Hazard perception test [RANT]

Scuzz, missed your edit in your first post:
“Two clicks per hazard won’t penalise you, neither will four for the developing hazard”

Im going to go for that technique next time. Identify hazard, click, give it a second for the computer to join in, click again, then click 4 times as it’s developing.
That should see you through – it’s how I did it. If you get disqualified, I’ll owe you a drink 🙂

So much for hazard perception. Someone should invent a test for self perception.

I think computer kids would find it a doddle.
I did lots of practice ones online first for my bike test, its easy to click too early or too much.
Passed though.

I say his attitude shows complacency ( because he did not train for / understand the test) therefore he is not as safe as he claims – because of his complacent attitude.

It only shows a complacency towards tests, not towards driving. Stoner may approach all things in life with the same complacency (I don’t know, I’ve never met him) but there’s nothing to suggest the absolute correlation that you seem to be inferring.

It’s the flagrant complaceny extended towards internet arguing I can’t abide.

Good to see the excellent work on this thread.

It’s the flagrant complaceny extended towards internet arguing I can’t abide.

Good to see the excellent work on this thread.

I reckon it would be a fairly easy task for one of the STW programming gurus to put together an automated “STW Thread Generator”, where you type in a topic, enter the names of the participants and then the code generates a 4 page thread, locking it immediately afterwards.

This would give many people lots of spare time to do other things, like ride bikes and talk to humans and stuff.

(can some please try coding this, it would be great 🙂 )

LOL. You don’t think TJ is actually a real person do you? 😉

Biker petition

Not sure if STW have done this. Equally relevant to non- motor bikes. Deserves own thread?

But peterfile I think the site does a sort of theraputic service for the communnity.

Maybe Mark and co. could apply for Social services funding?

don’t worry teej, junkyard reckons I’m a crap motivational speaker aswell, i think he’s just not very motivation-able.

I cant be arsed replying – See what I did there 8)

I’ve been arguing on internet newsgroups and forums for over 20 years, so fairly sure I know how to apply the usual rules of English grammar and comprehension, yet it seems the rules for winning an argument on STW are completely different. I’m fairly certain I’ve failed for attempting to argue in a logical and coherent fashion.

What a bucket of monkey spunk.

I agree with most people that the hazard perception test is a load of absolute garbage.

However, if it actually makes new drivers think about potential hazards at all, then it may have some merit.

In reality, people (including me when I took it for a bike test, 13 years after passing myt car test and a lot of cycling on the road ) just practise the test to be able to pass it.

GrahamS – Member

LOL. You don’t think TJ is actually a real person do you?

Real? Define real. Seeing as none of you actually have any physical presence……………

none of you actually have any physical presence

If that’s true, Christmas and your Birthday must be really disappointing.

TandemJeremy – Member
If were were all the same the world would be dull.

TJ – marching to the beat of a different zylophone ( the one in my head that talks to me)

Posted 1 hour ago # Report-Post
FTFY

Oddly TJ’s IP address resolves to: http://www.cleverbot.com/ 😀

Seeing as none of you actually have any physical presence

well granted I am not as fat [headed] as you but that is still overstating it somewhat

e

But peterfile I think the site does a sort of theraputic service for the communnity.

Maybe Mark and co. could apply for Social services funding?

I dunno, it’s only a matter of time before we see something like this in the Daily Mail:

“Cyclist attacks group of disabled war veterans after arguing tirelessly on the internet since it was invented.

Sources suggest the devil worshipping cyclist may also jump red lights and tolerate immigrants”

In fact I wonder if stw is a government experiment to divert the efforts of numerous ****wits from properly ****ing up their employers’ businesses 😉

yet it seems the rules for winning an argument on STW are completely different.

You can never really win an argument on STW.

You can only stop caring.

I disagree GrahamS

I disagree GrahamS

No you don’t!

That’s not an argument, it’s just contradiction!

xylophone?

When I did the test, one of the things that crossed my mind was ‘what sort of person could possibly fail it?’.
Now I know 😀

So much for hazard perception. Someone should invent a test for self perception.

Lovely!

I was involved in the design and validation of the hazard test. It went through a rigorous pilot process with, novices and experts. Was validated against a series of other similar tests, giving good concurrent validity, was tested in parallel forms over time, giving good reliability, was used as a predictor for driving test performance and incident records giving good predictive validity. It’s not something just knocked up by a bunch of folks who thought it looked good. Tell me, is you life littered with a number of tests and assessments on which you should have done well, but failed to do so, because the test had not been calibrated to cope with your awesomeness?

Now that is what I call an argument

*Arms catapult*

It’s not something just knocked up by a bunch of folks who thought it looked good. Tell me, is you life littered with a number of tests and assessments on which you should have done well, but failed to do so,

Actually no. It’s pretty much the first time Ive failed anything, so yes, a little sore about it.

Was validated against a series of other similar tests, giving good concurrent validity, was tested in parallel forms over time, giving good reliability, was used as a predictor for driving test performance and incident records giving good predictive validity

Im assuming this is published somewhere then?

*keeps stirring*
Give him GRAPHS
LOTS OF THEM

Im assuming this is published somewhere then?

Where’s Ben Goldacre when you need him? 🙂

HERE YOU GO CHAPS – graphs, lots of em!

In fact the more I think on it, the happier I am in my opinion that it is a monkey spunk of a test regardless of the sincerity of the methodology the designers insist they used. Not one person in this thread as far as I can see has concluded that the test itself is a good test, the principle of the test is welcomed, yes, but not the test itself – even those who have passed it first time, and even TJ (which is rightly so as he hasnt sat it).

On any google search of forum search you find the same accusations levelled at the mechanics of the test.

How can a test designer be happy with that? It has to work in application, not just in statistical theory.

Im assuming this is published somewhere then?

Love it.

93% of would be bikers pass the test – perhpas because they prepared for it?

Stoner does not – therefore the test is at fault. the fact that other people whinge about it is proof

How can a test designer be happy with that? It has to work in application, not just in statistical theory.

On top of all this, new drivers still fail to perceive hazards.
Ban this sick filth.

OP

Im assuming this is published somewhere then?

No, why would it be? This is the real world not some academic tossing off exercise.

Not one person in this thread as far as I can see has concluded that the test itself is a good test

Nope, it’s far too easy 😀

No, why would it be?

Something about someone paying someone else’s wages? 😆
(This isn’t a personal jibe, just tacking with the winds of a typical STW argument)