بررسى ويژگىهاى روانسنجى، ساختار عاملى و روايى مقياس ادراك خطر رانندگى بر اساس نظريه انگيزه محافظت و عوامل كشنده در رانندگان جوان به عنوان ميانجى در مدل رفتار پرخطر رانندگى در بررسى تحليل مسير.

Background and Objective: The possible effects on risky driving of young drivers such as age and gender cannot be changed, however, to know the interventions to reduce risky driving behaviors, young drivers, examining psychological variables can be helpful. Coping appraisal and threat appraisal variables from protection motivation theory can help to understand young drivers› decision-making for risky driving behavior. Materials and Methods: This research consists of two parts. The first part was to investigate the psychometric properties of risk perception scale in young drivers based on the theory of protection motivation. For instrument validity, content validity with the opinion of 11 experts, face validity, construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis) and convergent validity were used, and its reliability was checked by internal consistency method (Cronbach’s alpha). And the second part was conducted in the form of route analysis to investigate the decision-making model of young drivers to carry out risky driving behavior. The present sample consisted of 350 young drivers of Ahvaz city, who were selected by available and voluntary sampling method. Subjects responded to driving risk perception questionnaires based on protection motivation for 5 fatal factors, driving risk perception and risky driving behavior. The current questionnaire contains 30 items, which include two subscales: confrontational assessment and threat assessment. Results: After going through the validity and reliability stages of the questionnaire, from the initial 30 questions, 3 questions were removed in the form and content validity check stages, and finally 27 questions remained. Examining the results of construct validity using confirmatory factor analysis showed (RMSEA=0.07) and χ2/df=2.76 (p<0.001). The reliability of the instrument was obtained using internal consistency (0.92-0.95). In the second part of the research, using path analysis, the relationship between coping evaluation variables and threat evaluation with risky driving behavior of young drivers was modeled with the mediation of perceived risk in two models of inconsistent and protective decision making. Both maladaptive and protective models showed a good fit with the data (RMSEA=0.04 and RMSEA=0.06). The threat assessment model was able to explain about 50% of the variance of perceived risk and the general model about 30% of the variance of risky driving behavior. In addition, in this model, the path between perceived severity and perceived risk had the highest relationship value (β=0.56). In the second model, i.e. protective path, coping evaluation explained 14% of the variance of perceived risk and the overall model explained 34% of the variance of risky driving behaviors. Also, in the protective pathway model, the relationship between response costs and perceived risk was the highest (β=-0.55). An interesting result in this study was the mediation of perceived risk between reward and response costs with risky driving behavior. Conclusion: the scale of risk perception in young drivers based on the theory of protection motivation as a reliable and valid tool can be used together with other psychological investigations and high risk behaviors of drivers and our insight about the influencing factors on how young drivers make decisions to design interventions in to improve their driving safety. Also, examining the relationships between variables in the form of path analysis helps us understand the factors that encourage young drivers to engage in risky driving behaviors (threat-inconsistent path) and why young novice drivers may decide not to engage in risky driving (protective path) it helps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]