Stephen,
I see that you did not answer *our* questions either. Many of us
obviously understood the trick that was up your sleeve (or at least up
that of those you were relying on). As the article you attached says in
its very first paragraph: "Even the commonly cited statistic of
a higher risk of crash per kilometre among this group..." It then goes
on to attempt to minimize this bald fact by continuing, "has been shown
to be an artefact: low mileage is intrinsically risky, and studies show
that when this is controlled for the older drivers perform as well as,
if not better than, younger drivers." The phrase "as well, it not
better," in all likelihood translates into "no significant difference,"
so what we REALLY have, advocacy aside, is that older people are
terrible drivers (perhapst in part because they do not drive very far
or very often). The implication, however, that their skills would
improve if they drove more (as such skills do for younger folks) is
patently silly. If older drivers took to the highways in order to up
the number of kms they drive, the age-related decline in their driving
skills would become even *more* evident (much to the detriment of
others on the road). Thankfully, many older people recognize the
decline in their own skills and so stay off the highways when they can,
resulting in a lower superficial accident rate than they would
otherwise have (which seems to have, astonishingly, fooled the
researchers you cite into concluding that there is *not* a causal link
between aging and driving-skill decline. this would be a CLASSIC
example of taking a mere correlation to have causal implications. There
is LOADS of quantitative evidence, however, that older people have
slower reaction times and handle procedures in which attention has to
be quickly switched from one task to another and back again (such as
driving) particularly poorly.
Regards,
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M3J 1P3
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164
fax: 416-736-5814
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
============================
.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I asked:
Drivers of age 65 or older:
a) drive as safely or more safely than any other age group
b) have a 10% higher accident rate than any other age group
c) have a 25% higher accident rate than any other age group
d) have a 50% higher accident rate than any other age group
e) are exceeded in accident rate only by the youngest (under age 21)
drivers
You sent me 18 replies. Unfortunately, only a mere 4 or 22% of the responses had
the correct answer, which was (a). I therefore regret to inform most of you that you
are crash test dummies, which, as Dave Barry is fond of saying, would be a great
name for a rock band. For those with the correct answer, you should be proud!
I must also protest the unfortunate tone of some of your remarks. I've been told that
the answer "would depend" (Chris Green), that the test was "no fair" (Lenore Frigo),
that I was "mean" (Tim Shearon), that there was "a catch" (David Campbell), that I
needed to "define [my] terms" and had "something up my sleeve" (David Epstein),
and that "it might be a trick question" (Miguel Roig). Honestly, do your students give
you such grief? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked. And I must remind you that there
are no trick questions, only trick answers.
Further to the data, a disturbing 33% of you were unclear on the requirements of
answering a multiple-choice question and provided either no response or more than
one. Do I have to remind you that this is a forced-choice procedure, and if you don't
choose one and only one response, you get zero? And Annette, didn't I say "no
googling?" How are you going to get anywhere in education if you won't follow
simple instructions? Fortunately, your googling led you into error, which serves you
right.
The results summary:
Based on all responses (n = 18)
a) = 22%
b) = 0%
c) = 0%
d) = 6%
e) = 39%
other = 33%
Omitting "other' responses (n = 12), which richly deserve their zero:
a) = 33%
b) = 0%
c) = 0%
d) = 8%
e) = 58%
My justification. We've all seen the news reports of elderly people plowing into
pedestrians (there was a bad case in Los Angeles last year, and another in
Montreal), and these are inevitably followed by calls for getting old folks off the
road. So I was surprised to discover t'aint necessarily so. My source is the
authoritative British Medical Journal ("Are the media running elderly drivers off the
road?", 2005, 330: 368 (February 12).
Unfortunately, I see that I've just been caught by the new and regrettable policy of
BMJ to restrict access after one week, so I can't sent you there as I was intending
to. I guess I'll just have to copy it out for you by hand. Bother! And please remember
that I know nothing about this matter beyond what it says in the article. Don't shoot
the messenger.
Stephen
-----------------------
Are the media running elderly drivers off the road?
Drivers over the age of 65 are the safest drivers of any age group. Even the
commonly cited statistic of a higher risk of crash per kilometre among this group has
been shown to be an artefact: low mileage is intrinsically risky, and studies show
that when this is controlled for the older drivers perform as well as, if not better than,
younger drivers (Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
2002; 5: 271-4). Despite this evidence many European governments have enacted
restrictive legislation directed at them.
The negative perception extends to the American Medical Association's 2003
guideline _Assessing Fitness to Drive in Older People_. Although the guideline is
clinically useful, its preface still emphasizes the "risk" posed by older drivers.
Much of the literature on older people's medical fitness to drive concentrates on risk
rather than mobility. Might a negative image of elderly drivers in the media be an
important factor in shaping public and medical opinion on the issue?
To help answer this question we searched the electronic archives of 15 UK and
Irish national and regional newspapers from January 1999 to May 2004 for
references to older drivers. We assessed whether the articles were negative or
positive to older drivers or balanced. We identified 51 relevant articles, of which we
independently judged 17 to be negative, four positive, and 30 even handed. When
we excluded brief reports on fatal crashes, we found the results for opinion or
editorial articles to be 15 negative, four positive, and seven balanced. Headlines
included "Keep the over-50s off our M-ways," "Old dear trashes 7 cars," "MP calls
for old to get special licences,", "Silly old buggy," and "Fanatic speed cop targets
old folk".
Newspaper reporting of issues relating to older drivers in the United Kingdom and
Ireland is largely negative in content and is at variance with the evidence. The
potential consequences of such representation are to distort the political and
societal context within which doctors practice medicine and promote healthy ageing.
The media reflect and shape public opinion. In particular, the media can influence
the public's perception of health related issues. One example is the inordinately
high level of success with cardiopulmonary resuscitation in television series such as
ER (_New England Journal of Medicine_ 1966: 344 1578-82).
This leaves professionals with two tasks. Firstly they need to be mindful of such
prejudices when dealing with individual patients. When they are discussing
resuscitation with their patients they should consider the unrealistic survival rate of
cardiopulmonary resuscitation portrayed on television. So too, when discussing
driving ability with older patients--and in particular with their relatives--doctors need
to take into account the negative perception of older drivers among the general
public and to strive to ensure that the mobility of older people is not prematurely
and unnecessarily curtailed.
The second task is for our professional bodies--doctors, geriatricians, transport
planners--to work with journalists and opinion formers to educate them and make
them aware that the major concern with transport and health for older people is
usually access to transport rather than the imagined threat that older drivers
represent to other road users. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development has recommended just such an approach (Ageing and Transport:
Mobility Needs and Safety Issues, 2001), emphasizing the need for information
campaigns that prioritize mobility over risk. New medical curriculums are already
well oriented to social and behavioural sciences; a brief taste of media studies may
help doctors understand and combat negative perceptions among the public that
shape their work environment.
Alan Martin, registrar, Lucy Balding, house officer, Desmond O'Neill, associate
professor
department of medical gerontology, Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin 24, Ireland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------
Whew! There are also three _Rapid Responses_ but I can't access them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
Department of Psychology fax:(819) 822-9661
Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lennoxville, QC J1M 1Z7
Canada
Dept web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
TIPS discussion list for psychology teachers at
http://faculty.frostburg.edu/psyc/southerly/tips/index.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
