Michael A Knodler Jr

The effects of focused attention training on the duration of novice drivers' glances inside the vehicle.

Several studies have documented that the failure of drivers to attend to the forward roadway for a period lasting longer than 2–3 s is a major cause of highway crashes. Moreover, several studies have demonstrated that novice drivers are more likely to glance away from the roadway than the experienced drivers for extended periods when attempting to do a task inside the vehicle. The present study examines the efficacy of a PC-based training programme (FOrward Concentration and Attention Learning, FOCAL) designed to teach novice drivers not to glance away forthese extended periods of time. A FOCAL-trained group was compared with a placebo-trained group in an on-road test, and the FOCAL-trained group made significantly fewer glances away from the roadway that were more than 2 s than the placebo-trained group. Other measures indicated an advantage for the FOCAL-trained group as well. Statement of relevance: Distracted driving is increasingly a problem, as cell phones, navigation systems, and other in-vehicle devices are introduced into the cabin of the automobile. A training programme is described that has beentested on the open road and can reduce the behaviours that lead to crashes caused by the distracted driving.

Empirical Evaluation of Hazard Anticipation Behaviors in the Field and on Driving Simulator Using Eye Tracker

Eye behaviors have been used with driving simulators to evaluate the effectiveness of novice and older driver training programs. Driving simulators are often favored when drivers must be placed in risky situations. Because there was no study of whether eye behaviors observed on a driving simulator in risky scenarios were also observed in the field, the authors had both trained and untrained novice drivers maneuver a controlled set of 10 scenarios on a driving simulator. The scenarios were similar to a set of scenarios that a different, matched set of trained and untrained drivers had navigated in the field. Drivers in this simulator study were trained with the same PC program used by drivers in the field study. Five of the scenarios that the trained drivers saw on the simulator and in the field were similar to those seen in training on a PC (near transfer); the other five were similar in concept to those in training but different in surface features (far transfer). A fixation on the region of a scenario that had information relevant to identifying a risk was scored as recognizing the risk. On the simulator, trained drivers recognized the risk 41.7% more often than untrained drivers in the near-transfer scenarios and 32.6% more often in the far-transfer scenarios. In the field, trained drivers recognized the risk 38.8% more often in the near-transfer and 20.1% more often in the far-transfer scenarios. Both effects were highly significant, and the difference between them was not close to significant. Thus results from tests on a simulator have a close correspondence with those in the field.

Driving Without a Clue: Evaluation of Driver Simulator Performance During Hands-Free Cell Phone Operation in a Work Zone

Crashes continue to be a problem in work zones. Analyses have indicated that rear-end and sideswipe crashes are the most frequent. Investigators have hypothesized that distractions are often the cause of both types of crashes. These distractions will only increase as more drivers attend to other tasks, such as cell phone conversations. To address this issue, virtual worlds that reflect various work zone geometries were developed for an advanced driving simulator. The worlds contained 32 virtual work zones; 38 drivers navigated through these worlds. On one portion of a trip, drivers were asked to respond to a series of short sentences that mimicked a hands-free cell phone conversation. A lead vehicle ahead of the participant driver braked occasionally in the work zone activity area. Braking scenarios involved either the lead vehicle stopping after an advanced clue that traffic ahead would stop or the lead vehicle stopping for no apparent reason, most often after passing a roadside obstacle (potential distraction). Drivers not engaged in a cell phone task were able to reduce their speed earlier in response to a slowing lead vehicle than were drivers engaged in the cell phone task. The drivers not engaged in a cell phone task were also less likely to brake hard and more likely to make a mirror glance when changing lanes. Finally, they scanned almost twice as far to the left and right. Results strongly suggest that cell phone use reduces driver awareness and may increase the likelihood of a crash in work zone activity areas.

Evaluation of Different Speech and Touch Interfaces to In-Vehicle Music Retrieval Systems

In-vehicle music retrieval systems are becoming more and more popular. Previous studies have shown that they pose a real hazard to drivers when the interface is a tactile one which requires multiple entries and a combination of manual control and visual feedback. Voice interfaces exist as an alternative. Such interfaces can require either multiple or single conversational turns. In this study, each of 17 participants between the ages of 18 and 30 years old was asked to use three different music retrieval systems (one with a multiple entry touch interface, the iPod, one with a multiple turn voice interface, interface B, and one with a single turn voice interface, interface C) while driving through a virtual world. Measures of secondary task performance, eye behavior, vehicle control, and workload were recorded. When compared with the touch interface, the voice interfaces reduced the total time drivers spent with their eyes off the forward roadway, especially in prolonged glances, as well as both the total number of glances away from the forward roadway and the perceived workload. Furthermore, when compared with driving without a secondary task, both voice interfaces did not significantly impact hazard anticipation, the frequency of long glances away from the forward roadway, or vehicle control. The multiple turn voice interface (B) significantly increased both the time it took drivers to complete the task and the workload. The implications for interface design and safety are discussed.

Evaluation of Driver Behavior in Type II Dilemma Zones at High-Speed Signalized Intersections

Unlike traditional Type I dilemma zones, where inappropriate signal timings or detector placements restrict the ability of motorists to safely proceed through the intersection or safely stop in advance, Type II dilemma zones are attributed to driver difficulties in decision making. Type II issues become more prevalent at high-speed intersections, which have greater variability in operating speeds and greater potential for serious crashes. Although several features related to Type II dilemma zones are known, inconsistency remains in the application of the boundary definitions. This research characterizes driver behavior and comprehension related to Type II dilemma zones for the purpose of defining these boundary conditions. Empirical observations of 10 high-speed signalized intersection approaches were conducted, and the analyses of the observed driver behavior resulted in an expanded understanding of how and where drivers make their decision to stop or proceed when approaching a signal. Specifically, distributions of vehicle location and driver behavior were examined using multiple boundary definitions, and in several instances the distributions of driver behaviors varied depending on the dilemma-zone definition employed.

Backing collisions: a study of drivers' eye and backing behaviour using combined rear-view camera and sensor systems

Context Backing crash injures can be severe; approximately 200 of the 2,500 reported injuries of this type per year to children under the age of 15 years result in death. Technology for assisting drivers when backing has limited success in preventing backing crashes. Objectives Two questions are addressed: Why is the reduction in backing crashes moderate when rear-view cameras are deployed? Could rear-view cameras augment sensor systems? Design 46 drivers (36 experimental, 10 control) completed 16 parking trials over 2  days (eight trials per day). Experimental participants were provided with a sensor camera system, controls were not. Three crash scenarios were introduced. Setting Parking facility at UMass Amherst, USA. Subjects 46 drivers (33 men, 13 women) average age 29 years, who were Massachusetts residents licensed within the USA for an average of 9.3  years. Interventions Vehicles equipped with a rear-view camera and sensor system-based parking aid. Main Outcome Measures Subjects eye fixations while driving and researchers observation of collision with objects during backing. Results Only 20% of drivers looked at the rear-view camera before backing, and 88% of those did not crash. Of those who did not look at the rear-view camera before backing, 46% looked after the sensor warned the driver. Conclusions This study indicates that drivers not only attend to an audible warning, but will look at a rear-view camera if available. Evidence suggests that when used appropriately, rear-view cameras can mitigate the occurrence of backing crashes, particularly when paired with an appropriate sensor system.

Do Advance Yield Markings Increase Safe Driver Behaviors at Unsignalized, Marked Midblock Crosswalks? Driving Simulator Study

In the United States, 78% of pedestrian crashes occur at noninter-section crossings. As a result, unsignalized, marked midblock crosswalks are prime targets for remediation. Many of these crashes occur under sight-limited conditions in which the view of critical information by the driver or pedestrian is obstructed by a vehicle stopped in an adjacent travel or parking lane on the near side of the crosswalk. Study of such a situation on the open road is much too risky, but study of the situation in a driving simulator is not. This paper describes the development of scenarios with sight limitations to compare potential vehicle–pedestrian conflicts on a driving simulator under conditions with two different types of pavement markings. Under the first condition, advance yield markings and symbol signs (prompts) that indicated “yield here to pedestrians” were used to warn drivers of pedestrians at marked, midblock crosswalks. Under the second condition, standard crosswalk treatments and prompts were used to warn drivers of these hazards. Actual crashes as well as the drivers’ point of gaze were measured to determine if the drivers approaching a marked midblock crosswalk looked for pedestrians in the crosswalk more frequently and sooner in high-risk scenarios when advance yield markings and prompts were present than when standard markings and prompts were used. Fewer crashes were found to occur with advance yield markings. Drivers were also found to look for pedestrians much more frequently and much sooner with advance yield markings. The advantages and limitations of the use of driving simulation to study problems such as these are discussed.

Potential application of flashing yellow arrow permissive indication in separated left-turn lanes

The consideration being given to the adoption of the flashing yellow arrow (FYA) permissive indication has led to a number of additional studies evaluating potential scenarios in which FYA may be effectively used. One potential scenario is in intersections with wide medians where the left-turn lane and the corresponding signals are separated from the adjacent through and right-turn lanes. Left-turn maneuvers at locations with wide medians typically operate with protected-only left-turn phasing and separate signal displays, as drivers cannot see the adjacent through movement signals; however, some transportation professionals have implemented a flashing red arrow (FRA) that requires drivers to first stop before accepting a gap in the opposing traffic stream. This research quantified driver comprehension of the FYA permissive indications compared with that of the FRA indication for use at locations with wide medians. The research used both driving simulator and static experiments with 264 drivers responding...

Spatial and temporal analysis of driver gap acceptance behavior at modern roundabouts

Despite an increasing acceptance of modern roundabouts in the United States, unfamiliarity with this type of intersection is still widespread. This unfamiliarity results in drivers making unpredictable decisions about gap acceptance, thus increasing the difficulty of design decisions. The relationship between the spatial and temporal critical gaps accepted by drivers in modern roundabouts is explored with gap acceptance data from more than 1,500 vehicle interactions at the roundabout on the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, campus. The critical gap was determined to be 42 ft spatially and 2.2 s temporally, which correlated directly with the average speed of the circulating flow. A longer critical gap time was observed for heavy vehicles in the traffic stream. Even though the unidirectional flow of the circulating traffic creates a potentially unpredictable environment for the driver, careful and precise analysis to obtain an accurate and reliable value of the critical gap will allow for improved roundabout design.

Large-Scale Observational Study of Drivers’ Cell Phone Use

This report details the 2012 observational study used to determine drivers’ cell phone use in Massachusetts; the study was completed as a component of the annual seat belt observation study by the University of Massachusetts Traffic Safety Research Program. This study identified the magnitude of risky driving behavior throughout Massachusetts. The location, the time of day, and the direction of travel for each observation were determined by random selection with consideration given to the regions fatality rate and length of roadway. Throughout the state, the drivers’ cell phone use at any given daylight hour was determined; the timing allowed for comparisons between different populations. The apparent cell phone use of 17,677 drivers was observed at 145 locations, with a finding of an average cell phone use of 7.0%, a handheld use of 5.6%, and a text messaging use of 1.4%. Females were observed having handheld conversations at a greater rate than males, but there was little difference in text messaging use. Teens were observed text messaging more often than adults and elders, while the handheld conversation rate was similar for teens and adults. Drivers observed wearing seat belts had a lower cell phone use than those who were not wearing seat belts, for text messaging and handheld conversations. Notable variations in cell phone use were identified across various driver demographics, road types, and times of observation and furthered the understanding of drivers’ cell phone use and providing an opportunity for targeted countermeasures.