Analysis from Neuropsychology in Driving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding our minds allows us to know ourselves better. Neuropsychology facilitates the understanding of brain functions and their relationship with human behavior. Based on the bibliography and field sources, the study of the quantitative-qualitative approach and descriptive level allows us to identify individual and social behaviors in driving. It was applied to the population of the Riobamba canton, with a sample of 308 professional and non-professional (individual) drivers; 2 premises of behavior were analyzed: (1) Social behavior: we constantly behave according to the place and situation in which we find ourselves, where we project an image before others, we pretend and fulfill a social role. (2) Spontaneous behavior: there are places where we act naturally and authentically; we stop taking care of ourselves, we are spontaneous and natural. The results show that driving behavior changes due to different circumstances, causing disruptive behavior: anonymity, lack of direct contact and interaction with other drivers, everyone is equal, there are no hierarchies, social status, or gender, competition prevails, the law of the jungle, autonomy, disorganization, abuse, there is no guilt when crossing lanes or passing, audacity when not respecting a line, aggressiveness arises, we drive out of necessity, we block the roads, we compete, we do not give way, we claim, we use excessive use of the horn, rudeness, gestures, and other behaviors are said. It is concluded that behavior changes in the human being when driven by beliefs, thoughts, and shortcomings: dissatisfaction, unhappiness, stress, arriving on time at your destination; that is, we drive out of necessity and not as an aim to do something we like doing, “drive”. Keywords: social behavior, spontaneous behavior, behavior, neuropsychology, psychology, driving. Resumen Comprender nuestra mente permite conocernos mejor. La neuropsicología facilita la comprensión de las funciones cerebrales y su relación con la conducta humana, el estudio de enfoque cuanti-cualitativo, nivel descriptivo permitió identificar la conducta individual y social en la conducción, fundamentada en fuentes bibliográficas y de campo; se aplicó a la población del cantón Riobamba, con una muestra de 308 conductores profesionales y no profesionales (particulares); se analizó 2 premisas de la conducta: (Conducta social: constantemente nos comportamos de acuerdo al lugar y situación en la que nos encontramos, donde proyectamos una imagen ante los demás, fingimos y cumplimos un rol social. (Conducta espontánea existe lugares donde actuamos de forma natural, auténticas dejamos de cuidarnos, somos espontáneos, naturales. Los resultados muestran, en la conducción la conducta cambian por diferentes circunstancias, provocando conductas disruptivas: anonimato, inexistencia de contacto directo e interacción con otros conductores, todos son iguales, no existe jerarquías, nivel social, ni género, impera la competencia, la ley de la selva, autonomía, desorganización, abuso, no existe culpa al cruzarnos de carril o rebasar, audacia al no respetar una fila, surge la agresividad, manejamos por necesidad, bloqueamos las carreteras, competimos, no cedemos el paso, reclamamos, hacemos uso excesivo de la bocina, se dicen groserías, gestos y entre otras conductas. Se concluye, el comportamiento cambia en el ser humano al conducir per creencias, pensamientos y carencias: insatisfacción, infelicidad, estrés, llegar a tiempo a su destino; es decir, conducimos por necesidad y no como un fin para realizar algo que nos gusta hacer, “conducir”. Palabras Clave: conducta social, conducta espontánea, comportamiento, neuropsicología, psicología, conducción.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".