↓ Skip to main content

Stereotype threat and hazard perception among provisional license drivers

Overview of attention for article published in Accident Analysis & Prevention, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Stereotype threat and hazard perception among provisional license drivers
Published in
Accident Analysis & Prevention, February 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel P. Skorich, Hugh Webb, Lisa Stewart, Maria Kostyanaya, Tegan Cruwys, Kathy McNeill, Andrew J. Frain, Li Lim, Benjamin M. Jones, Lillian Smyth, Kerry J. O’Brien

Abstract

Stereotype threat refers to the negative impact a stereotype about one's group can have on one's performance in domains relevant to the stereotype. In the current paper, we explore whether the negative stereotype of provisional license drivers (PLDs) might produce stereotype threat in a driving-related hazard perception task. We manipulate threat by asking participants to self-identify as PLDs in a categorization condition, or by reminding PLD participants explicitly of the stereotype of PLDs in an explicit stereotype condition. Results reveal increments in hazard perception in the categorization condition, and decrements in hazard perception in the explicit stereotype condition. Mediation analysis reveals that hazard perception performance is fully mediated by increased effort in the categorization condition and by decreased effort in the explicit stereotype condition. We discuss these findings in terms of their implications for stereotype threat and its mediators, and for public policy that explicitly discriminates between PLDs and other driver groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Turkey 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 60 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 28%
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 38%
Engineering 10 16%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 10 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Accident Analysis & Prevention
#2,806
of 4,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,186
of 296,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Accident Analysis & Prevention
#57
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,178 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.