رفتار حرکتی

مقایسه دیدمحیطی و زمان واکنش ساده و انتخابی بین رانندگان خبره و تازه کار

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه رفتارحرکتی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

2 گروه تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی، دانشگاه امام حسین، تهران، ایران

3 گروه رفتار حرکتی، واحد کرج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرج، ایران

چکیده
هدف از پژوهش حاضر مقایسه دیدمحیطی و زمان واکنش ساده و انتخابی بین رانندگان خبره و تازه کار بود. تعداد 15 رانندۀ خبره و 15 رانندۀ تازه کار به طور داوطلبانه در پژوهش حاضر شرکت کردند. دیدمحیطی، زمان واکنش ساده و زمان واکنش انتخابی رانندگان توسط دستگاه وینا اندازه گیری شد. برای تحلیل داده ها از آزمون های آماری تحلیل واریانس، همبستگی پیرسون و رگرسیون خطی استفاده شد. نتایج تفاوت معناداری بین قابلیت های دیدمحیطی، زمان واکنش ساده، و زمان واکنش انتخابی افراد خبره و تازه کار نشان داد. افراد خبره در این قابلیت ها نسبت به افراد مبتدی به طور معناداری عملکرد بهتری داشتند. بین قابلیت دیدمحیطی رانندگان خبره با زمان واکنش ساده و انتخابی آنان در عملکردهای صحیح همبستگی وجود داشت. بررسی شیب خط رگرسیون نیز نشان داد که دیدمحیطی می تواند پیش بینی کننده زمان واکنش ساده و انتخابی در رانندگان خبره باشد. بنابراین توصیه می شود برای ارزیابی توانایی های دیدمحیطی، زمان واکنش ساده و انتخابی رانندگان خبره، انتخاب رانندگان خبره با مقاصد ورزشی، و حتی برای آزمون های رانندگی از این آزمون ها استفاده شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Comparing Peripheral Vision, Simple Reaction Time, and Choice Reaction Time between Expert and Novice Drivers

نویسندگان English

  • Sara Parsa 1
  • mohammad vaez mosavi 2
  • Jaleh Bagherli 3
1 Department of motor behavior, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University,Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Physical Education And Sport Science, Emam Hossein University, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of motor behavior, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University,Karaj, Iran
چکیده English

The aim of this study was to compare the relationship among peripheral vision, simple reaction time, and choice reaction time in expert and novice drivers. Fifteen certified drivers and 15 novice drivers participated in the present study voluntarily. Peripheral vision, simple reaction time and choice reaction time of drivers were measured by Vienna Testing System. One-way analysis of variance, Pearson correlation test and linear regression tests were used to analyze the data. The results showed that there was a significant difference in peripheral vision, simple reaction time, and choice reaction time between experts and novices; in which experts in these abilities were better than novices. The peripheral vision of expert drivers was correlated with simple and choice reaction time in correct performances. Examination of the slope of the regression line also showed that peripheral vision can predict simple and choice reaction time in expert drivers. Therefore, it is recommended to use these tests to evaluate peripheral vision abilities, simple and choice reaction time of expert drivers to select national team athletes, and even for driving tests to select suitable drivers.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

  • Vienna device
  • safe driving
  • motor ability
  • expertise
  • prediction
  1. Ashrafi A, Abolhasani A. Psychological factors affecting traffic accidents in Iran. Afagh Humanities Monthly. 2016;8:39-50 (in Persian).
  2. 2Falah Karkan M, Behbodi H, Tayefe N, Soltani Moghadam R, Khoshbakht M. Visual disorders in drivers causing accidents. Guilan University of Medical Sciences. 2013;22(85):48-53(in Persian).
  3. Alizadehnia N, Shiralivand E, Kangari H. Role of decreased visual acuity, contrast sensitivity disorder, and visual field defect in traffic accidents and recommendations to improve these factors. J Rehab Med. 2017;6(4):256-67 (in Persian).
  4. Bourne RR, Stevens GA, White RA, Smith JL, Flaxman SR, Price H, et al. Causes of vision loss worldwide, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis. The Lancet Global Health. 2013;1(6):e339-e49.
  5. Haibach P, Reid g, Collier D. Motor Learning and Development, Champaign: Human Kinetics. 2nd ed; 2017, p. 18.
  6. Magill RA. Motor learning concepts and applications. Vaez‌Mousavi m, Shojaee M. 14th ed; Tehran: Bamdad; 2018 (in Persian).
  7. Lococo K, Tyree R. Moudle 1: function abilities and safe driving. Medscape. 2010.
  8. Magill RA, Anderson D. Motor learning and control: concepts and applications. 10th Sana Gostar; 2017.
  9. Alberti CF, Shahar A, Crundall D. Are experienced drivers more likely than novice drivers to benefit from driving simulations with a wide field of view? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2014;27:124-32.
  10. Crundall D, Chapman P, Phelps N, Underwood G. Eye movements and hazard perception in police pursuit and emergency response driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2003;9(3):163.
  11. Crundall DE, Underwood G. Effects of experience and processing demands on visual information acquisition in drivers. Ergonomics. 1998;41(4):448-58.
  12. Falkmer T, Gregersen NP. Fixation patterns of learner drivers with and without cerebral palsy (CP) when driving in real traffic environments. Transportation Research Part F: traffic psychology and behaviour. 2001;4(3):171-85.
  13. Konstantopoulos P, Chapman P, Crundall D. Exploring the ability to identify visual search differences when observing drivers’ eye movements. Transportation Research Part F: traffic psychology and behaviour. 2012;15(3):378-86.
  14. Mackenzie AK, Harris JM. A link between attentional function, effective eye movements, and driving ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2017;43(2):381.
  15. Underwood G, Chapman P, Bowden K, Crundall D. Visual search while driving: skill and awareness during inspection of the scene. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2002;5(2):87-97.
  16. Williams AM, Davids K, Williams JG. Visual perception and action in sport. London, E& FN Spon. 2005.
  17. Schmidt RA, Wrisberg C. Motor learning and performance: a problem- based learning approach. Namazizadeh M,VaezMousavi M. Tehran: 9th ed SAMT; 2020 (in Persian).
  18. Schmidt RA, Lee TD. Motor control and learning. HemayatTalab R, Ghasemi A. 4th ed. Tehran: Elmo Harekat; 2015 (in Persian).
  19. Kato T, editor. Visual Behaviors and expertise in race driving situation. Congress of the International Ergonomics Association. Springer; 2018.
  20. Wolfe B, Dobres J, Rosenholtz R, Reimer B. More than the useful field: considering peripheral vision in driving. Applied Ergonomics. 2017;65:316-25.
  21. Jafarzadehpur E, Yarigholi MR. Comparison of visual acuity in reduced lumination and facility of ocular accommodation in table tennis champions and non-players. Journal of Sports Science & Medicine. 2004;3(1):44.
  22. Ghasemi A, Momeni M, Rezaee M, Gholami A. The difference in visual skills between expert versus novice soccer referees. Journal of Human Kinetics. 2009;22(1):15-20.
  23. Gholami A, Farokhi A. The effect of goal setting on selective reaction time. Olympic. 2005;2(30):85-93 (in Persian).
  24. Vaeyens R, Lenoir M, Williams AM, Mazyn L, Philippaerts RM. The effects of task constraints on visual search behavior and decision-making skill in youth soccer players. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2007;29(2):147-69.
  25. Sohrabi Ms, Motamed Zade M, Golmohammadi R, Moghimbeygi A. Using a driving simulator to assess the driver's reaction time to two types of brake lights. Iran Occupational Health. 2013;10:1-10 (in Persian).
  26. Wege C, Will S, Victor T. Eye movement and brake reactions to real world brake-capacity forward collision warnings—A naturalistic driving study. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2013;58:259-70.
  27. Sheykh M, Bagherzade F, Shojaee M. The effect of the number of pre-specified parameters on the reaction time of the power generation task. Harekat. 2003;18:25-39 (in Persian).
  28. Abernethy B, Russell RG. The relationship between expertise and visual search strategy in a racquet sport. Human Movement Science. 1987;6(4):283-319.
  29. schuhfried.com.
  30. Anstey KJ, Wood J, Lord S, Walker JG. Cognitive, sensory and physical factors enabling driving safety in older adults. Clinical Psychology Review. 2005;25(1):45-65.
  31. Lacherez P, Wood JM, Anstey KJ, Lord SR. Sensorimotor and postural control factors associated with driving safety in a community-dwelling older driver population. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2014;69(2):240-4.
  32. Van Leeuwen PM, De Groot S, Happee R, De Winter JC. Differences between racing and non-racing drivers: A simulator study using eye-tracking. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0186871.
  33. Pammer K, Liu Y, Borzycki M, editors. Expert drivers and situational awareness. Australasian Road Safety Conference, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; 2017.
  34. Sivak M. The information that drivers use: is it indeed 90% visual? Perception. 1996;25(9):1081-9.
  35. Hagh Shenas H, Ghaffari MA. Neuropsychological differences in faulty and safe bus drivers. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. 2009;14:428-38 (in Persian).
  36. Aarts L, Van Schagen I. Driving speed and the risk of road crashes: a review. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2006;38(2):215-24.
  37. Wege C, Will S, Victor T. Eye movement and brake reactions to real world brake-capacity forward collision warnings—A naturalistic driving study. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2013;58:259-70.
رفتار حرکتی
دوره 15، شماره 52
تیر 1402
صفحه 43-68

  • تاریخ دریافت 22 آذر 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش 22 آبان 1401

صفحه اصلی

داوران

ارسال مقاله

اصول اخلاقی

اخبار و اعلانات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

تماس با ما