The intercoder agreement when using the Driving Reliability and Error Analysis Method in road traffic accident investigations

Many different classification schemes have been used in the analysis of road traffic accidents but the agreement between coders using the same classification scheme is rarely tested and/or reported. As a high intercoder agreement is a prerequisite for a study’s validity, this is a serious shortcoming. The aim of the present study was, therefore, to test the intercoder agreement of the Driving Reliability and Error Analysis Method (DREAM) version 3.0 by letting seven coders from different European countries analyse and classify the causes of the same four accident scenarios. The results showed that the intercoder agreement for genotypes (contributing factors) ranges from 74% to 94% with an average of 83%, while for phenotypes (observable effects) it ranges from 57% to 100% with an average of 78%. The results also showed that weaknesses in classification schemes, methods, training of coders as well as in presentation of accident information can be identified by testing the intercoder agreement.

[1]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Cognitive reliability and error analysis method : CREAM , 1998 .

[2]  Charles P. Smith.  Content analysis and narrative analysis. , 2000 .

[3]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment , 2006 .

[4]  Jesper Sandin,et al.  Crash investigations for active safety - Meeting new demands on investigation methodology , 2004 .

[5]  J R Treat,et al.  TRI-LEVEL STUDY OF THE CAUSES OF TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS: FINAL REPORT , 1979 .

[6]  M Salusjarvi,et al.  Road accidents: on-site investigations , 1989 .

[7]  James T. Reason,et al.  Managing the risks of organizational accidents , 1997 .

[8]  Ioannis A. Papazoglou,et al.  Modeling accidents for prioritizing prevention , 2007, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[9]  A S Hakkert,et al.  Accident analysis and conflict behaviour , 1987 .

[10]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Joint Cognitive Systems , 2006 .

[11]  H. W. Warner,et al.  Manual for DREAM 3.0, Driving Reliability and Error Analysis Method. Deliverable D5.6 of the EU FP6 project SafetyNet, TREN-04-FP6TRSI2.395465/506723. , 2008 .

[12]  Michel Rossignol,et al.  Inter-rater analysis of a classification scheme of occupational fatalities by electrocution , 1994 .

[13]  Roger Bakeman,et al.  Behavioral observation and coding. , 2000 .

[14]  J. A. Rothengatter,et al.  Road users and traffic safety , 1987 .

[15]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Barriers And Accident Prevention , 2004 .

[16]  Lotte Larsen,et al.  Methods of multidisciplinary in-depth analyses of road traffic accidents. , 2004, Journal of hazardous materials.

[17]  R. Kolbe,et al.  Content-Analysis Research: An Examination of Applications with Directives for Improving Research Reliability and Objectivity , 1991 .

[18]  Dot Hs,et al.  The 100 Car Naturalistic Driving Study , 2002 .

[19]  Jesper Sandin.  An analysis of common patterns in aggregated causation charts from intersection crashes. , 2009, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  Mikael Ljung,et al.  DREAM : Driving Reliability and Error Analysis Method , 2002 .

[21]  G C Staughton,et al.  METHODOLOGY OF AN IN-DEPTH ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION SURVEY , 1977 .

[22]  Willem A. Wagenaar,et al.  The goal, and how to get there , 1997 .

[23]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .