[Closed] Hazard perception test [RANT]

how come you had to take the test?

i blame binners

I just passed mine the other week.

It disqualified me for "cheating" in the first two questions (!), but then I got 5s and 4s for the rest so still passed.

Interestingly enough, around 84% of new drivers pass the test, compared to only 60% of experienced drivers who have to sit the same test before becoming instructors....hmmmmm.

Unfortunately, it seems like all you're being tested on is the technique of how to pass the test!

the hazard perception test was easy. I clicked once for every hazard and got a fairly high percentage.

Also if you are looking to blame something/someone else for your failings then you aren't fit to drive and need to sort your attitude out. So often my friends go "it wasn't my fault the instructor was shit." Well change instructors you dumb **** and if your really good enough to pass teh test why didnt you in the first place?

Learn from your mistakes, do it again and dont cry.

the hazard perception test was easy. I clicked once for every hazard and got a fairly high percentage.

Also if you are looking to blame something/someone else for your failings then you aren't fit to drive and need to sort your attitude out. So often my friends go "it wasn't my fault the instructor was shit." Well change instructors you dumb **** and if your really good enough to pass teh test why didnt you in the first place?

Learn from your mistakes, do it again and dont cry.

bwahahahahahahahahahhahahaha 🙂

Are you telling me that the 40% of would-be driving instructors who fail the test aren't fit to drive because they query why a new driver can pass it but someone who is experienced can't?

bwahahahahahaahahahahahahaha

^ Ladies and Gentlemen, POST OF THE WEEK!
I offer a platitude: "Everyone fails at somepoint. It's how they move on from failure that matters".
(I agree that the test is a load of bollocks. You should take your mildly arrogant 'doesn't apply to me' attitude and use it to compensate for the test being a bit retarded - that's what I did. It actually says in the instructions "Click again shortly after your initial click just incase". Two clicks per hazard won't penalise you, neither will four for the developing hazard)

Unfortunately, it seems like all you're being tested on is the technique of how to pass the test!

exactly. The hazard perception component isnt a problem, its meeting the crap test structure that's a pain.

Also if you are looking to blame something/someone else for your failings then you aren't fit to drive and need to sort your attitude out. blah blah blah

bravo, only took 4 posts.

Its for a motorbike test. Ive been driving with no crashes or points or incidents for 30 years.

Agreed, the hazard perception test is absolute bollocks. Had to do it when getting motorbike licence few years back. Just a pointless game you have to learn how to play. I did pass, but only because the bike school had a PC permanently set up in the office so you could click away for as long as it took to learn how to play it.

Absolutely pointless test that serves no purpose other than to make someone somewhere a lot of money.

[url= http://www.hsmassociates.eu/hazardperception.pdf ]Interesting Reading....[/url]

(although you might not like the bike stats, Stoner! 😉

My uncle is a driving instructor & failed the hazard perception test until he learnt what the computer needed you to do. I think he was seeing hazards too early.

Stoner -

So its not your fault yo didn't understand the test structure / how to pass? Other folk do. Its not rocket science

Its for a motorbike test. Ive been driving with no crashes or points or incidents for 30 years.

complacency? Not a good place to start from with riding motorbikes

I did the whole Pass Your Test DVD things and they had example Hazard Perception tests on them. VERY useful to practise as it is a lot about technique as well as just spotting hazards.

From memory, they recommended clicking several times for each hazard, at least once when you first see it, once when it develops, once when you'd have to take avoiding action.

The trouble I found was determining what was actually a "hazard". To me as a learner driver who'd cycled on the roads, [u]everything[/u] was a [i]potential[/i] hazard: bloke walking on pavement (could suddenly decide to cross the road without looking), car ahead (could brake suddenly for no apparent reason), car at junction (might SMIDSY me), bridge (someone could drop something on me) etc etc

cheers - pf. Id concur with his findings.

As for the bike stats I think you'll find that its heavily weighted towards novice learners much like the car test. Only the ADI+ test group are going to be heavily weighted towards experienced drivers.

Unfortunately, it seems like all you're being tested on is the technique of how to pass the test!

complacency? Not a good place to start from with riding motorbikes

Yes go out and crash now that will learn you 😀

TJ have you considered motivational speaking ?

I think he was seeing hazards too early.

Bit daft, reckon you could scrape a pass by randomly clicking, should pause the vid when you click and then get you to ID exactly where you thought the hazard was. Clck to pause then use mouse to highlight the hazard, DQ for clicking then not highlighting a valid hazard within a few seconds, should be easy to do I'd have thought

So its not your fault yo didn't understand the test structure / how to pass? Other folk do. Its not rocket science

That's the point though TJ.

Why have a test you need a certain technique to pass, rather than just focusing on the skill it's trying to assess - being able to identify hazards.

I passed, but that's only because I practised the technique required. It's quite a funny wee system that disqualified me on two questions because I was apparently clicking "rhythmically".

FWIW I reckon the principal of the test is good (checking observation skills) but it would be [u]MUCH[/u] better if it could be done by showing people videos and getting them to give the examiner a running commentary on what they are looking out for. Sadly that requires more personnel, training and expense than the automated "game" test.

exactly. The hazard perception component isnt a problem, its meeting the crap test structure that's a pain.

Also if you are looking to blame something/someone else for your failings then you aren't fit to drive and need to sort your attitude out. blah blah blah

bravo, only took 4 posts.

Its for a motorbike test. Ive been driving with no crashes or points or incidents for 30 years.

I managed to pass my motrobike one (and the car one before that).

Agree though that it is a bit of a 'game'. It's a pretty simple one though, not everything is a hazard, e.g. pedestrian walking isn't a hazard, them looking over their shoulder or approachign a pedestrian crossing is. If you clicked to early you weren't identifying hazards. The scenes are all scripted so there's always 10 (I think, it was 2 years ago that I did my last one) seconds between the hazard starting (ped reaching a crossing, car indicating) and them requiring you to do something. The way my instructor explained it was you're not clincking at everything you notice and would keep an eye on (otherwise you'd click for every road user coming into your field of vision), you're clicking at the point in time you'd come off the throttle/change down a gear and be hovering over the brake pedal anticipating that somethings about to happen.

It's a game, but a really simple one!

blah blah, Nanny TJ comes sashaying in.

My uncle is a driving instructor & failed the hazard perception test until he learnt what the computer needed you to do. I think he was seeing hazards too early.

That is the problem, not hazard identification.

Since you've obviously not done the test TJ (I assume youve had your bike licence since 1943 or thereabouts) you cant know that there is no feedback in the intro vid or during the test to give any indication of when the hazard timing is being recorded from, so its very easy for experienced drivers to identify a hazard and concluded it is developing before the test has defined it as such. And in fact nearly all the posts on other threads Ive seen about problems with the test indicate experienced drivers identifying developing hazards before the test is programmed too.

EDIT Typo: for 20 [s]30[/s] years.

I am shitting my pants now as I will be taking the theory test on Friday ...

I have a non-EU driving licence since I was 17 yr old so not sure what to expect now apart from clicking the monitor.

I am also taking lessons to drive here as I have not driven for a while.

What's the fascination with roundabout? Double roundabouts ... big, small, multiple ... merry go round ... it's rubbish! Yes, it's rubbish! Pointless roundabouts.

What's with the fluctuating speed limit? It's rubbish!

It's a game of beating the test set by bureaucrats and pen pushers.

A couple of years back when the missus was doing her car test I had a go on the practise system she had on a DVD. Again, I failed repeatedly until I waited a second or 2 after spotting the hazard before reacting to it.

If I rode my bike with that level of alertness I'd have been squished years ago!

Driving for 30 years Stoner?

You should be winding down towards a bus pass at your age, not getting a mid life crisis dead mobile licence.

Enjoy the bike 😉

Edit: of course editing for typos indicates an inability to get things right first time. And the red mist reaction to the test is concerning too. 😈

Stoner after the test >>> 👿

I'll be getting an angry phone call if I keep this up, so I'll stop now.

Stoner - claiming you are safe to ride a bike because of years in a car show complacency IMO

Seriously - be safe not complacent

Actually stoner - I did a dummy hazard perception test and passed first time - did it out of interest. I assume the dummy was similar to the real thing. the technique required seemed fairly obvious.

Have you had training? Passing this test should be apart of your training

claiming you are safe to ride a bike because of years in a car show complacency IMO

and where did I say that?

I draw no conclusions on my safety to ride a bike from my safety in a car, only that my hazard perception is not as bad as could be concluded from failing a poorly constructed test. You're trying too hard to be an arse. Take a time out.

I think somebody didn't practise. 🙄

😉

Not a good place to start from with riding motorbikes

Far better to go around blasting the whatsits out of the national speed limit instead.

If you've never tried it have a go here:
http://www.theory-test.co.uk/asp/hpt_flashdisplay.asp

Hit the "Review" button to see how you scored and whether you clicked too early. (5 points on both clips here 🙂 but 5 other "non-hazards" clicked on each clip too 🙁 )

And Stoner, buy this DVD. That's what everyone does 🙂

Stoner - my point is you did not train / practice for the test and are blaming the structure of the test rather than your lack of preparation.

You did claim decades of experience in a car as if this made some point about your safety on a bike.

Best thing I ever did was a Police Motorcycle Course - it was 95% hazard awareness all done with video and then instructed riding 1:1 with a Police biker - learnt so much in such a short time, shame not all police forces run them.

Practised here:
http://www.theory-test.co.uk/asp/hpt_flashdisplay.asp

2x 5 pointers on this one ^

But I doubt that they use the same timing criteria as the Pearson/DVLA one.

Stoner, do you have an iphone?

If so, download "Hazard Perception Test" app, that's all I used and it taught me enough to know that you have to click when the computer wants you to, rather than be 100% on the ball with spotting hazards.

Its funny isn't it - I just did that one again - scored the two five pointers but actually identified about 30 hazards on each clip.

ts funny isn't it - I just did that one again - scored the two five pointers but actually identified about 30 hazards on each clip.

Yep and if you clicked all those in the real test you'd fail for clicking too much. 😕

(30 though? Really? Looking at my review I clicked 5 or 6 "additional" hazards on each clip. Your eyes must have been spinning in your head!)

Yup - but its easy to see what they intend you to see and to click on them when they are obvious. I didn't click on the hazards they don't have down as hazards

Edit - yes 30 or so on each clip. ( roughly) Any pedestrian, any vehicle at a junction, any parked car with someone in it. any unusual object at the roadside, anything creating a blindspot like a van parked at the roadside or a tree.

Stoner - my point is you did not train / practice for the test and are blaming the structure of the test rather than your lack of preparation.

Best thing I ever did was a Police Motorcycle Course - it was 95% hazard awareness all done with video and then instructed riding 1:1 with a Police biker - learnt so much in such a short time, shame not all police forces run them.

You did claim decades of experience in a car as if this made some point about your safety on a bike.

I said "Ive been driving with no crashes or points or incidents for 30 years" in response to some idiot's post that "... then you aren't fit to drive "

Stop projecting.

but actually identified about 30 hazards on each clip.

and as Graham says, youd have thought yourself jolly smart, but have failed the test.

I passed. No prep or practice.

Can't see the hassle myself. Thank goodness Stoner's not on the roads yet. 😀

The problem I had was not with the test, it was with the piss poor DSA guidance DVD. Using all the free online tests which actually reviewed your performance (showing you a banded bar approaching each hazard, when you clicked and how many points it was worth) I was passinge very time, then I tried the DSA DVD and failed consistently, even after I'd cheated and watched the clip to identify the hazard beforehand.

Ignore the DSA DVD, it WON'T help.

Overall though, I found myself a much better driver for having done the hazard perception, it basically 'turned on' my perception whereas before I was missing most stuff until my instructor prompted me.

Only time I've been told to speed by the Police - 'use all the bike's acceleration to over take, then roll back to the speed limit'.

If the test was about hazard perception, you'd be right, but it's not, so you're wrong. The test is about your ability to respond in the manner the computer wants you to and is just a pointless test that does not in any way measure your ability to identify hazards.

Which is why you need to practise and train and understand what the test is about

and as Graham says, youd have thought yourself jolly smart, but have failed the test.

I wouldn't have clicked the 25 subtle ones that they would not count - only the ones they would

I said "Ive been driving with no crashes or points or incidents for 30 years" in response to some idiot's post that "... then you aren't fit to drive "

Wooosh - complacency. 🙄

use [b]all[/b] the bike's acceleration to over take, then roll back to the speed limit

Unless you're on a Hayabusa? 😉

but its easy to see what they intend you to see and to click on them when they are obvious

How do you know in the 1st clip that the open van door, the oncoming car in a narrow street, and the newly parked car are not the "obvious" hazards?

If you're safe, just you just, well, y'know, [b][i]know[/i][/b]!

To be fair, the hazzard perception bit of the driving test has always been a bit iffy.

Don't know about anyone else, but since I passed my test, I've not once had a suicidal clipboard try to end it's life by launching itself against my dashboard!

TJ have you considered motivational speaking ?

I also clicked more and earlier than I should have done but it's a Hazard Perception test not a Potential Hazard Perception test. As long as you understand that, you're fine. All this guff about test structure is missing the point. As thisisnotaspoon said:

The way my instructor explained it was you're not clincking at everything you notice and would keep an eye on (otherwise you'd click for every road user coming into your field of vision), you're clicking at the point in time you'd come off the throttle/change down a gear and be hovering over the brake pedal anticipating that somethings about to happen.

It's a game, but a really simple one!

The other issue (when I sat it at least) is that the video quality is so appalling you sometimes can't tell if something is a potential hazard or just a random splotch.

Wooosh - complacency

Er, thinking you're fit to drive is complacency? So, what, you should only drive if you believe you aren't fit to do so?

TJ, you come across as a bright chap, but you really should consider staying away from motoring threads. You never do yourself any favours.

TandemJeremy - Member
Yup - but its easy to see what they intend you to see and to click on them when they are obvious. I didn't click on the hazards they don't have down as hazards

Edit - yes 30 or so on each clip. ( roughly) Any pedestrian, any vehicle at a junction, any parked car with someone in it. any unusual object at the roadside, anything creating a blindspot like a van parked at the roadside or a tree.

..but it's a Hazard Perception test not a Potential Hazard Perception test

yes, but to get 5 points you [b]do[/b] have to spot the [i]potential[/i] hazard before it turns into an [i]actual[/i] hazard.

Okay, the freshly parked car is only a [i]potential[/i] hazard. But how is an open van door or an oncoming car in a narrow street not an [i]actual[/i] hazard? Would you not come off the throttle for either of those?

Cougar - Member
Wooosh - complacency
Er, thinking you're fit to drive is complacency? So, what, you should only drive if you believe you aren't fit to do so?

TJ, you come across as a bright chap, but you really should consider staying away from motoring threads. You never do yourself any favours.

Indeed. Surely it's also rather complacent to assume that you are the sole arbiter of when the speed limit applies. What is the effect of speeds "that would make your eyes bleed" on one's ability to spot hazards, I wonder? 😉

I cilcked once for every EMERGING hazard on my test and did not get penalized despite clicking a lot of times.

Also, yes I think 40% of driver instructors probably arent safe to be driving on the roads. Driving is something most people can "do" but really cant do correctly. My standards are obviously higher than most.

No cougar - thinking that because you have decades in a car makes you safe to ride a bike is complacent. [i] Knowing[/i] you always have more to learn makes you safer.

for example - I have not ridden a motorcycle for a couple of years - so despite a few hundred thousand miles on one I would be very cautious if I got on one now - I wouldn't think I was a skilled as I was a few years ago.

CFH - non at all- you can still see them you just have less time to do anything about them. 🙂

What a bucket of monkey spunk

My mate Mickey may want a word with you about his moped. 😆

yesiamtom - Member
I cilcked once for every EMERGING hazard on my test and did not get penalized despite clicking a lot of times.

Also, yes I think 40% of driver instructors probably arent safe to be driving on the roads. Driving is something most people can "do" but really cant do correctly. My standards are obviously higher than most.

I passed it first time when doing it for my bike test having been a car driver for 20 years .As an experienced driver it is easy to anticipate problems in sone scenarios and click early .You will fail parts for multiple clicking though as they assume you just click away until the hazzard appears? .Did the OP practice at all prior to taking the test or just assume it was easy ? I had no problem at all doing it and scored highly

thinking that because you have decades in a car makes you safe to ride a bike is complacent. Knowing you always have more to learn makes you safer.

I'd suggest that 20 years in a car without incident would imply a reasonable proficiency in hazard perception. The only person implying that that makes him "safe to ride a bike" appears to be your good self.

No cougar - thinking that because you have decades in a car makes you safe to ride a bike is complacent. Knowing you always have more to learn makes you safer.

enfht - Member

What a bucket of monkey spunk

My mate Mickey may want a word with you about his moped.

I thought he was bothering female giraffes these days?

Man fails hazard perception test

Man claims that decades of driving means he is safe therefore the test is at fault

I say his attitude shows complacency ( because he did not train for / understand the test) therefore he is not as safe as he claims - because of his complacent attitude.

Comedy gold. Re-read the thread

you kind of get used to this with TJ around.

The comedy is stoner claiming the test is at fault because he failed it and there cannot be anything wrong with him and his hazard perception.

Too complacent to train properly for the test. complacency does not make for safe bike riders

Man fails hazard perception test

Man claims that decades of driving means he is safe therefore the test is at fault

I say his attitude shows complacency ( because he did not train for / understand the test) therefore he is not as safe as he claims - because of his complacent attitude.

man spends his time on STW arguing with people
man ends up with no friends
dinosaurs eat man
women inherit the earth

I am not the one who failed a test them blames the structure of the test for his failure!

[img] [/img]

Nanny TJ's word of the day is "Complacency". See how many times you can find it kids!

Too complacent to train properly for the test. complacency does not make for safe bike riders

complacency does not make for safe bike riders

Nor does a blatant, flagrant, arrogant disregard for the speed limit.
😉

How's the view from up there on your high horse, TJ?

TandemJeremy - Member
I am not the one who failed a test them blames the structure of the test for his failure!

*Picks up Sesame Street theme...*

*Sings*

one of these kids is not like the others, one of these kids is not quite the same....

😉

Ok

Stoner is the safest driver in the world. His failure to pass the hazard perception test does not show a lack of preparation for it but as he obviously is a safe driver well prepared for the test then the test must be at fault - its the only answer

the fact that 93% of would be bikers doing the test pass it first time is neither here nor there. there is nothing else Stoner could have done to prepare, the only possible answer is the test is at fault. After all how could stoner possible be at fault at all?

TandemJeremy - Member
Ok

Stoner is the safest driver in the world. His failure to pass the hazard perception test does not show a lack of preparation for it but as he obviously is a safe driver well prepared for the test then the test must be at fault - its the only answer

the fact that 93% of would be bikers doing the test pass it first time is neither here nor there. there is nothing else Stoner could have done to prepare, the only possible answer is the test is at fault. After all how could stoner possible be at fault at all?

Straw man. There were other posts in between yours y'know!

I bought the cd rom when it came out and found that if I clicked as fast as I could then I failed on every hazzard. At the end of the test each of my click points were too quick on the scale. So it was worth buying the cd rom as I learnt that I needed to wait a fraction of a second before clicking to pass the test.

You also get away with another click,so I would click approx 1 second (if that) after the first click.

If were were all the same the world would be dull.

TJ - marching to the beat of a different drummer ( the one in my head that talks to me)

Good job Stoner is packing it in next year then! Oh,wrong Stoner.

If were were all the same the world would be dull.

TJ - marching to the beat of a different drummer ( the one in my head that talks to me)

Scuzz, missed your edit in your first post:
"Two clicks per hazard won't penalise you, neither will four for the developing hazard"

Im going to go for that technique next time. Identify hazard, click, give it a second for the computer to join in, click again, then click 4 times as it's developing.