Just the Facts: Changes in Older Driver Attitudes After Exposure to Educational Interventions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the change in cognitive processing as measured by consciousness raising and attitudes toward driving following educational interventions for older adults. METHODS: Older adults who viewed a research-based applied theater production about older driver safety (n = 110) were compared to those who were exposed to a print-based publication available to all drivers (n = 100). RESULTS: After viewing the play developed with input from older adults and others, older adult viewers' attitudes toward driving shifted in a manner consistent with an increased openness or willingness to consider changing their driving behavior. Conversely, after reading the print-based materials, the older adults felt more empowered to continue drive. CONCLUSIONS: Demonstrating that an intervention that takes into account the views of older drivers can lead to attitudinal outcomes that differ from those achieved with typical "just the facts" programs is an important step in understanding how program content and format affect outcomes. Future interdisciplinary work such as this may enhance our capabilities to understand more about the processes involved in influencing change in attitudes and behaviors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".