge of novice skill deficit, but also knowledge of the scenarios in which skills are most compromised [11,12,13,14,15].…”