Simulated driving assessments have the benefit of safely exposing drivers to hazardous scenarios in order to evaluate performance. However, as hazards actualize, there is the potential for altering drivers’ subsequent simulator performance, such as increased vigilance and decreased number of driving performance errors. The goal of this manuscript is to preliminarily explore unintended training effects of a simulator protocol by comparing observed driving performance errors over baseline and interim points in a simulated assessment. Twenty novice teen drivers completed four experimental drives which were designed to replicate collision scenarios from the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey. Participants did not receive any feedback about their performance during the study. In order to assess errors, the authors incorporated three standard intersections in each experimental drive: 1) 2-way stop sign intersection; 2) 4-way stop sign intersection; and 3) left turn intersection with a stop sign. For each standard intersection, they examined simulator recorded data coded to detect speeding and stopping errors and eye tracking video data coded to detect traffic check errors. The analysis used a sum score of errors in performance in the standardized intersections. Over the baseline and interim points, they observed similar observed numbers of errors, even after hazards actualized or simulated crashes occurred. Using a paired t-test, the total errors were not statistically significant different between baseline and Interim 4. In conclusion, preliminary evidence suggests that teens’ driving performance did not demonstrate an unintended training effect as a result of participation in the simulated assessment.