驾驶技能自我评估量表的修订及其信效度检验
Reliability and Validity of Self-Assessments of Components of Driving Skill in Chinese Drivers
摘要: 目的:对驾驶技能自我评估量表(Self-Assessments of Components of Driving Skill)进行修订并检验其信度与效度。方法:使用驾驶技能自我评估量表对616名驾驶员进行测量,要求他们与一个同性别同年龄的平均驾驶员相比,对自己的驾驶技能做出评估。结果:修订后的量表由16个题目组成,累计方差解释率为61.75%。修订后量表总的内部一致性信度为0.90以上。量表总分及2个维度的得分与事故可能性量表得分相关显著,表明量表的结构效度较好。此外,有交通违规(或事故)记录的驾驶员和无交通违规(或事故)记录的驾驶员在量表总分及2个维度的得分差异显著,表明量表的外部效度较好。结论:修订后的驾驶技能量表具有良好的信度与效度,可以作为测量我国驾驶员驾驶技能的一个有效工具。
Abstract: Objective: To revise and assess the reliability and validity of the Self-Assessments of Components of Driving Skill (SCDS). Methods: A total of 616 drivers completed the SCDS, and they were asked to evaluate their driving skills compared to an average driver of the same age and age. Results: The revised SCDS consisted of 16 items, and the cumulative variance was 61.75%. The total internal consistency reliability of the scale is above 0.90. The scores of the total scale and the two dimensions are significantly correlated with the scores of accident probability scale, indicating that the structural validity of the scale is good. In addition, drivers with traffic violations or crashes scored significantly higher on the dimensions of the SCDS than those who had not have traffic violations or crashes. Conclusions: The revised SCDS has good reliability and validity and can be used as an effective tool to measure the driving skills of drivers in China.
文章引用:曲莹莹, 孙龙, 周春雪 (2018). 驾驶技能自我评估量表的修订及其信效度检验. 心理学进展, 8(10), 1567-1574. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2018.810181

参考文献

[1] 窦广波, 宋熙, 常若松(2016). 人格对驾驶员危险知觉技能的影响. 辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版), 39(4), 46-50.
[2] 马艺丹, 孙龙(2018). 驾驶技能量表的修订及其信效度检验. 心理学进展, 8(6), 848-854.
[3] 孙龙(2017). 驾驶员危险知觉加工过程: 驾驶经验与危险类型的作用. 博士论文, 大连市: 辽宁师范大学.
[4] 孙龙, 常若松, 李爽(2016). 驾驶员人格对事故风险的影响. 人类工效学, 22(2), 32-35.
[5] Ābele, L., Haustein, S., Møller, M., & Martinussen, L. M. (2018). Consistency between Subjectively and Objectively Measured Hazard Perception Skills among Young Male Drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 118, 214-220.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Brown, I. D., & Groeger, J. A. (1988) Risk Perception and Decision Taking during the Transition between Novice and Experienced Driver Status. Ergonomics, 31, 585-597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Gosselin, D., Gagnon, S., Stinchcombe, A., & Joanisse, M. (2010). Comparative Optimism among Drivers: An Intergenerational Portrait. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42, 734-740.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Horswill, M. S., Waylen, A. E., & Tofield, M. I. (2004). Drivers’ Ratings of Different Components of Their Own Driving Skill: A Greater Illusion of Superiority for Skills That Relate to Accident Involvement1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 177-195.[CrossRef
[9] Lajunen, T., & Summala, H. (1995). Driving Experience, Personality, and Skill and Safety-Motive Dimensions in Drivers’ Self-Assessments. Personality Individual Differences, 19, 307-318.[CrossRef
[10] Mallia, L., Lazuras, L., Violani, C., & Lucidi, F. (2015). Crash Risk and Aberrant Driving Behaviors among Bus Drivers: The Role of Personality and Attitudes towards Traffic Safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 79, 145-151.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Sun, L., & Chang, R. (2016). Effects of Self-Assessed Ability and Driving Experience on Hazard Perception. Journal of Psychological Science, 39, 1346-1352.
[12] Sundström, A. (2008). Self-Assessment of Driving Skill—A review from a Measurement Perspective. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 11, 1-9.[CrossRef
[13] Sundström, A. (2011). The Validity of Self-Reported Driver Competence: Relations between Measures of Perceived Driver Competence and actual driving skill. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14, 155-163.[CrossRef
[14] White, M. J., Cunningham, L. C., & Titchener, K. (2011). Young Drivers’ Optimism Bias for Accident Risk and Driving Skill: Accountability and Insight Experience Manipulations. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43, 1309-1315.[CrossRef] [PubMed]