道路安全的家庭氛围量表的修订及信效度检验

目的检验修订版道路安全的家庭氛围量表在我国驾驶员测量中的信度和效度。方法使用修订版道路安全的家庭氛围量表和驾驶风格量表,对321名驾驶员进行测量。结果修订后的道路安全的家庭氛围量表由36个题目组成,分为反馈、无安全承诺、榜样、监控、限制、沟通6个维度,累计方差解释率为58.84%。量表总的内部一致性系数是0.92,量表各因素与总分的相关系数在0.52~0.86之间,且相关显著。量表各维度与驾驶风格量表各维度之间的相关显著,说明量表的相容效度较好。结论修订后的道路安全的家庭氛围量表信效度良好,可以用来测量我国驾驶员对道路安全的家庭氛围的认知。     

多维度驾驶风格量表的修订及初步应用

目的:检验修订版多维度驾驶风格量表在我国驾驶员测量中的信度、效度和适用性。方法:采用"滚雪球"方法在全国20个大中城市先后分两次选取总共655名驾驶员参加本次研究,样本分为两部分。结果:样本1的测量结果显示:修订后的驾驶风格量表由24个题目组成,分为5个因素,累计贡献率为54.27%。量表各因素与总分的相关系数在0.60~0.77之间,均P0.001。量表总的内部一致性系数为0.86,各个因素的内部一致性系数在0.70~0.82之间。样本2的测量结果验证了修订版驾驶风格量表的结构有效性和适用性。结论:修订版驾驶风格量表具有良好的信度和效度,可以作为今后进一步研究的测量工具。     

驾驶行为量表(中国版)的制订及信效度检验

目的检验中文版驾驶行为量表(Driving Behavior Scale,DBS)在国内驾驶员群体中的信度、效度和适用性。方法采用中文版驾驶行为量表对360名驾驶员进行了测量,获得328份有效问卷,通过项目分析和因素分析,形成最终中文版量表。结果量表共有21个题目,分为3个维度:过度的安全/谨慎行为、驾驶功能缺陷和敌意/攻击行为。累计方差解释率为62.48%。量表的内部一致性系数为0.86,各个因素的内部一致性系数在0.81-0.93之间,P均0.001。修订后中文版驾驶行为量表各维度与驾驶安全态度量表各维度之间显著相关。这说明该量表的相容效度良好。结论最终中文版驾驶行为量表信效度良好,能够可靠而有效的测量国内焦虑驾驶行为。     

危险驾驶行为量表的修订及信效度检验

目的修订驾驶员危险驾驶行为量表,并检验其信效度。方法在线发放450份危险驾驶行为量表和安全态度量表,收回有效问卷432份。结果修订后的危险驾驶行为量表共18个题目,分为过度自信、驾驶超速和违反交通规则三个维度。量表的内部一致性系数为0.93。修订后量表各维度与总分的相关系数在0.66~0.91之间,均P0.001。修订后的量表与安全态度量表各维度显著相关。这说明修订后量表相容效度高。结论修订后的危险驾驶行为量表具有良好的信效度,可作为测量我国驾驶员危险驾驶行为的一个工具。     

亲社会和攻击性驾驶行为量表的修订及信效度检验

目的修订驾驶员亲社会和攻击性驾驶行为量表并检验其信效度。方法采用中文版亲社会和攻击性驾驶行为量表对驾驶员进行测试,获得692份有效问卷。结果量表包括28个题目,分为2个维度,累计方差解释率为44.14%。量表的结构拟合度较好(CFI=0.90,TLI=0.92,RMSEA=0.051)。两个维度的内部一致性系数为0.87和0.90;与总分之间的相关系数为0.50和0.76,且Ps0.001。2个维度与大五人格量表各维度之间部分相关显著,表明量表具有良好的相容效度。结论修订后的驾驶员亲社会和攻击性驾驶行为量表信度和效度较好,可以作为测量我国驾驶员亲社会和攻击性驾驶行为的一个可靠而有效的工具。     

交通安全文化量表的修订及其信效度检验

目的对交通安全文化量表进行修订。方法采用交通安全文化量表和驾驶行为量表对610名驾驶员进行测量。结果修订后的交通安全文化量表由24个题目组成,分为书面文化、听觉文化、口头文化、外向型文化、责任心文化以及内向型文化6个维度,可以解释交通安全文化47. 21%的变异。在量表中,各因素与总分的相关系数在0. 619～0. 685之间,P 0. 001。量表总的内部一致性系数为0. 798,各维度的内部一致性系数在0. 671～0. 782之间。量表各维度与亲社会驾驶行为维度呈显著正相关,与攻击性驾驶行为维度呈显著负相关。说明量表具有良好的相容效度。结论修订后的交通安全文化量表具有良好的信效度,可以作为测量我国驾驶员安全文化的一个有效工具。     

交通替代攻击问卷的修订与信效度检验

目的 修订交通替代攻击问卷并检验其在我国驾驶员群体中的信效度。方法 采用交通替代攻击问卷对317名驾驶员进行施测,共获得305份有效问卷。通过分析后得到修订版的中国交通替代攻击问卷。结果 修订后的交通替代攻击问卷共保留24个题目,累积方差贡献率56.278%;该问卷的模型拟合度较好(GFI=0.870,IFI=0.920,TLI=0.911,NFI=0.860,CFI=0.919,RMSEA=0.062,χ²/df=2.148,SRMR=0.045)。问卷总的内部一致性系数为0.894,问卷各维度的内部一致性系数在0.677～0.936。问卷各维度与总分的相关系数在0.588～0.845之间,且相关显著。问卷各维度与亲社会和攻击性驾驶行为量表之间部分相关显著,说明修订后的问卷具有良好的相容效度。结论 修订后的交通替代攻击问卷信度和效度较好,可以作为测量我国驾驶员交通替代攻击的一个可靠而有效的工具。     

驾驶能力量表的修订及信效度检验

目的检验中文版驾驶能力量表在我国驾驶员中的信度、效度和适用性。方法使用中文版驾驶能力量表和驾驶员人格特质量表对253名驾驶员进行测试。结果修订后的驾驶能力量表由11个题目组成,累计方差解释率为49.22%,量表总的内部一致性信度为0.893,量表总分与人格特质量表各维度之间相关显著。这表明,量表的相容效度较好。量表总分与驾驶员过去一年驾驶中的交通违规次数相关显著,表明量表的外部效度较好。结论修订后的驾驶能力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能力的一个有效工具。     

瑞典职业疲劳量表在中国驾驶人群体中的修订

目的 引进Ahsberg等编制的瑞典职业疲劳量表(Swedish Occupational Fatigue Inventory-25,SOFI-C),在中国驾驶员群体中进行中文版修订和信效度检验。方法 招募持有机动车驾驶证的大学生和职业客车司机作为被试，完成1 h驾驶任务，并在驾驶前后填写SOFI-C量表(除驾驶模式外，无其他不同),随机选取部分(n=27)大学生佩戴脑电仪进行实验，得到有效问卷数据233份，有效脑电数据18份。结果 (1)修订后量表各维度拟合指数良好，χ²/df=3.001,RMSEA=0.093,CFI=0.941、NFI=0.915和TLI=0.921.(2)修订后量表总的内部一致性系数为0.966,分半信度为0.931,各维度的内部一致性系数和分半信度在0.798-0.955之间。(3)修订后量表内容效度在0.563-0.899之间，结构效度在0.873-0.940之间。(4)瞌睡、体力耗尽和身体不适三个因子对应的AVE值均>0.5,且CR值全部高于0.7。(5)量表得分与四、五阶段的脑电指标α波均呈显著正相关；量表前测分数可预测驾驶...     

营运驾驶员情绪状态对驾驶风格的影响

目的探索营运驾驶员情绪状态对驾驶风格的影响。方法采用多维度驾驶风格量表(MDSI-C)和驾驶员情绪状态量表(DPMS)对165名营运驾驶员进行测量。结果 MDSI-C感觉寻求、愤怒、焦虑和分心4个维度的性别差异显著(t=-3.021,-4.259,3.550,5.531,P<0.01)。紧张与感觉寻求、分心和焦虑维度得分呈正相关(r=0.251~0.436,P<0.01)。愤怒与MDSI-C所有维度得分呈正相关(r=0.163~0.353,P<0.05)。抑郁与感觉寻求和冒险维度得分呈正相关(r=0.243,0.158,P<0.05)。精力与感觉寻求和愤怒维度得分呈正相关(r=0.208,0.194,P<0.05)。回归分析发现:驾驶员各人口学因素和DPMS各维度,可以分别解释冒险型、愤怒型和焦虑型驾驶风格19.4%、36.3%和29.3%的变异。结论驾驶员长期情绪愤怒或紧张对驾驶风格有不良影响,影响驾驶安全。     

Family climate for road safety: A new concept and measure

This research adapted the workplace concept of safety climate to the domain of safe driving, defining a new construct of “family climate for road safety”. Four studies were conducted in Israel with the aim of developing and validating a multidimensional instrument to assess this construct among young drivers. Study 1 (n = 632) focused on developing the Family Climate for Road Safety Scale (FCRSS), a self-report scale assessing the family climate by means of seven aspects of the parent–child relationship: Modeling, Feedback, Communication, Monitoring, Noncommitment, Messages, and Limits. Significant differences were found between young men and women on all factors. In addition, significant associations were found between the FCRSS factors on the one hand, and the reported frequency of risky driving and personal commitment to safety on the other. Studies 2–4 confirmed the factorial structure of the FCRSS and the reliability of its factors, adding to its criterion and convergent validity. Study 2 (n = 178) yielded significant associations between the scale and young drivers’ perception of their parents as involved, encouraging autonomy, and providing warmth; Study 3 (n = 117) revealed significant associations between the scale and youngsters’ reported proneness to take risks while driving, as well as significant associations between the factors and various dimensions of family functioning; and Study 4 (n = 156) found associations between the FCRSS factors and both driving styles (risky, angry, anxious, careful) and family cohesion and adaptability. The discussion deals with the validity and utility of the concept of family climate for road safety and its measurement, addressing the practical implications for road safety.     

Differentiating risky and aggressive driving: Further support of the internal validity of the Dula Dangerous Driving Index

The Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI) is a cross-cultural validated instrument that measures simultaneously various manifestations of behaviours, cognitions, and affects associated with dangerous driving. The aims of the study were to translate the DDDI into French and then to verify the validity and reliability of the French version of the scale by means of observed behaviours on a driving simulator, and of self-reported measures of driving behaviours, personality and sociodemographic characteristics. A first sample of 395 drivers completed self-reported questionnaires and a second sample of 75 male drivers also completed tasks on a driving simulator. A confirmatory factorial analysis supported the internal validity of the scale. Findings also show that the French version of the DDDI yields good internal consistency, concomitant and convergent validity for each subscale (risky driving, negative cognitive/emotional driving and aggressive driving) and total score. The scale was useful to differentiate sociodemographic and psychological profiles associated with each subscale.     

Data Based Violated Behavior Analysis of Taxi Driver in Metropolis in China

Violation probability of taxi drivers in metropolis is far more than that of normal drivers because they are labor-intensive, overconfident of self-driving skill, and always searching potential customers, sometimes even picking up or dropping off passengers randomly. In this paper, four types of violated behavior of taxi drivers in metropolis were first summarized, based on which corresponding scale table was initial designed with social statistical method. Furthermore, with certain samples, relative item analysis, exploratory factor analysis, validity analysis and reliability analysis were conducted to verify validity of the initial scale table, based on which some improvements were made, and we can see that the modified scale table in the paper has high fitness degree, good reliability and validity to detect violated behavior of taxi driver accurately. Finally, large area survey data of taxi driver questionnaire from Shanghai was collected with the modified scale table above, the analysis results showed that among four types of violated behavior of taxi drivers in metropolis, the probability over-speed is top to 89.57%, in which probabilities of behaviors of “driving over-speed at mid-night” and “accelerating to across the intersection during the yellow signal” are top to 64.2% and 58.2% respectively, which is meaningful for the improvement of taxi drivers’ behaviors specification and traffic safety regulation.     

Assessing dangerous driving behavior during driving inattention: Psychometric adaptation and validation of the Attention-Related Driving Errors Scale in China

Driver inattention is a significant cause of motor vehicle collisions and incidents. The purpose of this study was to translate the Attention-Related Driving Error Scale (ARDES) into Chinese and to verify its reliability and validity. A total of 317 drivers completed the Chinese version of the ARDES, the Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI), the Attention-Related Cognitive Errors Scale (ARCES) and the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) questionnaires. Specific sociodemographic variables and traffic violations were also measured. Psychometric results confirm that the ARDES-China has adequate psychometric properties (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.88) to be a useful tool for evaluating proneness to attentional errors in the Chinese driving population. First, ARDES-China scores were positively correlated with both DDDI scores and number of accidents in the prior year; in addition, ARDES-China scores were a significant predictor of dangerous driving behavior as measured by DDDI. Second, we found that ARDES-China scores were strongly correlated with ARCES scores and negatively correlated with MAAS scores. Finally, different demographic groups exhibited significant differences in ARDES scores; in particular, ARDES scores varied with years of driving experience.     

Validation of the Driver’s Angry Thoughts Questionnaire (DATQ) in a Chinese sample

The relationship between driving anger and negative driving outcomes, such as dangerous driving behaviors and traffic violations, has been the topic of several studies, but few studies have explored drivers’ angry thoughts when they encounter anger-provoking situations and the potential consequences of such thoughts. The purpose of this study was to investigate drivers’ angry thoughts behind the wheel and their relationship with dangerous driving behaviors. A total of 303 Chinese drivers completed the Chinese version of the Driver’s Angry Thoughts Questionnaire (DATQ), the Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI) and the Driving Anger Scale (DAS). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the Chinese DATQ yielded a five-factor solution with 20 items that showed the best goodness of fit for the data. The brief DATQ also showed good reliability and validity. Three forms of aggressive thinking were positively correlated with dangerous driving behaviors, and coping self-instruction was negatively correlated with dangerous driving behaviors and traffic violations. More importantly, aggressive thinking mediated the effect of driving anger on dangerous driving behaviors, indicating the importance of thoughts behind the wheel. These results provide evidence supporting the development of strategies to reduce and prevent aggressive driving and accidents.     

The Dula Dangerous Driving Index in China: An investigation of reliability and validity

The aim of this study was to translate the Dula Dangerous Driving Index (DDDI) into Chinese and to verify its reliability and validity. A total of 246 drivers completed the Chinese version of the DDDI and the Driver Behavior Questionnaire (DBQ). Specific sociodemographic variables and traffic violations were also measured. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the internal structure of the DDDI, and the four-factor model was supported in China. Measures of convergent and criterion validity demonstrated that the Chinese DDDI was valid. Its convergent validity was supported by its positive relationship with the DBQ, and its criterion validity was tested using its relationship with self-reported accident involvement and traffic violations. Finally, score comparisons between different demographic groups revealed significant differences, thereby linking age and driving years to dangerous driving.     

基于驾驶模拟实验的驾驶员气质与驾驶行为关系研究

目的本文研究驾驶员气质差异与驾驶行为之间的关系。方法随机抽取21名驾驶员参与驾驶模拟实验,获取受试者的气质与驾驶行为数据,再利用统计分析软件对实验数据进行统计分析。结果不同气质类型驾驶员的驾驶行为存在着明显的差异,胆汁质驾驶员的操纵行为安全性较差,有事故倾向性特征;粘液质驾驶员的操纵行为安全性较好,是四类驾驶员中最适合做驾驶员的气质类型。结论通过驾驶员气质测评可以预测驾驶员的驾驶操纵行为,评价驾驶员的安全驾驶水平,可为驾驶员的甄选、培训提供一定的依据。