PSYCHOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SCALE OF HEURISTIC AVAILABILITY IN STOP SIGNAL TRANSGRESSION OF YOUNG DRIVERS

Authors

  • Carlos Alberto Mirón Juárez Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C, CIAD.
  • Jesús Francisco Laborín Álvarez Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29365/rpcc.20161125-52

Keywords:

Risk taking, Availability Heuristics, Road Driving

Abstract

The psychosocial research recognizes that young people make reasoning mistakes when estimating the risk of a road accident. Therefore, a descriptive and cross-sectional study was conducted with young drivers residents of Hermosillo, Sonora to obtain the psychometric properties of a scale to evaluate cognitive shortcuts in risk behaviours for violation of stop sign. A total of 436 young men and women with a driving history and an age range of 16 to 24 years old were selected. The Rasch method and the graduated response model showed the unidimensionality of the total of the items; As well as adequate criteria of discrimination and measure of affinity. Next, the factor analysis showed three factors that explain 76.6% of the total variance with a Keizer-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) index of 0.89 and a Cronbach's alpha of 0.95. Based on the results it was concluded that cognitive biases related to personal experience and parents' behavior are involved in the interpretation of road accidents of young drivers.

Author Biographies

Carlos Alberto Mirón Juárez, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C, CIAD.

Psicólogo por la Universidad de Sonora, 

Maestría en Desarrollo Regional en el Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C., CIAD.

Estudiante del Doctorado en Ciencias en el Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C., CIAD.

Jesús Francisco Laborín Álvarez, Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C.

Profesor Investigador en el área de Desarrollo Regional en el Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C., CIAD.

References

Abad, F., Ponsoda, V. & Revuelta, J. (2006). Modelos politómicos de respuesta al ítem. Madrid: La Muralla.

Alonso, F., Esteban, C., Calatayud, C., Montoro, L. y Alamar, B. (2004). Los jóvenes y el tráfico. Circunstancias culturales, sociales y psicológicas. Cuadernos de reflexión Attitudes, 5. Madrid: Attitudes.

Carro, E., Hernández, N. y Sahagún, A. (2014). Psicología del tráfico en México: Revisión de publicaciones en revistas científicas mexicanas. Revista de Psicología y Ciencias del Comportamiento, 5(1), 24-35.

Cattell, R. (1966). The scree-test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245-276.

Cooper, P.J.; Pinili, M. y Chen, W. (1995). An examination of the crash involvement rates o novice driver aged 16 to 55. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 27, 89-104.

DeJoy, D., J. Klippel. 1984. Attributing responsibility for alcohol related near-miss accidents. J. Safety Res. 15(4), 107–115.

Eby, D.W. y Molnar, L.J. (1998). Matching traffic safety strategis to younth characteristics: a literature review of cognitie development. Final Report. University of Mchigan. Transportation Research Institute. Washington: NHTSA.

González-Montesinos, L. (2008). El análisis de reactivos con el Modelo Rasch. Manual técnico A. serie: medición y metodología, México, Universidad de Sonora/INEE, 2008. Recuperado en http://www.winsteps.com/a/recursos.pdf

Gorsuch, R. (1983). Factor Analysis. Second Edition. LEA

Higgins, E., Rholes, W., y Jones, C. (1977). Category Accesbility and Impression Formation. Journal of experimental social psychology, 13, 141-154.

INEGI (2013). Estadística de accidentes de tránsito terrestre en zonas urbanas y suburbanas. Recuperado en: http://www.inegi.org.mx/lib/olap/General_ver4/MDXQueryDatos.asp

INEGI (2016). Estadísticas de Mortalidad. Consultado en: http://www.inegi.org.mx/est/contenidos/proyectos/registros/vitales/mortalidad/default.aspx

Kahneman, D. (2002). Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. Princeton University, Department of Psychology. Princeton, NJ 08544, USA.

Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist. 58, 697-720.

Kahneman, D., y Frederick, (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics of intuitive judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ledesma, R. (2008). Introducción al Bootstrap. Desarrollo de un ejemplo acompañado de software de aplicación. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4, 51-60.

Ledesma, R., Poó, F. y Montes, S. (2011). Psicología del tránsito: Logros y Desafíos de la investigación. PSIENCIA. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencia Psicológica, 3(2), 108-119.

Levy, D.T. (1990). Youth and traffic safety: The effects of driving age, experience, and education. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 22, 327-334.

Lipsey, M.W. (1990). Design sensivity: Statistical power for experimental research. Newbury Park, CA. Sage.

Martínez Arias, M.R., Hernández Lloreda, M.J y Hernández Lloreda, M.V. (2006). Psicometría. Madrid: Alianza.

Matthews, M. y Moran, A. (1986). Age differences in male drivers’ perception of accident risk: The role of perceived driving ability. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 18, 299-313.

Mccartt A., Mayhew D., Braitman K., Ferguson, S. y Simpson, H. (2009). Effects of age and experience on young driver crashes: review of recent literature. Traffic Inj Prev. 10, 209-219.

Mirón, C. y Laborín, J. (2015). Construcción y validación de una escala de heurísticos de disponibilidad en conducción bajo alcoholemia en jóvenes conductores. Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos de Psicología, 15(2), 35-46.

Montero, I., y León, O. (2007). Guía para nombrar los estudios de investigación en Psicología. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 847-862.

Mortimer, R.G., Goldsteen, K., Armstrong, R.W., y Macrina, D. (1990). Effects of incentives and enforcement on the use of safety belts. Journal of Safety Research, 21(1).

Muñiz, J. (2010). Las Teorías de los tests: teoría clásica y teoría de respuesta a los ítems. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 57-66.

Organización Mundial de la Salud (2009). Informe sobre la situación mundial de la seguridad vial. Departamento de Prevención de la Violencia y los Traumatismos y Discapacidad, Suiza. Recuperado en: www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention

Organización Mundial de la Salud (2013). Global status report on road safety 2013: supporting a decade of action. Who library cataloguing-in-Publication Data. Recuperado en: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/78256/1/9789241564564_eng.pdf

Prato, C., Toledo, T., Lotan, T. y Ben-Ari, O. (2010). Modeling the behavior of novice young drivers during the first year after licensure. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 42, 480-486.

Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of Latent Ability Using a Response Pattern of Graded Scores. Psychometric Monograph No. 17. Richmond, VA: Psychometric Society. Retrieved from http://www.psychometrika.org/journal/online/MN17.pdf

Schwartz, N. y Vaughn, L. (2002). The availability heuristic revisited: Ease of recall and content of recall as distinct sources of information. En Griffin, D. y Kahneman, D. (Eds.) Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment.

Sierra, R. (2003). Técnicas de Investigación Social. Madrid: Thomson.

Sunstein, C. (2004). Precaution against what? The Availability Heuristic and Cross-Cultural Risk Perception. John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper, 220.

Todd, P. y Gigerenzer, G. (2007). Environments that make us Smart, Ecological Rationality. Association for Psychological Science. 16 (3), 167-171.

Tversky, A. y Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, New series, 185(4157), 1124-1131.

Tversky, A. y Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgments of and by representativeness. En D. Kahneman, P. Slovic y A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 84-98). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Downloads

Published

2017-03-10

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 2 (2016): Julio-Diciembre de 2016

Section

Investigación empírica y análisis teórico

License

Those authors who have publications with the Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences of the Academic Unit of Legal and Social Sciences, accept the following terms:

a. The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right to first publish their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License. which allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and his first publication are indicated this journal.

b. Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the version of the published work (e.g., deposit it in an institutional telematic archive or publish it in a monographic volume) provided that the initial publication in this journal is indicated.

C. Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through personal communication (e.g. colleagues) before and during the submission process, for purposes of feedback or enrichment of the work, which can produce interesting exchanges