驾驶分心行为量表设计与影响因素分析*

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.11.006

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (11): 39-46.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.11.006

• 安全社会科学与安全管理 • 上一篇下一篇

驾驶分心行为量表设计与影响因素分析^*

张磊¹, 彭金栓¹ 教授, 陈晓利^1,2 正高级工程师

1 重庆交通大学交通运输学院,重庆 400074;
2 招商局重庆交通科研设计院有限公司自动驾驶技术交通运输行业研发中心,重庆 400067

收稿日期:2021-08-09 修回日期:2021-10-15 出版日期:2021-11-28
作者简介:张磊 (1992—),男,河北邢台人,博士研究生,研究方向为驾驶行为及交通安全。E-mail:963467525@qq.com。
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划项目(2018YFB1600501);重庆市高校创新研究群体项目(CXQT21022);重庆市研究生导师团队建设项目(JDDSTD2018007);重庆市研究生科研创新项目(CYB21218)。

Design of driving distraction behavior scale and analysis of influencing factors

ZHANG Lei¹, PENG Jinshuan¹, CHEN Xiaoli^1,2

1 School of Traffic &Transportation, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing 400074, China;
2 Research and Development Center of Transport Industry of Self-driving Technology, China Merchants Chongqing Communications Research & Design Institute Co., Ltd., Chongqing 400067, China

Received:2021-08-09 Revised:2021-10-15 Published:2021-11-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为揭示驾驶人分心行为的心理作用机制,首先,按照计划行为理论(TPB)设计初始驾驶分心行为量表;然后,在重庆地区开展问卷调查工作,并描述性统计分析有效回收的321份量表数据;最后,划分驾驶分心态度、知觉行为控制、主观规范、注意力特征、人口学信息、驾驶信息6个主要影响因素,并将其作为外源性潜变量,将分心行为频次作为内生性潜变量,构建结构方程模型(SEM)。根据修正指标(MI)和临界比值(CR)优化模型路径后,检验6个外源性潜变量对分心行为的相关假设,并提取其中具有显著性的影响路径。研究结果表明:对分心驾驶行为影响最显著的外源性潜变量是驾驶人的主观规范,对应的路径系数为0.650;而知觉行为控制、驾驶分心态度、人口学信息3个潜变量影响较小,路径系数分别是0.152、0.134和0.113,而注意力特征、驾驶信息对分心行为的影响不具有显著性。

关键词: 驾驶分心行为, 量表, 影响因素, 计划行为理论(TPB), 结构方程模型(SEM)

Abstract: In order to reveal psychological mechanism of drivers' distraction behavior, firstly, initial driving distraction scale was designed according to TPB. Then, a questionnaire survey was carried out in Chongqing, and data of 321 collected scales were analyzed by descriptive statistics. Finally, six principal influencing factors of driving distraction attitude, perceptual behavior control, subjective norm, attention characteristic, demographic information and driving information were classified and defined as exogenous latent variables, while frequency of distraction was taken as endogenous one, and a SEM was established. Model path was optimized according to modification indexes (MI) and critical ratio (CR), relevant assumptions concerning influence of six exogenous latent variables on distraction behavior were experimented, and significant influencing paths were extracted. The results show that the most significant exogenous latent variable that distracts driving is drivers' subjective norm, with a corresponding path coefficient of 0.650. Perceptual behavior control, driving distraction attitude and demographic information exert less influence, with their coefficients being 0.152, 0.134 and 0.113 respectively. Moreover, influence of attention characteristics and driving information on distraction behavior is not significant.

Key words: driving distraction behavior, scale, influencing factors, theory of planned behavior (TPB), structural equation model (SEM)

中图分类号:

X910
X911

张磊, 彭金栓, 陈晓利. 驾驶分心行为量表设计与影响因素分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(11): 39-46.

ZHANG Lei, PENG Jinshuan, CHEN Xiaoli. Design of driving distraction behavior scale and analysis of influencing factors[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(11): 39-46.

参考文献

[1] 李梦琦, 张敬磊. 考虑愤怒情绪的驾驶员换道行为博弈分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(2): 165-170.
LI Mengqi, ZHANG Jinglei. Game analysis of car drivers' lane-changing behaviors considering angry feelings[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(2): 165-170.
[2] GERSHON P, SITA K R, ZHU Chunming, et al. Distracted driving, visual inattention, and crash risk among teenage drivers[J]. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2019, 56(4): 494-500.
[3] LIAO Yuan, LI Shengbo, WANG Wenjun, et al. Detection of driver cognitive distraction: a comparison study of stop-controlled intersection and speed-limited highway[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2016, 17(6): 1 628-1 637.
[4] LI Zhaojian, BAO Shan, KOLMANOVSKY I V, et al. Visual-manual distraction detection using driving performance indicators with naturalistic driving data[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2018, 19(8): 2 528- 2 535.
[5] SCHROEDER P, MEYERS M, KOSTYNIUK L. National survey on distracted driving attitudes and behaviors[J]. Cellular Telephones, 2013, 20(5): 78-81.
[6] FOFANOVA J, VOLLRATH M. Distraction in older drivers : a face-to-face interview study[J]. Safety Science, 2012, 50(3): 502-509.
[7] PRAT F, GRAS M E, PLANES M, et al. Driving distractions: an insight gained from roadside interviews on their prevalence and factors associated with driver distraction[J]. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology & Behavior, 2017, 45: 194-207.
[8] FELDMAN G, GREESON J, RENNA M, et al. Mindfulness predicts less texting while driving among young adults: examining attention- and emotion-regulation motives as potential mediators[J]. Personality & Individual Differences, 2011, 51(7):856-861.
[9] CHEN H Y W, DONMEZ B, HOEKSTRA A L, et al. Self-Reported engagement in driver distraction: an application of the theory of planned behaviour[J]. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2016, 38: 151-163.
[10] ROWE R, ANDREWS E, HARRIS P R, et al. Identifying beliefs underlying pre-drivers' intentions to take risks: an application of the theory of planned behaviour[J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2016, 89: 49-56.
[11] 安宇, 窦爽, 张娜, 等. 高校暴力行为影响因素的结构方程模型分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(2): 51-56.
AN Yu, DOU Shuang, ZHANG Na, et al. Structural equation model analysis of influencing factors of violence in colleges and universities[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(2): 51-56.
[12] AJZEN I. The theory of planned behavior[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1991, 50(2):179-211.
[13] 温惠英, 朱殿臣, 漆巍巍,等. 雾天驾驶人对限速标志的遵从程度研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(2): 15-20.
WEN Huiying, ZHU Dianchen, QI Weiwei, et al. Study on drivers' compliance with variable speed limit signs under fog weather condition[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(2): 15-20.
[14] AJZEN I. The theory of planned behaviour: reactions and reflections[J]. Psychology & Health, 2011, 26(9): 1 113-1 127.
[15] CESTAC J, PARAN F, DELHOMME P. Young drivers' sensation seeking, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control and their roles in predicting speeding intention: how risk-taking motivations evolve with gender and driving experience[J]. Safety Science, 2011, 49(3): 424-432.

驾驶分心行为量表设计与影响因素分析^*

Design of driving distraction behavior scale and analysis of influencing factors

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	李媛媛, 袁玉林, 随力瑞. 基于KAP理论的大学生网络安全教育研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 1-8.
[2]	孙世梅, 张家严. 基于24Model-D-ISM的地铁站火灾疏散影响因素研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4): 153-159.
[3]	徐孝民, 李伟, 黄胜忠. 黄河流域环境风险因素的时空演变及影响因素分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(3): 206-215.
[4]	李全生, 颜杰, 王斌, 张禹. 哈尔乌素露天煤矿爆堆粉尘润湿性及其影响因素[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S2): 7-12.
[5]	王桂林, 赵长海, 宋德林. 基于提高环境安全的露天矿空气污染影响因素研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S2): 77-84.
[6]	张名芳, 马艳华, 马勇. 无信号交叉口人车冲突严重程度影响因素分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 190-197.
[7]	刘启源, 刘金程. 自然灾害视角下区域韧性评价方法及影响因素[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(5): 174-181.
[8]	成连华, 赵旭东, 郝杰. 集成ISM与G1的建筑工人安全能力影响因素研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(4): 61-68.
[9]	李聪颖, 张浩星, 谭倩, 李微, 成华, 王琦. 基于Cox比例风险模型的交通违法间隔时间研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(3): 126-133.
[10]	刘兰剑, 董永强. 交通基础设施韧性研究:缘起、发展与未来[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(11): 45-51.
[11]	郭焘, 王祥尧, 顾丹妮, 乔韩. 轮班工人睡眠质量问题及其干预策略[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(S2): 236-242.
[12]	张博旭. 铁路事故灰色关联分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(S2): 60-63.
[13]	李敬强, 樊天辰. 民航法定自查人员安全检查能力模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(7): 7-13.
[14]	李响, 李消, 王松, 雷描描, 赖本涛. 铁路机务检修人员人因失误影响因素研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(6): 23-30.
[15]	陈彦霖, 黄文炜, 李弘扬. 建筑企业差错管理氛围与工人安全绩效关系[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(5): 28-34.