Psychological Fidelity: Perception of Risk
Psychological Fidelity: Perception of Risk
复制标题
心理忠诚度：对风险的感知
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Ranney
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
T. Ranney
高保真驾驶模拟器为研究参与者提供了逼真而引人注目的体验。然而，来自模拟器研究的研究结果的可信度继续受到挑战。驾驶体验的保真度似乎不足以克服有关心理保真度不足的批评，心理保真度的定义是参与实验的风险和回报与现实世界的风险和回报相对应的程度。实验研究消除了与驾驶相关的伤害风险。它们通常还会消除旅行目的，这会影响现实世界驾驶的所有组成部分。不幸的是，研究人员通常很少考虑这个问题，经常指导参与者像往常一样开车。在没有明确的驾驶环境的情况下，这样的指示可能会让一些参与者感到困惑。精心设计的驾驶模拟器实验通过创造受约束的情景来诱导特定的行为，从而消除了人们对驾驶动机的困惑。研究人员必须找出已经被模拟消除的驾驶部件，并试图通过使用说明和性能激励来替换它们。指令定义了绩效空间和驱动任务组件；激励定义了与任务组件相关的相对优先级。激励对绩效的影响取决于(1)激励的性质；(2)任务特征；(3)选择用于衡量的绩效方面；以及(4)个体差异。激励措施可能会改善绩效的某些方面，同时也会降低其他方面的绩效，这意味着必须注意将激励措施与绩效衡量标准相匹配。奖励/惩罚计划用于将业绩激励纳入驾驶模拟器研究。与使用这些方法相关的实际问题包括：模拟重大负面结果(即撞车)的影响；多次撞车；激励措施随时间推移的影响；奖惩制度的评估；业绩衡量的非独立性。文中提供了使用奖励/惩罚制度的详细例子。心理忠诚度的问题适用于所有平台。心理保真度的提高消除了由于驾驶过程中的个体差异而产生的不必要的差异，这些差异是由于实验者对优先事项的不确定性造成的。
High-fidelity driving simulators provide a realistic and compelling experience for research participants. However, the credibility of research results from simulator studies continues to be challenged. The fidelity of the driving experience appears insufficient to overcome criticisms concerning the lack of psychological fidelity, defined as the extent to which the risks and rewards of participation in the experiment correspond to real-world risks and rewards. Experimental studies eliminate the injury risk associated with driving. They also typically eliminate the trip purpose, which influences all components of real-world driving. Unfortunately, researchers typically give little consideration to this problem, often instructing participants to drive as they normally would. In the absence of a well-defined driving context, such instructions can be confusing to some participants. Well-designed driving simulator experiments eliminate confusion about driving motives by creating constrained situations to elicit specific behaviors. Researchers must identify the driving components that have been eliminated by the simulation and attempt to replace them through the use of instructions and performance incentives. Instructions define the performance space and driving task components; incentives define the relative priorities associated with the task components. The effects of incentives on performance are determined by some combination of (1) the nature of the incentive; (2) task characteristics; (3) aspects of performance selected for measurement; and (4) individual differences. Incentives are likely to improve certain aspects of performance, while degrading others at the same time, implying that care must be taken in matching incentives to performance measures. Reward/penalty schemes are used to incorporate performance incentives into driving simulator studies. Practical issues associated with their use include: simulating the effects of significant negative outcomes (i.e., crashes); multiple crashes; effects of incentives over time; assessment of reward/penalty systems; and non-independence of performance measures. Detailed examples of the use of reward/penalty systems are presented. Problems of psychological fidelity apply to all platforms. Improving psychological fidelity eliminates unwanted variability due to individual differences in driving, which result from uncertainty about the experimenter’s priorities.