Rapid holistic perception and evasion of road hazards.

How quickly can a driver perceive a critical hazard on or near the road? Evidence from vision research suggests that static scene perception is fast and holistic, but does this apply in dynamic road environments? Understanding how quickly drivers can perceive hazards in moving scenes is essential because it improves driver safety now, and will enable autonomous vehicles to work safely with drivers in the future. This paper describes a new, publicly available set of videos, the Road Hazard Stimuli, and a study assessing how quickly participants in the laboratory can detect and correctly respond to briefly presented hazards in them. We performed this laboratory experiment with a group of younger (20-25 years) and older (55-69 years) drivers, and found that while both groups only required brief views of the scene, older drivers required significantly longer to both detect (220 ms, younger; 403 ms, older) and correctly respond to hazards (388 ms younger; 605 ms older). Our results indicate that participants can perceive the scene and detect hazards holistically, without serially searching the scene, and can understand the scene and hazard sufficiently well to respond adequately with only slightly longer viewing durations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

[1]  THE WHEN , 2018, The Wealth Dragon Way.

[2]  Bolei Zhou,et al.  Moments in Time Dataset: One Million Videos for Event Understanding , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[3]  A. Chauvin,et al.  Of guns and snakes: testing a modern threat superiority effect* , 2018, Cognition & emotion.

[4]  R. Rosenholtz,et al.  More than the Useful Field: Considering peripheral vision in driving. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[5]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Five factors that guide attention in visual search , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[6]  Jeremy M Wolfe,et al.  A half-second glimpse often lets radiologists identify breast cancer cases even when viewing the mammogram of the opposite breast , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Julie M. Harris,et al.  Eye movements and hazard perception in active and passive driving , 2015, Visual cognition.

[8]  Donald L. Fisher,et al.  Evaluation of the Minimum Forward Roadway Glance Duration , 2015 .

[9]  David Crundall,et al.  Are experienced drivers more likely than novice drivers to benefit from driving simulations with a wide field of view , 2014 .

[10]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  “Take over!” How long does it take to get the driver back into the loop? , 2013 .

[11]  Jean Underwood,et al.  Driving Experience and Situation Awareness in Hazard Detection , 2013 .

[12]  Karla K. Evans,et al.  The gist of the abnormal: Above-chance medical decision making in the blink of an eye , 2013, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[13]  David Crundall,et al.  Some hazards are more attractive than others: drivers of varying experience respond differently to different types of hazard. , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[14]  C. Owsley.  Aging and vision , 2011, Vision Research.

[15]  Cynthia Owsley,et al.  Vision and driving , 2010, Vision Research.

[16]  Michelle R. Greene,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article The Briefest of Glances The Time Course of Natural Scene Understanding , 2022 .

[17]  Michelle R. Greene,et al.  Recognition of natural scenes from global properties: Seeing the forest without representing the trees , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  G Underwood,et al.  Visual attention and the transition from novice to advanced driver , 2007, Ergonomics.

[19]  I. Blanchette.  Snakes, spiders, guns, and syringes: How specific are evolutionary constraints on the detection of threatening stimuli? , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[20]  A. Treisman.  How the deployment of attention determines what we see , 2006, Visual cognition.

[21]  Le Song,et al.  The ‘when’ and ‘where’ of perceiving signals of threat versus non-threat , 2006, NeuroImage.

[22]  H. Pashler,et al.  Central Interference in Driving , 2006, Psychological science.

[23]  G. Underwood,et al.  Eye fixation scanpaths of younger and older drivers in a hazard perception task , 2005, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[24]  Jeremy M. Wolfe,et al.  26.5 brief comms NEW , 2005 .

[25]  David Gur,et al.  Prevalence effect in a laboratory environment. , 2003, Radiology.

[26]  Daniel V. McGehee,et al.  Collision Warning Timing, Driver Distraction, and Driver Response to Imminent Rear-End Collisions in a High-Fidelity Driving Simulator , 2002, Hum. Factors.

[27]  G. Underwood,et al.  (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/acp.806 Attending to the Peripheral World While Driving , 2022 .

[28]  David Crundall,et al.  Selective searching while driving: the role of experience in hazard detection and general surveillance , 2002, Ergonomics.

[29]  Constance S. Royden,et al.  Visual search asymmetries in motion and optic flow fields , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  Marc Green,et al.  "How Long Does It Take to Stop?" Methodological Analysis of Driver Perception-Brake Times , 2000 .

[31]  G. Underwood,et al.  Driving Experience and the Functional Field of View , 1999, Perception.

[32]  David Crundall,et al.  Effects of experience and processing demands on visual information acquisition in drivers , 1998 .

[33]  M. Sivak.  The Information That Drivers Use: Is it Indeed 90% Visual? , 1996, Perception.

[34]  T A Ranney,et al.  Models of driving behavior: a review of their evolution. , 1994, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[35]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[36]  J. Theeuwes.  Endogenous and Exogenous Control of Visual Selection , 1994, Perception.

[37]  John A. Groeger,et al.  Risk perception and decision taking during the transition between novice and experienced driver status , 1988 .

[38]  Carl Graf Hoyos,et al.  Estimating hazards in traffic situations , 1983 .

[39]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[40]  D. Navon.  Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.

[41]  D. Pelz,et al.  CAUTION PROFILE AND DRIVING RECORD OF UNDERGRADUATE MALES , 1974 .

[42]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  Impact of prevalence and case distribution in lab-based diagnostic imaging studies , 2019, Journal of medical imaging.

[43]  David Crundall,et al.  Hazard prediction discriminates between novice and experienced drivers. , 2016, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[44]  A. Böckler,et al.  Out of the corner of the driver's eye: Peripheral processing of hazards in static traffic scenes. , 2016, Journal of vision.

[45]  Donald L. Fisher,et al.  Minimum Time to Situation Awareness in Scenarios Involving Transfer of Control from an Automated Driving Suite , 2016 .

[46]  Robert McCall,et al.  Visual Requirements of Vehicular Guidance , 2009 .

[47]  Cristy Ho,et al.  Crossmodal Information Processing in Driving , 2009 .

[48]  Antonio Torralba,et al.  Building the gist of a scene: the role of global image features in recognition. , 2006, Progress in brain research.

[49]  Jon Courtenay Grimwood,et al.  Take over , 2006, Nature.

[50]  Nemkumar Banthia,et al.  FROM THE LABORATORY TO THE REAL WORLD , 2002 .

[51]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[52]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[53]  F P McKenna,et al.  HAZARD PERCEPTION IN DRIVERS: A METHODOLOGY FOR TESTING AND TRAINING , 1994 .

[54]  T. Rockwell,et al.  Strategies of visual search by novice and experimental drivers. , 1972, Human factors.