Influence of Taillight Width on the Ability to Recognize Closing Speed, Closing Distance, and Closing versus Separating

Front-to-rear crashes account for a large number of fatal collisions in the United States. While many of these crashes might be related to driver error (i.e. following too closely, inattention to traffic ahead, etc.) a cluster of these crashes are likely to be related to the human visual system limitations of depth perception during motion. Observers with valid CDL and non-commercial licenses were shown two 4-second video clips showing a slower moving vehicle ahead, referred to as the lead vehicle. The lead vehicle was depicted at distances of 91 m (300 ft) to 457 m (1500 ft) while closing at 72 km/h (45 mph). The lead vehicle was depicted on an unilluminated two-lane highway at night to allow the taillights to be the salient stimulus. The lead vehicle had either the standard taillights with a width of 1.7 m (5.4 ft) or narrowed taillights that were 0.4 m (1.43 ft) apart. The order in which each clip was viewed was counterbalanced. Observers consistently believed the narrower taillight configuration was farther away despite the vehicles’ headlights being on, allowing the entire vehicle width to be seen at distances closer than 128 m (420 ft). Also, observers perceived the wider taillight vehicle to be closing faster when viewing at distances closer than 128 m (420 ft). Drivers with CDL licenses performed no better or worse than non-commercial drivers which supports the hypothesis that crashes involving a high-speed vehicle closing on a slow moving or stopped vehicle might be related to human limitations, rather than driving experience, inattention or careless behavior.

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

[2]  Jeffrey W. Muttart,et al.  Relationship Between Relative Velocity Detection and Driver Response Times in Vehicle Following Situations , 2005 .

[3]  D Regan,et al.  Risky driving behavior: a consequence of motion adaptation for visually guided motor action. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  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.

[5]  H Summala,et al.  Driving experience and perception of the lead car's braking when looking at in-car targets. , 1998, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[6]  Marco Dozza,et al.  Analysis of Naturalistic Driving Study Data: Safer Glances, Driver Inattention, and Crash Risk , 2014 .

[7]  R. Mortimer Perceptual Factors in Rear-End Crashes , 1990 .

[8]  Donald L. Fisher,et al.  Driver-Eye-Movement-Based Investigation for Improving Work-Zone Safety , 2009 .

[9]  Wiel H. Janssen Driver's Inability to Judge Important Parameters of Leading Vehicle Movement at Night , 1977 .

[10]  Suzanne E. Lee,et al.  A COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION OF NATURALISTIC LANE-CHANGES , 2004 .

[11]  Samuel G Charlton,et al.  The role of looming and attention capture in drivers' braking responses. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[12]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment , 2006 .

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

[14]  John A. Michon,et al.  The perception of lead vehicle movement in darkness , 1976 .

[15]  E R Hoffmann,et al.  Scaling of relative velocity between vehicles. , 1996, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[16]  Fabrice Vienne,et al.  Can Headway Reduction in Fog Be Explained by Impaired Perception of Relative Motion? , 2009, Hum. Factors.

[17]  Patricia R. Delucia,et al.  Motion Extrapolation of Car-Following Scenes in Younger and Older Drivers , 2006, Hum. Factors.

[18]  T A Ranney,et al.  Motor vehicle crashes in roadway construction workzones: an analysis using narrative text from insurance claims. , 1996, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[19]  A James McKnight,et al.  Young novice drivers: careless or clueless? , 2003, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  J. Reason Human error: models and management , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[21]  M L BRAUNSTEIN,et al.  Detection of Vehicle Velocity Changes during Expressway Driving , 1964, Human factors.

[22]  Gustav Markkula,et al.  A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies. , 2016, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[23]  Heikki Summala,et al.  DETECTION THRESHOLDS IN CAR FOLLOWING SITUATIONS AND PERIPHERAL VISION: IMPLICATIONS FOR POSITIONING OF VISUALLY DEMANDING IN-CAR DISPLAYS , 1999 .

[24]  A J Fisher,et al.  THE EFFECT OF PRESENCE LIGHTS ON THE DETECTION OF CHANGE OF VEHICLE HEADWAY , 1978 .