Call for psychological tests for young drivers.

[kezzer]

This is bloody stupid. Anyone with a sense of humour can be deemed as immature. I'm a crazy guy and can get fairly immature at times with friends, but that never translates to typical hoon behaviour.

Funny how in the Jeremy Clarkson thread you were all agreeing there's 'nothing' you can do, yet thinking a stupid immaturity test will stop this behaviour is stupid.

[pottery beige]

Psych test's are a crock.... i've done them.. passed them.. and the joint you work at is full of more FW's than place's that don't do them.... go figure... :

[UNR8D]

Originally Posted by flappist

Two points:

1) None of the incumbent governments will ban driving by stupid or immature people as it would alienate a huge percentage of their electoral support base.

2) The majority of drivers, especially city based, have no idea how to control a car. There is nowhere for them to learn or practice advanced driving techniques other than a tiny number of driving schools for huge fees.

When I was young we used to drive on salt flats, bush dirt roads, mud flats and remote roads like loonies racing, doing slides, donuts and every other stunt we could think of.
This training is a huge benefit when faced with a dangerous situation.
Such things are now called hooning and if anyone were to try it, particularly in the cities, they would be shot, burned, drowned and then locked up forever (or possibly longer) and get their own segment on ACA.

Some time ago I attended a skid pan day with about 20 other AFF members. Watching the skilled driving demonstrations was most illuminating.
Many could not do a single lap of a circle without spinning out even after several attempts.

Why?

Because they cannot practice anywhere for fear of having their car confiscated so the first time they get into trouble they have no idea what to so and it often ends in tragedy.

While we have dogmatic zealots lobbying and advising naive politicians on road safety the road toll will remain (or get worse).

^^ what he said

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Psychological testing weeds out 1000's of unsuitable people that apply for the ambulance, fire and police service each year. You would be surprised what they can tell from about 200 questions.

But then again, I did get through so maybe it does not get it right.

Never having to go through a psychological assessment, are they questions that anyone with a reasonable intellect be able to pass - even if they were a little 'wacky'?

Put me in front of a 200 question psychological test and I'll be sure to pick the answers that seem to meet the criteria of the role, not what I really think.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

Psych test's are a crock.... i've done them.. passed them.. and the joint you work at is full of more FW's than place's that don't do them.... go figure... :

If there was an apostrophe psyche test, you'd be the Charles Manson of apostrophes. :

[Bobman]

If anyone is interested there is a special story on Channel 7 news (Melbourne) tomorrow night after 6pm.

Should be worth a watch.

[SSD-85]

This will be about as effective as telling people in wheelchairs they cant go on a train, or use a car, with the same end result.

Before you know it, theyll start saying women should stay in the kitchen and not be allowed to vote.

All based on the premise they psychologically cannot handle anything else.

[Wally]

Seems to me many of the 25 and unders I speak to are quite obviously on grass, zanax, zyprexa, etc

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by Rodp

If there was an apostrophe psyche test, you'd be the Charles Manson of apostrophes. :

Hahahaha, that's my high quality public school edgamacation coming out in me. :P
And every psych test i've passed i was lying my *** off all the way...

[prydey]

why is it that people think changing the rules to obtain a little piece of plastic will make some sort of difference. all it will do will increase the amount of unlicenced people on the road.

speed and cars are an easy target. drugs and alcohol and the general social lifestyle should be focused on a little more. maybe even get parents to take a little more responsibility for their own kids.

TopGear's JC was spot on when he told grimshaw there was nothing we could do to fix the problem of young kids doing stupid things. young kids have been doing stupid things since the beginning of time.

[gtfpv]

psych tests are not as straight forward and easy as one may think . believe it or not psychology is a proffession which takes years and years to master, and its based on peoples overall behaviour , not what any individual thinks .
a psych test for a front line military gunner, may be slightly different than a child care teacher . or if the test is the same i dont know if they would want the same results . or they may , i dont know .
however they aren't straight forward and simple .
eg: i once sat for one for a job application ( i passed and got the job by the way ) so no need to go off topic and start bagging .
it was a mixture of tests not just one .
in one of the test questions , i was asked to read a passage related to a procedure, the passage was clearly wrong and you would not do the task at hand the way the passage stated . the question was then how would you do the procedure, i gave the correct answer as to the way the task has to be done by law, i was then shown that i got that question wrong and asked why did i answer the question that way, i stated because the instructions asked me to do the task at hand wrong , so i did it the right way.
the test question was one to see if you could ignore the correct way and follow the instructions . ?? it caught me out big time . and that was just the example question, designed to explian the purpose of the exam .
they can assess, catch you out , and tell if your honest , a liar , a cheat , or a procrastinator. mature / immature etc etc .
not very many could 100% fool these tests.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by prydey

why is it that people think changing the rules to obtain a little piece of plastic will make some sort of difference. all it will do will increase the amount of unlicenced people on the road.

Agreed. I got pulled over last week for the first time in a long time at an RBT. Never asked for a licence.

I've said it more than once and I'll keep saying it. More visual police presence on the road at all times of the day may curb some of the boneheaded behaviour on our roads.

When being caught doing something stupid on our roads is seen as unlucky rather than inevitable, bad things will happen.

[Grunter]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

You cannot possibly teach a NEW unfamiliar "reactive" skill to be "instinctive" in a single defensive driver course...

Skills learnt on defensive driver courses are rarely remembered or "recruited" in a split second instinctive situation, it takes months of practice for reactive skills to become instinctive and used without thought....

Drivers should not be taking risks first and foremost, not taught to get out of a stupid situation caused by ignoring road laws and acting irresponsibly....

The one factor no driver can control is what other drivers are doing or reacting to what you do, just because you loose control doing something stupid and regain control of your vehicle on a wet road doesn't meant you haven't caused chaos for other road users and caused them to crash...

This "ideology" is selfish and idiotic at best...

Interesting, so far, because of my view, I'm in denial, selfish and idiotic because I disagree with your point of view. I'm doing well.

Flappist has nailed it. Saved me having to explain it further.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

psych tests are not as straight forward and easy as one may think . believe it or not psychology is a proffession which takes years and years to master, and its based on peoples overall behaviour , not what any individual thinks .
a psych test for a front line military gunner, may be slightly different than a child care teacher . or if the test is the same i dont know if they would want the same results . or they may , i dont know .
however they aren't straight forward and simple .
eg: i once sat for one for a job application ( i passed and got the job by the way ) so no need to go off topic and start bagging .
it was a mixture of tests not just one .
in one of the test questions , i was asked to read a passage related to a procedure, the passage was clearly wrong and you would not do the task at hand the way the passage stated . the question was then how would you do the procedure, i gave the correct answer as to the way the task has to be done by law, i was then shown that i got that question wrong and asked why did i answer the question that way, i stated because the instructions asked me to do the task at hand wrong , so i did it the right way.
the test question was one to see if you could ignore the correct way and follow the instructions . ?? it caught me out big time . and that was just the example question, designed to explian the purpose of the exam .
they can assess, catch you out , and tell if your honest , a liar , a cheat , or a procrastinator. mature / immature etc etc .
not very many could 100% fool these tests.

Very true.

I have had many Psych tests for instances such as application for defence force, special forces service, fire service and ambulance so I have done a few. One thing I can tell you, they are not all the same. Some of them were the same test but some were very different. Some of the tests will provide a profile of the person and then it is up to the assessor to determine if that profile is suitable. To assess the mental maturity of someone is a relatively simple function of these tests. They could reasonably accurately determine if the 17 year old is really 17 mentally or do they have an understanding of the cause and effect of actions of a 13 year old. Much better than just doing a simple multi choice road rules test, doing a hill start and a reverse park will.

After my special forces psych test I had the opportunity to talk to the psychologist who conducted the test. I asked him about how they determine if someone is answering truthfully of full of BS. They have questions that are BS markers, normally these are questions giving scenarios or a situation and ask you to select a response. Then there is a similar question but it is regarding a different situation, your answer should be pretty much the same, if not you are dishonest in your answers. These similar questions are always a long way apart in the test and random in their placement, you get a sense of de ja vu when you read the question but would not remember your previous question if you lied, unless you are really good.

Yes, it is not fool proof and it could be played but I am tipping the average 17 year old would not be able to play it. Lets remember mental age is not only a product of chronological age but also a result of life experience, education, outside influences etc, not everyone grows up at the same rate. Perhaps such testing, used in the correct manner would be beneficial, food for thought.

[jpd80]

One of the big things with Psych tests that people don't get is their ability to
show which people will follow instructions and those who won't.

They put you in different scenarios to see what your responses will be and yes
some are baits to see if candidates are giving answers they think people want
to hear...

Like any dumb government test, the 17 year olds will soon be on the net
learning how to answer certain generic questions. You see they are smart
learners at passing exams....

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by jpd80

One of the big things with Psych tests that people don't get is their ability to
show which people will follow instructions and those who won't.

They put you in different scenarios to see what your responses will be and yes
some are baits to see if candidates are giving answers they think people want
to hear...

Like any dumb government test, the 17 year olds will soon be on the net
learning how to answer certain generic questions. You see they are smart
learners at passing exams....

Good points but one difficulty with the idea of sharing answers, you are never given the answers in these tests, therefore the test answers you get may in fact be wrong as they are just a guess of someone else. Depends on the test they use I suppose. Like I said, not fool proof.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Good points but one difficulty with the idea of sharing answers, you are never given the answers in these tests, therefore the test answers you get may in fact be wrong as they are just a guess of someone else. Depends on the test they use I suppose. Like I said, not fool proof.

There are corruptable psyche students out there that can guide the young on certain generic scenarios,
you will get the answers that seem like these kids are pretty responsible, that's all it takes.

Oh, and being the government, there will be a prescribed question pool that will
leak onto the internet over time....

[flappist]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Very true.

I have had many Psych tests for instances such as application for defence force, special forces service, fire service and ambulance so I have done a few. One thing I can tell you, they are not all the same. Some of them were the same test but some were very different. Some of the tests will provide a profile of the person and then it is up to the assessor to determine if that profile is suitable. To assess the mental maturity of someone is a relatively simple function of these tests. They could reasonably accurately determine if the 17 year old is really 17 mentally or do they have an understanding of the cause and effect of actions of a 13 year old. Much better than just doing a simple multi choice road rules test, doing a hill start and a reverse park will.

After my special forces psych test I had the opportunity to talk to the psychologist who conducted the test. I asked him about how they determine if someone is answering truthfully of full of BS. They have questions that are BS markers, normally these are questions giving scenarios or a situation and ask you to select a response. Then there is a similar question but it is regarding a different situation, your answer should be pretty much the same, if not you are dishonest in your answers. These similar questions are always a long way apart in the test and random in their placement, you get a sense of de ja vu when you read the question but would not remember your previous question if you lied, unless you are really good.

Yes, it is not fool proof and it could be played but I am tipping the average 17 year old would not be able to play it. Lets remember mental age is not only a product of chronological age but also a result of life experience, education, outside influences etc, not everyone grows up at the same rate. Perhaps such testing, used in the correct manner would be beneficial, food for thought.

Yes but then again Julian Knight passed the same psych tests as you didn't he? :P

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by sweetspirit

It might work but if they have problems ect they might just drive without one .

If they are driving without a licence, then that is an attitude problem. With or without a licence they are a moron.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by flappist

Two points:

1) None of the incumbent governments will ban driving by stupid or immature people as it would alienate a huge percentage of their electoral support base.

2) The majority of drivers, especially city based, have no idea how to control a car. There is nowhere for them to learn or practice advanced driving techniques other than a tiny number of driving schools for huge fees.

When I was young we used to drive on salt flats, bush dirt roads, mud flats and remote roads like loonies racing, doing slides, donuts and every other stunt we could think of.
This training is a huge benefit when faced with a dangerous situation.
Such things are now called hooning and if anyone were to try it, particularly in the cities, they would be shot, burned, drowned and then locked up forever (or possibly longer) and get their own segment on ACA.

Some time ago I attended a skid pan day with about 20 other AFF members. Watching the skilled driving demonstrations was most illuminating.
Many could not do a single lap of a circle without spinning out even after several attempts.

Why?

Because they cannot practice anywhere for fear of having their car confiscated so the first time they get into trouble they have no idea what to so and it often ends in tragedy.

While we have dogmatic zealots lobbying and advising naive politicians on road safety the road toll will remain (or get worse).

Terrific post Flappist.

[chevypower]

Is there a psychological test for political candidates?

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by chevypower

Is there a psychological test for political candidates?

Not here, but we need one.

Seems not in the US either, I mean Schwarzenegger is governor of california :

[trippytaka]

I would like to see some more skills testing (wet skid pan) and some more training in emergency situations (simulated, again on a skid pan) before we delve into the psychology.

Combined, skills and psychology would be great!

[fg_nitro]

Originally Posted by chevypower

Is there a psychological test for political candidates?

Then if this were the case the government offices would be empty? Would they not?

[GTP owner]

Psyche maturity testing will never come in, as will proper driver training. Too many dumb people vote- remember that half of the population has an IQ below 100! Too complicated, too many variables, too expensive, to hard. Instead we will have slower speed limits and higher fines - easy, makes money, provides a good continuous income stream, appears to be doing something while it is not. Perfect for politics.

I think i would fail a maturity test at 36 years of age....especially after my IQ test came back negative!

[trippytaka]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Psyche maturity testing will never come in, as will proper driver training. Too many dumb people vote- remember that half of the population has an IQ below 100! Too complicated, too many variables, too expensive, to hard. Instead we will have slower speed limits and higher fines - easy, makes money, provides a good continuous income stream, appears to be doing something while it is not. Perfect for politics.

I think i would fail a maturity test at 36 years of age....especially after my IQ test came back negative!

True that.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Not here, but we need one.

Seems not in the US either, I mean Schwarzenegger is governor of california :

this is why i would rather pay peanuts and take the monkeys .

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Psyche maturity testing will never come in, as will proper driver training. Too many dumb people vote- remember that half of the population has an IQ below 100! Too complicated, too many variables, too expensive, to hard. Instead we will have slower speed limits and higher fines - easy, makes money, provides a good continuous income stream, appears to be doing something while it is not. Perfect for politics.

I think i would fail a maturity test at 36 years of age....especially after my IQ test came back negative!

and with our high immigration intake . our DRIVING STANDARDS AND IQ are dropping daily, see how many people get runnover at crossings in china .
MAYBE WE BETTER BRING IN 20KM/HR SPEED LIMITS. HOWEVER maybe a wheel going over you at 40kms hour might cause a little less damge than at 10kms /hr in any case the results would be the same .

[gtfpv]

next question . ' I HOPE THE TESTS ARE MULTI LINGUAL ?

[trippytaka]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

next question . ' I HOPE THE TESTS ARE MULTI LINGUAL ?

On that note... RTA driving tests are available in pretty much every language. I'm not going to say anything controversial on this mater... but if you can't read the native language, how are you expected to read the information given to you in permanent road signs, or the changing signs set up for special events and emergencies? Does this not create a dangerous situation? :togo: