Traffic & Road Safety Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand Transport Engineering Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Nashville MTA: Safety Bob Baulsir Metropolitan Transit Authority General Manager of Administration Nashville, TN.
Advertisements

Driving skill is measurably impaired by text-messaging. Writing text messages creates a significantly greater impairment than reading text messages, but.
Effects of Different Driving Distractions on High School Students Juliana Lamond.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35 (2005) 939–953 Situation awareness and workload in driving while using adaptive cruise control and a.
Sept-091© 2009 National Safety Council Cell Phones & Distracted Driving The Growing Epidemic of Cell Phone Use While Driving.
Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a breaking response. [1] IE484 Lab Section 1 Jennifer Powell.
The Effects of Text Messaging On the Driving Performance of Young Novice Drivers MUARC: Kristie Young, Simon Hosking & Michael Regan NRMA Motoring & Services:
Texting While Driving -- Another Kind of Impairment.
Hypothesis 1: Narrow roadways and roadways with higher speed limits will increase risk of vehicle/bicycle crash Hypothesis 2: Bicycle lanes and signage.
In 2008, nearly 6,000 people died and more than 500,000 were injured in motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) resulting from distracted driving involving the use.
Cell Phone Use While Driving Why it is a crash risk.
The London Congestion Charge. Facts Traffic speed in central London had fallen more that 20% since the 1960s (14.2 mph to 10mph) I n 1998 drivers in inner.
A Driving Distraction – Mobile Phones. Using cell phones whilst driving: Is mentally demanding Increases reaction time to hazards Reduces driving field.
1 Experimental Designs HOW DO HOW DO WE FIND WE FIND THE ANSWERS ? THE ANSWERS ?
lesson 8.2 DISTRACTIONS INSIDE THE VEHICLE
The Driver and Pedestrian Distraction Challenge Diane Wigle Safety Countermeasures Division National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) April.
Managing Distractions
Effects of practice, age, and task demands, on interference from a phone task while driving Author: David Shinar, Noam Tractinsky, Richard Compton Accident.
Safety Stand Down Toolbox Talk – Cellphone Use While Driving
LOGO A review of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in auto safety Professor: Liu Student: Ruby.
Effects on driving behavior of congestion information and of scale of in-vehicle navigation systems Author: Shiaw-Tsyr Uang, Sheue-Ling Hwang Transportation.
LOGO Imperfect in- vehicle collision avoidance warning systems can aid distracted drivers Masha Maltz, David Shinar Transportation Research Part F 10 (2007)
The Logic for the Distracted Driver David Strayer.
Professor: Liu Student: Ruby
Company Logo Add Your Company Slogan On the highway measures of driver glance behavior with an example automobile navigation system Dean P. Chiang*, Aaron.
Presented By The Pulsar Team Pulsar Advertising and The Marketing Source December 2003 Virginia Department of Transportation Virginia State Police Virginia.
The effect of in-vehicle warning systems on speed compliance in work zones 報告者:楊子群 James Whitmire II a, ⇑, Justin F. Morgan, Tal Oron-Gilad c, P.A. Hancock.
DWI (Driving While Impulsive): Investigating Relationships Between Impulsivity and Dangerous Driving in a Simulated Environment Jesse Thomas, Justin Bowling,
1 Challenge the future Longitudinal Driving Behavior in case of Emergency situations: An Empirically Underpinned Theoretical Framework Dr. R.(Raymond)
Aim: How can we assign experimental units to treatments in a way that is fair to all of the treatments?
John Costello 12 th Grade Pittsburgh Central Catholic HS.
It Can Wait! Story. Let’s kick this off with some questions:  I (or a friend I ride with) sometimes text while driving  I (or a friend I ride with)
T TNO Human Factors Driving behaviour effects of the Chauffeur Assistant Jeroen Hogema.
Accident Analysis and Prevention 31 (1999) 617–623 Dave Lamble *, Tatu Kauranen, Matti Laakso, Heikki Summala Cognitive load and detection thresholds in.
Aim: How do we randomize?. How to randomize The idea of randomization is to assign subjects to treatments by drawing names from a hat. In practice, experimenters.
Shun-Hui Chang, Chih-Yung Lin, Chun-Chia Hsu, Chin-Ping Fung, Jiun-Ren Hwang 報告者:楊子群 The effect of a collision warning system on the driving performance.
Comparison of manual vs. speech-based interaction with in-vehicle information systems Driving Behavior Simulation Lab Jannette Maciej ∗, Mark Vollrath.
Driving Distractions For Youthful Drivers. Distractions  Cell phones  Passengers  Driving Drowsy.
Company Logo Professor: Liu student: Ruby The role of working memory, field dependence, visual search, and reaction time in the left turn performance of.
Kun-chan Lan and Chien-Ming Chou National Cheng Kung University
Grab BagData General Information Laws $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100.
 Introduction  What is Driverless Car ?  History  Component  Action  Technology  Advantages  Disadvantages  Conclusion  Reference.
It Can Wait! Story. Let’s kick this off with some questions:  I (or a friend I ride with) sometimes text while driving  I (or a friend I ride with)
Risk Attitude Reversals in Drivers’ Route Choice When Range of Travel Time Information Is Provided Megan Englert Tim Leser.
姓名 : 許浩維 學號 :M 日期 : Road Accident: Driver Behaviour, Learning and Driving Task 1.
B1.7a Using formulas to calculate displacement Chapter B1.
Dynamic Turn Indicator: Research/Investigation Findings Informal document GRE (70th GRE session (21-23 October 2013, agenda item 5(f))
Texting While Driving -- ANOTHER Kind of Impairment.
Loudness interacts with semantics in auditory warnings to impact rear-end collisions Carryl L. Baldwin, Jennifer F. May Transportation Research Part F.
June 2016 Using Naturalistic Driving Data to Examine Teen Driver Behaviors Present in Motor Vehicle Crashes,
Distracted Driving Provided by:
Slide show made and presented by: Gina Gillespie
Car Safety NEED PRACTICE QUESTIONS.
Traffic Rules In America
Motorcycle Safety Facts (Illinois Data)
Effects of Oncoming Vehicle Size on Overtaking Judgments
DID YOU KNOW NO TEXT MESSAGE IS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO READ WHILE DRIVING. When driving 55 miles per hour, it takes only 5 seconds for your vehicle to travel.
Safety Bob Baulsir Nashville MTA: Metropolitan Transit Authority
Prevalence of Distracted Driving
Teenage Driving Issues
Texting While Driving -- Another Kind of Impairment
ADMINISTRATIVE AND TRAFFIC LAWS
Effects of Oncoming Vehicle Size on Overtaking Judgments
SAFE DRIVING.
Traffic Safety.
Using Naturalistic Driving Data to Assess the Prevalence of Environmental Factors and Driver Behaviors in Teen Driver Crashes March 2015.
Investigation Of Time And Speed Perception Using A Driving Simulator
Cell Phones & Distracted Driving
lesson 8.2 DISTRACTIONS INSIDE THE VEHICLE
Click anywhere to get started…
Presentation transcript:

Traffic & Road Safety Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand Transport Engineering Research New Zealand Ltd., PO Box 97846, South Auckland Mail Centre, New Zealand Driving while conversing Cell phones that distract and passengers who react 報告者:楊子群 Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Participants Sample : 119 participant. Remove 7 participant.  Mechanical failures(5)  Eyestrain or dizziness(2) Of the 64 participants.(the other 48 served as conversors for the drivers)  87% indicated they owned a cell phone.  Converse as they drove :78.6% (51.8% used it weekly or more often)  Cell phone to send and receive text messages while they drove:66.1% (51.8% used it weekly or more often) Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Apparatus  Complete automobile.(BMW 314i)  Three angled projection surface.  Four speaker located inside the car.  A digital video camera. Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Simulation scenario 5 Hazard 1 overtaking lane Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Experiment design Between subjects. Independent Variable 4 Group (16 Participants, 50% male) Randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups. Dependent Variable Mean seed Mean deceleration RT(sec) Mean deceleration TTC(sec) Mean utterance length Mean number of pauses Mean % SA utterances Mean % hazards recalled Driving Difficulty Total number of crashes Percent of drivers 1.Control 2.Passenger 3.Cell phone 4.Remote passenger Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Procedure [Step1] Introduction [Step2] Consent agreement [Step3] Brief questionnaire about background and cell phone use. [Step4] Short practice. [Step5] Participants in Groups 2 to 4 then self-selected which the pair. Can any topics,conversation card be used of no topics. [Step6] experiment(24min) [Step7] asked to rate the difficulty of driving the simulated on a 7-point scale 1=easy 7=extremely Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Vehicle speeds(1/3) Significant difference Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Vehicle speeds(2/3) Unuivariate analyses at each hazard site showed significant group differences: Hazard 1(busy intersection) Hazard 3(one-lane bridge) Hazard 4(road works) Hazard 5(landslip) Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Vehicle speeds(3/3) Post hoc pair-wise Significantly lower than Marginally lower than Hazard1 Passenger < cell phone remote passenger Control < cell phone (p<0.06) remote passenger (p<0.07). Hazard3 Hazard4 Control < cell phone Passenger < cell phone (p<0.055) Hazard2 No significant Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Reaction time and time-to-collision(1/3) Mean deceleration RT Mean deceleration TTC Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Reaction time and time-to-collision(2/3) One-way multivariate analysis id variance for four group. Four remaining hazard sites(Hazards2-5) indicated a significant effect. (p<0.01) Univariate analyses of the two deceleration measures significant differences: Hazards3 Hazards4 Hazards5 Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Reaction time and time-to- collision(3/3) Significantly Good=>long Good=>short No Significantly Significantly A B B A B B A>B A B B A B B A A B B A A B B Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Discourse measures 愛 Post hoc comparisons Significantly A > B > C A B C A B C A BA B A B A>B Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Difficulty ratings, hazard recall, and crashes No Significantly Post hoc comparisons Significantly Post hoc comparisons Significantly A B Most memorable hazard for the participants was the landslip. Perhaps this was the last to appear. A>B A B Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Difficulty ratings, hazard recall, and crashes occurring at Hazard 3(one-lane bridge) – 61.9% Hazard 2(parked car entering traffic)-33.3% Chi-square analysis. Significant difference between the four groups. A B A>B Driving Behavior Simulation Lab

Experiment 1 Results -Overtaking No significant differences in speeds measured at four point. (control 、 passenger 、 cell phone 、 Remote passenger) Optimal number that could be safely overtaken was two vehicles. 68.8% 50% Chi-square analysis. Marginally Significant difference Driving Behavior Simulation Lab