在模拟和道路条件下评估老年人的驾驶性能。

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-15 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2066533
Matthew C Costello, Peggy P Barco, Kevin J Manning, Kimberly E O'Brien
{"title":"在模拟和道路条件下评估老年人的驾驶性能。","authors":"Matthew C Costello, Peggy P Barco, Kevin J Manning, Kimberly E O'Brien","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2066533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Simulated driving offers a convenient test of driving ability for older drivers, although the viability of using simulated driving with this population is mixed. The relative weighting of the relevant perceptual, cognitive, and physical factors may vary between simulated and on-road driving. The current study was designed to assess this possibility. We conducted simulated and on-road driving tests of 61 older adults aged 66-92 years. To ensure that the driving performance was measured similarly between the two driving modalities, we employed the Record of Driving Errors (RODE) driving assessment system during both driving tests. Correlation and random weights analysis (RWA) results indicated only modest evidence of correspondence between the simulated and on-road driving performances. The primary factors operative in both simulated and on-road driving was Useful Field of View and a measure of basic cognition. Unique factors for simulated driving included a measure of physical mobility (Time-Up-and-Go) and spatial reasoning (Line), and for on-road driving included chronological age and sensorimotor processing (Trail-Making Task A). Chronological age was correlated primarily the on-road rather than simulated test, was greatly reduced with the inclusion of additional explanatory factors, and likely reflects driving efficiency rather than driving safety. We conclude that simulated driving in healthy older drivers can be beneficial for research purposes to assess cognitive and perceptual factors that underly driving effectiveness, although it cannot serve as a clear proxy for on-road driving.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Older adult driving performance assessed under simulated and on-road conditions.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew C Costello, Peggy P Barco, Kevin J Manning, Kimberly E O'Brien\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2022.2066533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Simulated driving offers a convenient test of driving ability for older drivers, although the viability of using simulated driving with this population is mixed. The relative weighting of the relevant perceptual, cognitive, and physical factors may vary between simulated and on-road driving. The current study was designed to assess this possibility. We conducted simulated and on-road driving tests of 61 older adults aged 66-92 years. To ensure that the driving performance was measured similarly between the two driving modalities, we employed the Record of Driving Errors (RODE) driving assessment system during both driving tests. Correlation and random weights analysis (RWA) results indicated only modest evidence of correspondence between the simulated and on-road driving performances. The primary factors operative in both simulated and on-road driving was Useful Field of View and a measure of basic cognition. Unique factors for simulated driving included a measure of physical mobility (Time-Up-and-Go) and spatial reasoning (Line), and for on-road driving included chronological age and sensorimotor processing (Trail-Making Task A). Chronological age was correlated primarily the on-road rather than simulated test, was greatly reduced with the inclusion of additional explanatory factors, and likely reflects driving efficiency rather than driving safety. We conclude that simulated driving in healthy older drivers can be beneficial for research purposes to assess cognitive and perceptual factors that underly driving effectiveness, although it cannot serve as a clear proxy for on-road driving.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2066533\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/5/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2066533","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

模拟驾驶为老年驾驶员提供了一种方便的驾驶能力测试,尽管在这一人群中使用模拟驾驶的可行性参差不齐。相关感知、认知和物理因素的相对权重可能在模拟驾驶和实际驾驶之间有所不同。目前的研究旨在评估这种可能性。我们对61名年龄在66-92岁的老年人进行了模拟驾驶和道路驾驶测试。为了确保两种驾驶模式之间的驾驶性能测量相似,我们在两次驾驶测试中都采用了驾驶错误记录(RODE)驾驶评估系统。相关性和随机权重分析(RWA)结果表明,模拟和实际驾驶性能之间只有适度的对应证据。在模拟驾驶和实际驾驶中起作用的主要因素是有用视野和基本认知的度量。模拟驾驶的独特因素包括身体移动能力(Time-Up-and-Go)和空间推理(Line),而在道路上驾驶的独特因素包括实足年龄和感觉运动处理(Trail-Making Task a)。实足年龄主要与道路上的测试而不是模拟测试相关,随着其他解释因素的加入,实足年龄的相关性大大降低,可能反映的是驾驶效率而不是驾驶安全。我们得出的结论是,健康老年驾驶员的模拟驾驶有助于研究评估驾驶效率背后的认知和感知因素,尽管它不能作为道路驾驶的明确代表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Older adult driving performance assessed under simulated and on-road conditions.

Simulated driving offers a convenient test of driving ability for older drivers, although the viability of using simulated driving with this population is mixed. The relative weighting of the relevant perceptual, cognitive, and physical factors may vary between simulated and on-road driving. The current study was designed to assess this possibility. We conducted simulated and on-road driving tests of 61 older adults aged 66-92 years. To ensure that the driving performance was measured similarly between the two driving modalities, we employed the Record of Driving Errors (RODE) driving assessment system during both driving tests. Correlation and random weights analysis (RWA) results indicated only modest evidence of correspondence between the simulated and on-road driving performances. The primary factors operative in both simulated and on-road driving was Useful Field of View and a measure of basic cognition. Unique factors for simulated driving included a measure of physical mobility (Time-Up-and-Go) and spatial reasoning (Line), and for on-road driving included chronological age and sensorimotor processing (Trail-Making Task A). Chronological age was correlated primarily the on-road rather than simulated test, was greatly reduced with the inclusion of additional explanatory factors, and likely reflects driving efficiency rather than driving safety. We conclude that simulated driving in healthy older drivers can be beneficial for research purposes to assess cognitive and perceptual factors that underly driving effectiveness, although it cannot serve as a clear proxy for on-road driving.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
134
期刊介绍: pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信