Car following decisions under three visibility conditions and two speeds tested with a driving simulator
- PMID: 16962059
- DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2006.06.009
Car following decisions under three visibility conditions and two speeds tested with a driving simulator
Abstract
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration web site reports that rear-end collisions in the United States exceed 1.5 million per year, or approximately 23% of all vehicle crashes. Car following behavior and the decision-making habits of drivers seem fundamental to understanding how to avoid these rear-end crashes. The present research aimed to reveal factors that govern car following under conditions of reduced visibility. It employed a KQ-Vection high-fidelity driving simulator to measure the behavior of automobile drivers following a lead vehicle at 13.4 m/s (30 MPH) or 22.4 m/s (50 MPH) under three visibility conditions--clear or one of two densities of simulated fog. At the higher speed, fog conditions separated participants into a group that stayed within visible range of the lead car, even though the headway time violated the NHTSA recommendations for the speed involved, and another group that lagged beyond the visible range. Data were compared to the model of Van Winsum for car following (The human element in car following models. Transportation Research Part F 2, 1999). Contrast and image size measurements allowed comparison to a standard contrast sensitivity function and allowed estimation of the JND term in the Van Winsum model.
Similar articles
-
Speed choice and driving performance in simulated foggy conditions.Accid Anal Prev. 2011 May;43(3):698-705. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.014. Epub 2010 Dec 15. Accid Anal Prev. 2011. PMID: 21376857
-
The effects of visibility conditions, traffic density, and navigational challenge on speed compensation and driving performance in older adults.Accid Anal Prev. 2010 Nov;42(6):1661-71. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.04.005. Epub 2010 May 15. Accid Anal Prev. 2010. PMID: 20728615
-
Validating a driving simulator using surrogate safety measures.Accid Anal Prev. 2008 Jan;40(1):274-88. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2007.06.007. Epub 2007 Jul 20. Accid Anal Prev. 2008. PMID: 18215559
-
Driver headway: how close is too close on a motorway?Ergonomics. 2007 Aug;50(8):1183-95. doi: 10.1080/00140130701318665. Ergonomics. 2007. PMID: 17558664 Review.
-
Determining the drivers' acceptance of EFTCD in highway work zones.Accid Anal Prev. 2011 May;43(3):762-8. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.023. Epub 2010 Dec 15. Accid Anal Prev. 2011. PMID: 21376864 Review.
Cited by
-
Examining the effect of adverse weather on road transportation using weather and traffic sensors.PLoS One. 2018 Oct 16;13(10):e0205409. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205409. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30325948 Free PMC article.
-
Changes in Drivers' Visual Performance during the Collision Avoidance Process as a Function of Different Field of Views at Intersections.PLoS One. 2016 Oct 7;11(10):e0164101. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164101. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27716824 Free PMC article.
-
Measuring listening effort: driving simulator versus simple dual-task paradigm.Ear Hear. 2014 Nov-Dec;35(6):623-32. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000079. Ear Hear. 2014. PMID: 25083599 Free PMC article.
-
Impacts of Fog Characteristics, Forward Illumination, and Warning Beacon Intensity Distribution on Roadway Hazard Visibility.ScientificWorldJournal. 2016;2016:4687816. doi: 10.1155/2016/4687816. Epub 2016 May 22. ScientificWorldJournal. 2016. PMID: 27314058 Free PMC article.
-
Age-related declines in car following performance under simulated fog conditions.Accid Anal Prev. 2010 May;42(3):818-26. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.04.023. Accid Anal Prev. 2010. PMID: 20380908 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical