Teen drivers' awareness of vehicle instrumentation in naturalistic research.

INTRODUCTION: Naturalistic driving methods require the installation of instruments and cameras in vehicles to record driving behavior. A critical, yet unexamined issue in naturalistic driving research is the extent to which the vehicle instruments and cameras used for naturalistic methods change human behavior. We sought to describe the degree to which teenage participants' self-reported awareness of vehicle instrumentation changes over time, and whether that awareness was associated with driving behaviors. METHOD: Forty-two newly-licensed teenage drivers participated in an 18-month naturalistic driving study. Data on driving behaviors including crash/near-crashes and elevated gravitational force (g-force) events rates were collected over the study period. At the end of the study, participants were asked to rate the extent to which they were aware of instruments in the vehicle at four time points. They were also asked to describe their own and their passengers' perceptions of the instrumentation in the vehicle during an in-depth interview. The number of critical event button presses was used as a secondary measure of camera awareness. The association between self-reported awareness of the instrumentation and objectively measured driving behaviors was tested using correlations and linear mixed models. RESULTS: Most participants' reported that their awareness of vehicle instrumentation declined across the duration of the 18-month study. Their awareness increased in response to their passengers' concerns about the cameras or if they were involved in a crash. The number of the critical event button presses was initially high and declined rapidly. There was no correlation between driver's awareness of instrumentation and their crash and near-crash rate or elevated g-force events rate. CONCLUSION: Awareness was not associated with crash and near-crash rates or elevated g-force event rates, consistent with having no effect on this measure of driving performance. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Naturalistic driving studies are likely to yield valid measurements of driving behavior.

Naturalistic assessment of the learner license period.

The purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics and progression of practice driving during the learner license period in a sample of teenagers. During the first and last 10h of practice driving, we examined (1) the amount, variety and complexity of conditions of practice; (2) the nature of parental instruction; and (3) errors that teens made while driving. Data were collected from 90 teens and 131 parents living in Virginia, USA, using in-vehicle cameras, audio recorders, GPS and trip recorders. Based on data collected from the instrumented vehicles, teens practiced for 46.6h on average, slightly higher than the GDL requirement for their jurisdiction, though half did not complete the required 45h of practice and only 17% completed the required 15h of night time driving. Exposure to diverse roadways increased over the practice driving period, which averaged 10.6 months. Most driving instruction occurred in reaction to specific driving situations, such as navigating and identifying hazards, and could be characterized as co-driving. Higher order instruction, which relates to the tactics or strategies for safe driving, was less frequent, but remained stable through the practice driving period. Instruction of all forms was more likely following an elevated gravitational force (g-force) event. Errors decreased over time, suggesting improvements in manual and judgment skills, but engagement in potentially distracting secondary tasks increased (when an adult was in the vehicle). A small percentage of trips occurred with no passenger in the front seat, and the g-force rate during these trips was almost 5 times higher than trips with an adult front-seat passenger. Taken collectively, these findings indicate (1) most teens got at least the required amount of supervised practice, but some did not; (2) instruction was mainly reactive and included some higher order instruction; (3) teens driving skills improved despite increased exposure to complex driving conditions, but secondary tasks also increased. Opportunities remained for improving the quality and variability in supervision and enhancing the development of skills during the lengthy period of practice.