Method for the Use of Naturalistic Driving Study Data to Analyze Rear-End Crash Sequences

Many factors are associated with crash risk, but their contribution to the progression of a crash is often unclear. Research on and understanding of the crash sequence are needed. One of the advantages of studying crash sequence is to identify the causative chain of crashes and, subsequently, the identification of effective countermeasures that may feasibly mitigate crash risk. An analogy to epidemiological studies is particularly useful: although researchers confirm that many factors are associated with an increase in the probability of myocardial infarction, there is still a need to research the disease process, the physiological process that promotes disease growth, and the possible interventions to treat or even prevent the disease. This study used data from the Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety System program. Two freeway rear-end events, including one crash and one near crash, with similar crash sequences were studied. The crash sequences of the two events were as follows: (a) the drivers maintained a temporal headway of less than 1 s at the beginning; (b) the traffic flow conditions were likely to cause misjudgments by the drivers and result in glances in inappropriate directions; (c) when the drivers were distracted, the leading vehicle decelerated; (d) the drivers did not decelerate accordingly and had their feet on the accelerator pedal; and (e) one event resulted in a crash and the other in a near crash. This study highlighted an approach for comparing and dissecting the differences in the crash sequence that led to the different outcomes.

[1]  Paul P Jovanis,et al.  Defining and screening crash surrogate events using naturalistic driving data. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[2]  Richard J Hanowski,et al.  A descriptive analysis of light vehicle-heavy vehicle interactions using in situ driving data. , 2007, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[3]  Nicholas J Garber,et al.  FACTORS AFFECTING SPEED VARIANCE AND ITS INFLUENCE ON ACCIDENTS , 1989 .

[4]  D. Shinar Traffic Safety and Human Behavior , 2007 .

[5]  P Fancher,et al.  Intelligent Cruise Control Field Operational Test , 1997 .

[6]  A L CHAPMAN An epidemiological approach to traffic safety. , 1954, Public health reports.

[7]  Paul P Jovanis,et al.  Crashes and crash-surrogate events: exploratory modeling with naturalistic driving data. , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[8]  P. Albert,et al.  Do elevated gravitational-force events while driving predict crashes and near crashes? , 2012, American journal of epidemiology.

[9]  Chris Lee,et al.  Analysis of Crash Precursors on Instrumented Freeways , 2002 .

[10]  Jean-Louis Martin,et al.  Relationship between crash rate and hourly traffic flow on interurban motorways. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[11]  David Shinar,et al.  Minimum and Comfortable Driving Headways: Reality versus Perception , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[12]  Dot Hs,et al.  Automotive Collision Avoidance System Field Operational Test , 2002 .

[13]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Near Crashes as Crash Surrogate for Naturalistic Driving Studies , 2010 .

[14]  Ronald R. Knipling,et al.  Assessment of IVHS countermeasures for collision avoidance : rear-end crashes , 1993 .

[15]  Paul P Jovanis,et al.  Screening Naturalistic Driving Study Data for Safety-Critical Events , 2013 .

[16]  W. Haddon A logical framework for categorizing highway safety phenomena and activity. , 1972, The Journal of trauma.

[17]  Eric Rodgman,et al.  Driver's exposure to distractions in their natural driving environment. , 2005, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[18]  Moshe Livneh,et al.  Relationships between road accidents and hourly traffic flow—I: Analyses and interpretation , 1982 .

[19]  James R. Sayer,et al.  Road Departure Crash Warning System Field Operational Test: Methodology and Results. Volume 1: Technical Report , 2006 .

[20]  Paul P Jovanis,et al.  Defining, Screening, and Validating Crash Surrogate Events Using Naturalistic Driving Data , 2011 .

[21]  Edward A. Brill A Car-Following Model Relating Reaction Times and Temporal Headways to Accident Frequency , 1972 .

[22]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  Human error taxonomies applied to driving: A generic driver error taxonomy and its implications for intelligent transport systems , 2009 .

[23]  W. Haddon The changing approach to the epidemiology, prevention, and amelioration of trauma: the transition to approaches etiologically rather than descriptively based. , 1968, American journal of public health and the nation's health.

[24]  Daniel V. McGehee,et al.  Human Performance Models and Rear-End Collision Avoidance Algorithms , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[25]  Nicholas J Garber,et al.  Incorporating Crash Risk in Selecting Congestion-Mitigation Strategies: Hampton Roads Area (Virginia) Case Study , 2001 .

[26]  Gary A Davis,et al.  Collective responsibility for freeway rear-ending accidents? An application of probabilistic casual models. , 2006, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[27]  Kun-Feng Wu,et al.  A Systemic Framework for Studying Traffic Crash Sequence Using Naturalistic Driving Study Data , 2014 .

[28]  Dot Hs,et al.  The 100 Car Naturalistic Driving Study , 2002 .

[29]  A H Rhodes,et al.  Speed, speed limits and road traffic accidents under free flow conditions. , 1999, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[30]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Driver distraction in long-haul truck drivers , 2005 .

[31]  Cheol Oh,et al.  Estimation of rear-end crash potential using vehicle trajectory data. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[32]  Paul P Jovanis,et al.  Using naturalistic driving data to explore the association between traffic safety-related events and crash risk at driver level. , 2014, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[33]  Murray Blumenthal,et al.  Dimensions of the traffic safety problem , 1967 .

[34]  Rebecca L Olson,et al.  The sleep of commercial vehicle drivers under the 2003 hours-of-service regulations. , 2007, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[35]  Leonard Evans The Dramatic Failure of U.S. Traffic Safety Policy: Engineering Is Important, Public Policy Is Crucial , 2006 .

[36]  N. Garber,et al.  Effect of Speed, Flow, and Geometric Characteristics on Crash Frequency for Two-Lane Highways , 2000 .

[37]  John D. Lee,et al.  How Dangerous Is Looking Away From the Road? Algorithms Predict Crash Risk From Glance Patterns in Naturalistic Driving , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[38]  Dot Hs,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II - Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment , 2006 .

[39]  Wilfred W Recker,et al.  Freeway safety as a function of traffic flow. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[40]  J R Treat,et al.  TRI-LEVEL STUDY OF THE CAUSES OF TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS. VOLUME II: SPECIAL ANALYSES , 1977 .

[41]  Mohamed Abdel-Aty,et al.  Comprehensive Analysis of the Relationship between Real-Time Traffic Surveillance Data and Rear-End Crashes on Freeways , 2006 .

[42]  W van Winsum,et al.  Time Headway in Car following and Operational Performance during Unexpected Braking , 1997, Perceptual and motor skills.

[43]  W. Haddon Energy damage and the ten countermeasure strategies. , 1973, Human factors.

[44]  Leonard Evans,et al.  Risky driving related to driver and vehicle characteristics , 1983 .

[45]  James R. Sayer,et al.  THE EFFECT OF LEAD-VEHICLE SIZE ON DRIVER FOLLOWING BEHAVIOR , 2000 .