Quantifying Drivers’ Comfort-Zone and Dread-Zone Boundaries in Left Turn Across Path/Opposite Direction (LTAP/OD) Scenarios

The aim of this study is to quantify drivers' comfort- and dread-zone boundaries in left-t urn-across-path/opposite-direction (LTAP/OD) scenarios. These scenarios account for a large fraction of traffic fatalities world-wide. The comfort zone is a dynamic spatiotemporal envelope surrounding the vehicle, within which drivers feel comfortable and safe. The dread zone, a novel concept, describes a zone with a smaller safety margin that drivers will not voluntarily enter, but can push themselves into when conditions provide additional motivation (e.g., when hurried). Quantifying comfort- and dread-zone boundaries in the context of turning left before or after an oncoming vehicle has the potential to inform and improve both the design and driver acceptance of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) and autonomous vehicles. Using a within-subject design, a test-track experiment was conducted with drivers turning an instrumented vehicle left across the path of an oncoming vehicle. The oncoming vehicle was a self-propelled full-sized computer-controlled balloon vehicle going straight at a constant speed (50 km/h). The driver assumed full control of the instrumented vehicle approximately 20 m before the intersection and had to make the decision to turn left before or after the oncoming balloon vehicle. There were two experimental conditions, comfortable driving and hurried driving. Measures for each turn included postencroachment time (PET), lateral acceleration, and self-reports of comfort and risk. Drivers consistently accepted shorter time gaps and higher lateral accelerations when hurried. We interpret these findings to suggest that drivers invoke two dynamic, contextuallydefined safety margins. The first is the comfort-zone boundary, a limit which drivers do not voluntarily cross without extra motives. The second is the dread-zone boundary, a more distant limit which drivers do not voluntarily cross even with extra motives. Grouping the responses (high/low) to the driver behavior questionnaire (DBQ) improved the ability to predict the dread-zone boundary PET given the comfort-zone boundary PET.

[1]  Philomina Simon,et al.  Advanced Driver Assistance System , 2020, International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering.

[2]  Lei Zhang,et al.  An Adaptive Longitudinal Driving Assistance System Based on Driver Characteristics , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[3]  Kazutoshi Nobukawa,et al.  A model based approach to the analysis of intersection conflicts and collision avoidance systems , 2011 .

[4]  G. Fechner Elemente der Psychophysik , 1998 .

[5]  Tamitza Toroyan,et al.  Global status report on road safety , 2009, Injury Prevention.

[6]  Loren Staplin SIMULATOR AND FIELD MEASURES OF DRIVER AGE DIFFERENCES IN LEFT-TURN GAP JUDGMENTS , 1995 .

[7]  A. Horst A time-based analysis of road user behaviour in normal and critical encounters , 1990 .

[8]  P. J. Cooper,et al.  EXPERIENCE WITH TRAFFIC CONFLICTS IN CANADA WITH EMPHASIS ON "POST ENCROACHMENT TIME" TECHNIQUES .INTERNATIONAL CALIBRATION STUDY OF TRAFFIC CONFLICTS. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATO ADVANCED RESEARCH WORKSHOP , 1984 .

[9]  Tzuu-Hseng S. Li,et al.  Implementation of human-like driving skills by autonomous fuzzy behavior control on an FPGA-based car-like mobile robot , 2003, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron..

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

[11]  Heikki Summala,et al.  Towards Understanding Motivational and Emotional Factors in Driver Behaviour: Comfort Through Satisficing , 2007 .

[12]  G. Gescheider Psychophysics: The Fundamentals , 1997 .

[13]  John D. Lee,et al.  Traffic-Entry Behavior and Crash Risk for Older Drivers with Impairment of Selective Attention , 2006, Perceptual and motor skills.

[14]  Jeremy A. Salinger,et al.  Status of NHTSA's Rear-End Crash Prevention Research Program , 2005 .

[15]  Truls Vaa,et al.  Drivers’ Information Processing, Decision-Making and the Role of Emotions: Predictions of the Risk Monitor Model , 2011 .

[16]  P. Carlo Cacciabue Modelling Driver Behaviour in Automotive Environments , 2007 .

[17]  Sharon Newnam,et al.  A comparison of the driving behavior between remunerated and volunteer drivers , 2011 .

[18]  J. Gibson,et al.  A theoretical field-analysis of automobile-driving , 1938 .

[19]  Mohamed Benmimoun SAFETY ANALYSIS METHOD FOR ASSESSING THE IMPACTS OF ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS WITHIN THE EUROPEAN LARGE SCALE FIELD TEST “ EUROFOT ” , 2011 .

[20]  E. Coelingh,et al.  A situation and threat assessment algorithm for a rear-end collision avoidance system , 2008, 2008 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium.

[21]  M Benmimoum,et al.  Safety analysis method for assessing the impacts of advanced driver assistance systems within the european large scale field test Eurofot , 2011 .

[22]  Martin Treiber,et al.  Calibrating Car-Following Models by Using Trajectory Data , 2008, 0803.4063.

[23]  Risto Näätänen,et al.  A model for the role of motivational factors in drivers' decision-making , 1974 .

[24]  Marco Dozza,et al.  euroFOT: constrains and trade-offs in testing hypotheses , 2010 .

[25]  Mike McDonald,et al.  Car-following: a historical review , 1999 .