How to assess reliability and validity of a traffic conflict technique?

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F44994575%3A_____%2F12%3A%230001101" target="_blank" >RIV/44994575:_____/12:#0001101 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://www.ictct.org/workshop.php?workshop_nr=35" target="_blank" >http://www.ictct.org/workshop.php?workshop_nr=35</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

How to assess reliability and validity of a traffic conflict technique?

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Traffic conflicts are one of indirect safety measures. In order of their description, collection and evaluation, number of various traffic conflict techniques (TCTs) has been developed since the end of 1960s. The two key properties of every indicator are(Laureshyn, 2010) reliability and validity. The question is: is there a practical way to assess reliability and validity of a traffic conflict technique? It has been asked in relation with establishment of Czech TCT. There have been two Czech TCT approaches, both used mainly in academia: one has utilised manual observations, the second has relied on video recording and analysis in the office (Ambros, 2011). Current task is to compare the both and draw conclusions with regards to their applicability inpractice. (presented at 25th ICTCT workshop)

Název v anglickém jazyce

How to assess reliability and validity of a traffic conflict technique?

Popis výsledku anglicky

Traffic conflicts are one of indirect safety measures. In order of their description, collection and evaluation, number of various traffic conflict techniques (TCTs) has been developed since the end of 1960s. The two key properties of every indicator are(Laureshyn, 2010) reliability and validity. The question is: is there a practical way to assess reliability and validity of a traffic conflict technique? It has been asked in relation with establishment of Czech TCT. There have been two Czech TCT approaches, both used mainly in academia: one has utilised manual observations, the second has relied on video recording and analysis in the office (Ambros, 2011). Current task is to compare the both and draw conclusions with regards to their applicability inpractice. (presented at 25th ICTCT workshop)

Druh

O - Ostatní výsledky

CEP obor

AQ - Bezpečnost a ochrana zdraví, člověk – stroj

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

Výsledek vznikl pri realizaci vícero projektů. Více informací v záložce Projekty.

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2012

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů