Should I be annoyed?

[Horse]

Some road users are not trained in advanced techniques and do stupid stuff!

I don't think the two attributes are mutually exclusive

[Ancient]

Some road users are not trained in advanced techniques and do stupid stuff!

I don't think the two attributes are mutually exclusive

Did I say they were? Certainly I catch myself occasionally and slap my wrists with a 'That was daft' - I call it continued learning. However I would hope that the propensity to make stupid mistakes was reduced by advanced training - that's one reason I took it up after all!

[bbllr87]

I would hope that the propensity to make stupid mistakes was reduced by advanced training

The propensity to make them may well be reduced, the awareness of them and willingness to admit them, I find, is increased.

(Someone who jumped a red light the other day while navigating a confusing 'roundabout' and following an ambulance with blue lights on.)

[Horse]

Some road users are not trained in advanced techniques and do stupid stuff!

I don't think the two attributes are mutually exclusive

Did I say they were?

However I would hope that the propensity to make stupid mistakes was reduced by advanced training - that's one reason I took it up after all!

I'm sure you noticed the ' ' at the end of my post.

However, I'll give you a serious answer to your second, personal (to you) point:

Do expert drivers have a reduced illusion of superiority?
Andrea E. Waylen a, Mark S. Horswill b,*, Jane L. Alexander c,
Frank P. McKenna

Abstract
It is well established that people tend to rate themselves as better than average across many domains. To maintain these illusions, it is suggested that people distort feedback about their own and others performance. This study examined expert/novice differences in self-ratings when people compared themselves with others of the same level of expertise and background as themselves. Given that a key expert characteristic is increased self-monitoring, we predicted that experts in a domain may have a reduced illusion of superiority because they are more aware of their actual ability. We compared expert police drivers with novice police drivers and found that this prediction was not supported. Expert police drivers rated themselves as superior to equally qualified drivers, to the same degree as novices, Cohen
s d = .03 ns. Despite their extensive additional training and experience, experts still appear to be as susceptible to illusions of superiority as everyone else.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

I had to drive in London yesterday (the Chelsea Embankment, to be precise) and the place is littered with cyclists. They're pretty aggressive, and some of them are quite fast. Generally I was overtaken on the nearside by pedal cyclists, and on the offside by motorcyclists. I didn't happen to see many coming the other way. I have never spent so much time looking in my mirrors - but the only time I felt a tiny bit peeved was watching the particularly idiotic ones pushing past the more law abiding ones at some traffic lights, so that they could cycle up the inside of the lorry waiting first in line, hop up on the pavement, and then dash across the traffic crossing the bridge to our left. Why couldn't they just wait, like the rest of us, I thought to myself? I didn't consider moving my car across to block them from doing it, though...

[martine]

...I I didn't consider moving my car across to block them from doing it, though...

Oh well you missed a trick there then

[7db]

It is well established that people tend to rate themselves as better than average across many domains.

Most people have more than the average number of legs.

[Horse]

It is well established that people tend to rate themselves as better than average across many domains.

Most people have more than the average number of legs.

But most people can accurately estimate how many legs they have

Your point being . . . . ?

[7db]

Your point being . . . . ?

They might all be right. The implication seems to be that because most people think they are better than average they must be wrong.

[brianhaddon]

Expert police drivers rated themselves as superior to equally qualified drivers, to the same degree as novices, Cohen
s d = .03 ns. Despite their extensive additional training and experience, experts still appear to be as susceptible to illusions of superiority as everyone else.[/i]

So how meaningful is this? So many drivers believe themselves to be better than average - does this make a difference to their skill and driving? There is a difference to being asked how you rate yourself in a peer group and how you act on the road. Ask a driver who is a member of the IAM or RoADAR if they are better than average driver and they may answer that at least they have had more training or they drive in a particular way that makes them safer than the average driver or even yes they are. But what matters is how they actually drive. How many people drive around with the conscious thought they know better or they can do something just because they are members of a group. I think drivers respond to the level of training they have. Yes some overestimate their skill but I bet even those who acknowledge superiority do not relate it directly on the road. I do sometimes wonder how meaningful these studies are. They can only meaningful if they show that people drive beyond their abilities and where do these studies show that?
Regards
Brian Haddon

[martine]

They can only meaningful if they show that people drive beyond their abilities and where do these studies show that?

I take your point but how would you measure that?

[Horse]

Your point being . . . . ?

They might all be right. The implication seems to be that because most people think they are better than average they must be wrong.

I'm guessing that you have thought that through

But for anyone who's hard of thinking , the report explains, and goes on - perhaps - to start to answer Brian's concerns:

People tend to judge their own ability as being superior to others. This belief has been described as illusory because, at the group level, the majority of people cannot be better than the majority of people (Taylor & Brown, 1988; Weinstein, 1980). This effect has been demonstrated in a wide range of domains and using a variety of methods.
. . .

Not everyone who rates themselves as better than average is necessarily labouring under an illusion. People who are considered experts in a domain are likely to be better than the average performer in that domain. Expert/novice differences have been studied extensively in a range of domains and Glaser and Chi (1988) identified a number of key characteristics of expert performance, one of which was superior self-monitoring. Glaser and Chi (1988) cited evidence that expert physics problem-solvers could predict more accurately how difficult they would find a problem and also appeared to be more aware of when they had made an error. For example, Larkin (1983) found that expert physics problem-solvers often abandoned unworkable solution attempts before carrying out the mathematical calculations. This characteristic may have implications for the illusory beliefs of experts. While experts may correctly rate themselves as being better than the average performer in their domain, the majority are still unlikely to be better than someone of the same level of expertise as themselves. This raises the possibility that experts may be subject to illusions of superiority when comparing themselves with other equally expert individuals.

I think drivers respond to the level of training they have. Yes some overestimate their skill but I bet even those who acknowledge superiority do not relate it directly on the road. I do sometimes wonder how meaningful these studies are. They can only meaningful if they show that people drive beyond their abilities and where do these studies show that?

What that study concludes is:
"Despite thousands of miles behind the wheel, decades of experience, and intensive specialised training, it appears that expert drivers are just as susceptible to illusions of superiority as non-experts."

You tell us what having illusions of higher skill levels is likely to have on driving . . . Will it inhibit or encourage a person in their driving? But be clear: it's talking about superiority to other, similarly-trained, drivers - not 'untrained' drivers.

I was thinking about this thread (and MartinE's Bristol young driver coaching) and about what 'advanced' training is really all about.

One of the things that grates on me is when I see on a 'reality TV' show where the traffic cop is hammering along in his MitsoSubuEvoTurbo patrol car, and the commentry explains how he can drive so fast (always insert top speed of car here: 1_ _ mph) - and it's because of his superior police training.

Is that what it's all about? 'Going faster'?

Isn't, really, it all about going slower? Or, at least, knowing when to? Improved observation, anticipation, planning - all intended to identify hazards and understand them and their implications for us - i.e. hazard perception. Anything other/beyond/above that is a bonus. But if part of the 'bonus prize' that comes with training is any false level, or 'illusion', of superiority, then that cannot, surely, be a 'Good Thing'?

More on a similar theme:
http://www.driveandstayalive.com/articl ... aining.htm

[Ancient]

Horse, I think there may be some talking at cross-purposes here. Nothing in what I said or implied tended towards saying that I was better than the majority of my peers. The report you link to is talking about experts tending to put themselves above the majority of experts; I expressed the hope that advanced driving training would tend to create or attract the type of driver who is willing to try to be better than the average driver. Others have pointed out that it is perfectly possible for a majority to be better than average and that being better trained should include seeing ones own mistakes (indeed I had already said that I catch myself making mistakes): None of this is stating that advanced drivers are or should be allowed to take more risks. Indeed in other posts I have questioned whether we are aware of and correctly allowing for the risk compensation that naturally occurs with training - perhaps this is what you are talking about with those police drivers?.

[Horse]

Horse, I think there may be some talking at cross-purposes here. Nothing in what I said or implied tended towards saying that I was better than the majority of my peers. The report you link to is talking about experts tending to put themselves above the majority of experts; I expressed the hope that advanced driving training would tend to create or attract the type of driver who is willing to try to be better than the average driver. Others have pointed out that it is perfectly possible for a majority to be better than average and that being better trained should include seeing ones own mistakes (indeed I had already said that I catch myself making mistakes): None of this is stating that advanced drivers are or should be allowed to take more risks. Indeed in other posts I have questioned whether we are aware of and correctly allowing for the risk compensation that naturally occurs with training - perhaps this is what you are talking about with those police drivers?.

As I said earlier, my first quote and reply ended with a ' ', and your comment "I would hope that the propensity to make stupid mistakes was reduced by advanced training" is emphasised by that report . . .

"While experts may be superior at self-monitoring (Glaser & Chi, 1988), this does not appear to save them from inappropriate self-enhancement. There are a number of possible explanations for this. First, it could be that experts in the domain we have chosen are not superior at self-monitoring. It should be noted, however, that a greater awareness of performance is a key component of advanced driver training although this has not been tested empirically. A second possibility is that experts self-monitoring, while making them more aware of their own performance, does not prohibit the mechanisms that sustain self-enhancement (e.g. viewing positive traits as unique and negative traits as common). That is, the tacit strategies used by individuals to support their illusory beliefs are wily enough to cope with sophisticated performance feedback."

However, as you can see, it still suggests that those police drivers who were involved suffered the same way as 'untrained' drivers.

Re: your comments on taking greater risks, that's often put across in those TV shows I mentioned: the 'delinquent' driver 'dangerously' squeezes through a gap, while the police driver apparently negotiates the same gap safely . . .

And the risk compensation aspect? Yes, although maybe a number of other phrases can be used, such as over-confidence, over-optimistic, etc.

As often happens, violent agreement is in danger of breaking out

[Ancient]

As often happens, violent agreement is in danger of breaking out

Ahhh, you've noticed that tendency too? I was wondering, but wasn't sure if it was that .