RISK CONTROL IS NOT RISK ADJUSTMENT: THE ZERO-RISK THEORY OF DRIVER BEHAVIOUR AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

Abstract The zero-risk theory, originally presented by Naatanen and Summala (1974, 1976 a), posits that due to human perceptual, cognitive, and motivational processes, drivers adapt to risks on the road, whilst being motivated towards faster speeds and objectively more risky behaviour. In decision-theoretic terms, both the subjective probability distribution of the outcomes of drivers' behaviour and their speed-utility function are severely distorted. Drivers are not, however, adjusting risk. With experience, driving simply becomes a habitual, largely automatized activity in which risk control is based on maintaining safety margins. Because of this adaptation to risk and the motives involved, drivers are not able to take traffic risks into account to a degree that would be rational from their own point of view and that of society. The main implication of the theory is that we have to prevent this tendency for drivers to be motivated towards higher speeds and thus to adapt to greater risk in the traffic sy...

[1]  David N. Lee,et al.  A Theory of Visual Control of Braking Based on Information about Time-to-Collision , 1976, Perception.

[2]  T. W. Forbes.  The Normal Automobile Driver as a Traffic Problem , 1939 .

[3]  C R Kelley,et al.  Manual and Automatic Control , 1968 .

[4]  David Katz.  Proceedings and papers : Thirteenth International Congress of Psychology, held at the University of Stockholm, July 16th to 21st, 1951, under the presidency of professor David Katz , 1952 .

[5]  F P McKenna,et al.  The human factor in driving accidents. An overview of approaches and problems. , 1982, Ergonomics.

[6]  Leonard Evans,et al.  Do accident-involved drivers exhibit riskier everyday driving behavior? , 1982 .

[7]  Gerald J.S. Wilde,et al.  The Theory of Risk Homeostasis: Implications for Safety and Health , 1982 .

[8]  Gunnar Johannsen,et al.  Mathematical Concepts for Modeling Human Behavior in Complex Man-Machine Systems , 1979 .

[9]  Heikki Summala,et al.  How does it change safety margins if overtaking is prohibited: A pilot study , 1980 .

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

[11]  Heikki Summala,et al.  Passing when Visibility Obscured: Can we Predict Accident Involvement from One Single Traffic Maneuver? , 1986 .

[12]  Markku Salusjärvi.  THE SPEED LIMIT EXPERIMENTS ON PUBLIC ROADS IN FINLAND , 1980 .

[13]  Ola Svenson,et al.  Change of Mean Speed in Order to Obtain a Prescribed Increase or Decrease in Travel Time , 1973 .

[14]  Paul Wasielewski,et al.  Speed as a measure of driver risk: Observed speeds versus driver and vehicle characteristics , 1984 .

[15]  R. J. Smeed,et al.  Some Statistical Aspects of Road Safety Research , 1949 .

[16]  F A Haight,et al.  Risk, especially risk of traffic accident. , 1986, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[17]  D. H. Taylor,et al.  DRIVERS' GALVANIC SKIN RESPONSE AND THE RISK OF ACCIDENT , 1964 .

[18]  Kåre Rumar,et al.  Driver Reaction to a Technical Safety Measure—Studded Tires , 1976 .

[19]  R Fuller,et al.  A conceptualization of driving behaviour as threat avoidance. , 1984, Ergonomics.

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

[21]  J A Michon.  Dealing with danger , 1979 .

[22]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[23]  Teuvo Peltoniemi,et al.  General and public opinion about the general speed limits in Finland in 1973-1974 , 1982 .

[24]  Heikki Summala,et al.  Modeling Driver Behavior: A Pessimistic Prediction , 1985 .

[25]  Donald H. Taylor.  Accidents, Risks, and Models of Explanation , 1976 .

[26]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[27]  Heikki Summala,et al.  A psychophysical method for determining the effect of studded tires on safety , 1980 .

[28]  Michael Sivak,et al.  DRIVER SELF-ASSESSMENT IN SPAIN AND THE U.S.A. , 1987 .

[29]  R. Näätänen,et al.  EFFORT IN DRIVING AS A TRAFFIC-SAFETY PROBLEM , 1977 .

[30]  W. Ashby,et al.  Every Good Regulator of a System Must Be a Model of That System , 1970 .

[31]  A. R. Cownie,et al.  Feedback in Accident Control , 1966 .

[32]  R. Näätänen,et al.  Road user behavior and traffic accidents , 1976 .

[33]  Heikki Summala,et al.  Driving‐speed regulation and other means to reduce risks when meeting a pedestrian on a dark road , 1980 .

[34]  Edythe Traylor Crump.  55 : a decade of experience , 1984 .

[35]  M. Baucus.  Transportation Research Board , 1982 .

[36]  Frank A. Haight.  Accident proneness: the history of an idea , 1964 .

[37]  H. Summala,et al.  Drivers' immediate responses to traffic signs. , 1984, Ergonomics.

[38]  O. Svenson.  ARE WE ALL LESS RISKY AND MORE SKILLFUL THAN OUR FELLOW DRIVERS , 1981 .

[39]  H. Leibowitz.  Recent Advances in our Understanding of Peripheral Vision and Some Implications , 1986 .

[40]  Jgu Adams,et al.  RISK AND FREEDOM: THE RECORD OF ROAD SAFETY REGULATION , 1985 .

[41]  Thomas H. Rockwell,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN DRIVER PERCEPTION ON RURAL CURVE NEGOTIATION , 1980 .

[42]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .

[43]  Leonard Evans,et al.  Human Behavior Feedback and Traffic Safety , 1985 .

[44]  M. S. Mayzner,et al.  Cognition And Reality , 1976 .