| 1. |
- Laurinavicius, Alfredas, et al.
(författare)
-
Policy instruments for managing road safety on EU-roads
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Transport. - : Vilnius Gediminas Technical University. - 1648-4142 .- 1648-3480. ; 27:4, s. 397-404
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Directive 2008/96/EC on road infrastructure safety management requires the establishment and implementation of procedures relating to road safety impact assessments (RSIA), road safety audits (RSA), ranking of high accident concentration sections and network safety ranking (NSR) and road safety inspections (RSI). The aim of this article is to present the outputs of BALTRIS project. The goal of the international project BALTRIS is to elaborate the road and street infrastructure safety management procedures and teaching material consistently explaining the above mentioned infrastructure management procedures. Four Baltic Sea region countries (Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), represented by universities and national road administrations participate in the elaboration of these procedures and teaching material. This article describes the scope of NSR, RSA and RSI procedures prepared in the frame of BALTRIS project, also article provides detailed implementation and execution of procedures for the EU Member States. NSR means a method for identifying, analysing and classifying parts of the existing road network according to their potential for safety development and accident cost savings. Ranking of high accident concentration sections means a method to identify, analyse and rank sections of the road network which have been in operation for 3 divided by 5 years and upon which a large number of fatal/injury accidents in proportion to the traffic flow or compared to respective conditions have occurred. RSI is a strategic comparative analysis of the impact of the new road or a substantial modification to the existing network on the safety performance of the road network. RSA is a formal safety performance examination of the existing or future road or intersection by an independent audit team.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mõttus, René, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparability of self-reported conscientiousness across 21 countries
- 2012
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Personality. - : SAGE Publications. - 1099-0984 .- 0890-2070. ; 26:3, s. 303-317
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In cross-national studies, mean levels of self-reported phenomena are often not congruent with more objective criteria. One prominent explanation for such findings is that people make self-report judgements in relation to culture-specific standards (often called the reference group effect), thereby undermining the cross-cultural comparability of the judgements. We employed a simple method called anchoring vignettes in order to test whether people from 21 different countries have varying standards for Conscientiousness, a Big Five personality trait that has repeatedly shown unexpected nation-level relationships with external criteria. Participants rated their own Conscientiousness and that of 30 hypothetical persons portrayed in short vignettes. The latter type of ratings was expected to reveal individual differences in standards of Conscientiousness. The vignettes were rated relatively similarly in all countries, suggesting no substantial culture-related differences in standards for Conscientiousness. Controlling for the small differences in standards did not substantially change the rankings of countries on mean self-ratings or the predictive validities of these rankings for objective criteria. These findings are not consistent with mean self-rated Conscientiousness scores being influenced by culture-specific standards. The technique of anchoring vignettes can be used in various types of studies to assess the potentially confounding effects of reference levels.
|
|
| 3. |
- Mõttus, René, et al.
(författare)
-
The effect of response style on self-reported conscientiousness across 20 countries.
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. - : SAGE Publications. - 0146-1672 .- 1552-7433. ; 38:11, s. 1423-1436
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Rankings of countries on mean levels of self-reported Conscientiousness continue to puzzle researchers. Based on the hypothesis that cross-cultural differences in the tendency to prefer extreme response categories of ordinal rating scales over moderate categories can influence the comparability of self-reports, this study investigated possible effects of response style on the mean levels of self-reported Conscientiousness in 22 samples from 20 countries. Extreme and neutral responding were estimated based on respondents’ ratings of 30 hypothetical people described in short vignettes. In the vignette ratings, clear cross-sample differences in extreme and neutral responding emerged. These responding style differences were correlated with mean self-reported Conscientiousness scores. Correcting self-reports for extreme and neutral responding changed sample rankings of Conscientiousness, as well as the predictive validities of these rankings for external criteria. The findings suggest that the puzzling country rankings of self-reported Conscientiousness may to some extent result from differences in response styles.
|
|
