Research Article  |   May 2014
One- and Three-Screen Driving Simulator Approaches to Evaluate Driving Capacity: Evidence of Congruence and Participants’ Endorsement
Author Affiliations
  • Carrie Gibbons, MPH, is Research Coordinator, St. Joseph’s Care Group, 580 Algoma Street North, Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5G4 Canada; gibbonsc@tbh.net
  • Nadia Mullen, PhD, is Research Associate, Centre for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario
  • Bruce Weaver, MSc, is Research Associate, Centre for Research on Safe Driving, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, and Assistant Professor of Biostatistics, Human Sciences Division, Northern Ontario School of Medicine, West Campus, Thunder Bay, Ontario
  • Paula Reguly, MPH, is Research Assistant, Department of Health Sciences, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario
  • Michel Bédard, PhD, is Director, Centre for Research on Safe Driving, and Professor, Department of Health Sciences and Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, and Scientific Director, St. Joseph’s Care Group, Thunder Bay, Ontario
Article Information
Community Mobility and Driving / Rehabilitation, Disability, and Participation
Research Article   |   May 2014
One- and Three-Screen Driving Simulator Approaches to Evaluate Driving Capacity: Evidence of Congruence and Participants’ Endorsement
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, May/June 2014, Vol. 68, 344-352. doi:10.5014/ajot.2014.010322
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, May/June 2014, Vol. 68, 344-352. doi:10.5014/ajot.2014.010322
Abstract

OBJECTIVE. We examined the validity of one-screen versus three-screen driving simulators and their acceptability to middle-aged and older drivers.

METHOD. Participants aged 40–55 or 65 and older (N = 32) completed simulated drives first with a single monitor and then with a three-monitor setup, followed by pen-and-paper measures and an interview.

RESULTS. Mean differences between one- and three-screen drives were not statistically significant for Starting/Stopping and Passing/Speed. Correlations between the two drives indicated moderate positive linear relationships with moderate agreement. More errors occurred on the one-screen simulator for Signal Violation/Right of Way/Inattention, Moving in a Roadway, Turning, and Total Scores. However, for Moving in a Roadway, Turning, and Total Scores, correlations between drives indicated strong positive linear relationships. We found no meaningful correlation between workload, computer comfort, simulator discomfort, and performance on either drive. Participants found driving simulators acceptable.

CONCLUSION. Findings support the use of one-screen simulators. Participants were favorable regarding driving simulators for assessment.