Judging arrival times of incoming traffic vehicles is not a prerequisite for safely crossing an intersection: Differential effects of vehicle size and type in passive judgment and active driving tasks.

Using a fixed-base driving simulator we compared the effects of the size and type of traffic vehicles (i.e., normal-sized or double-sized cars or motorcycles) approaching an intersection in two different tasks. In the perceptual judgment task, passively moving participants estimated when a traffic vehicle would reach the intersection for actual arrival times (ATs) of 1, 2, or 3s. In line with earlier findings, ATs were generally underestimated, the more so the longer the actual AT. Results revealed that vehicle size affected judgments in particular for the larger actual ATs (2 and 3s), with double-sized vehicles then being judged as arriving earlier than normal-sized vehicles. Vehicle type, on the other hand, affected judgments at the smaller actual ATs (1 and 2s), with cars then being judged as arriving earlier than motorcycles. In the behavioral task participants actively drove the simulator to cross the intersection by passing through a gap in a train of traffic. Analyses of the speed variations observed during the active intersection-crossing task revealed that the size and type of vehicles in the traffic train did not affect driving behavior in the same way as in the AT judgment task. First, effects were considerably smaller, affecting driving behavior only marginally. Second, effects were opposite to expectations based on AT judgments: driver approach speeds were smaller (rather than larger) when confronted with double-sized vehicles as compared to their normal-sized counterparts and when confronted with cars as compared to motorcycles. Finally, the temporality of the effects was different on the two tasks: vehicle size affected driver approach speed in the final stages of approach rather than early on, while vehicle type affected driver approach speed early on rather than later. Overall, we conclude that the active control of approach to the intersection is not based on successive judgments of traffic vehicle arrival times. These results thereby question the general belief that arrival time estimates are crucial for safe interaction with traffic.

[1]  H. Ross,et al.  Optic-Flow and Cognitive Factors in Time-to-Collision Estimates , 1983, Perception.

[2]  C Berthelon,et al.  Curvilinear Approach to an Intersection and Visual Detection of a Collision , 1993, Human factors.

[3]  Gilles Montagne,et al.  Intersection crossing considered as intercepting a moving traffic gap: effects of task and environmental constraints. , 2012, Acta psychologica.

[4]  J. Gibbon Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. , 1977 .

[5]  P R DeLucia,et al.  Pictorial and motion-based information for depth perception. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  Reinoud J Bootsma The (current) future is here! , 2009, Perception.

[7]  J. Bastin,et al.  Prospective strategies underlie the control of interceptive actions. , 2006, Human movement science.

[8]  M. Lenoir,et al.  Intercepting moving objects during self-motion: effects of environmental changes. , 1999, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[9]  C. Michaels,et al.  To Cross or Not to Cross: The Effect of Locomotion on Street-Crossing Behavior , 1996 .

[10]  W Schiff,et al.  Accuracy of judging time to arrival: effects of modality, trajectory, and gender. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  V Cavallo,et al.  Visual Information and Skill Level in Time-To-Collision Estimation , 1988, Perception.

[12]  Sabarish V. Babu,et al.  Synchronizing self and object movement: how child and adult cyclists intercept moving gaps in a virtual environment. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Heiko Hecht,et al.  Emotional effects on time-to-contact judgments: arousal, threat, and fear of spiders modulate the effect of pictorial content , 2014, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  B. Abernethy,et al.  Action specificity increases anticipatory performance and the expert advantage in natural interceptive tasks. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[15]  P. Hancock,et al.  The Perception of Arrival Time for Different Oncoming Vehicles at an Intersection , 1994 .

[16]  W Schiff,et al.  Information Used in Judging Impending Collision , 1979, Perception.

[17]  Reinoud J Bootsma,et al.  Fractional-order information in the visual control of lateral locomotor interception. , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  W. Meck,et al.  Neuropsychological mechanisms of interval timing behavior. , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[19]  Helen E Clark,et al.  The role of eye movements in the size-speed illusion of approaching trains. , 2016, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  P R DeLucia,et al.  Pictorial and motion-based depth information during active control of self-motion: size-arrival effects on collision avoidance. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  J M Auberlet,et al.  ARCHISIM: a behavioural multi-actors traffic simulation model for the study of a traffic system including ITS aspects , 2007 .

[22]  Rob Gray,et al.  Perceptual Processes Used by Drivers During Overtaking in a Driving Simulator , 2005, Hum. Factors.

[23]  R J Bootsma,et al.  Accuracy of Perceptual Processes Subserving Different Perception–Action Systems , 1989, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[24]  P. McLeod,et al.  Running to catch the ball , 1993, Nature.

[25]  Gilles Montagne,et al.  Intercepting a moving traffic gap while avoiding collision with lead and trail vehicles: gap-related and boundary-related influences on drivers' speed regulations during approach to an intersection. , 2012, Human movement science.

[26]  Mark S Horswill,et al.  Motorcycle Accident Risk Could Be Inflated by a Time to Arrival Illusion , 2005, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[27]  Patricia R. DeLucia,et al.  Effects of Size on Collision Perception and Implications for Perceptual Theory and Transportation Safety , 2013 .

[28]  Heiko Hecht,et al.  Threatening pictures induce shortened time-to-contact estimates , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[29]  Helen E Clark,et al.  An illusory size-speed bias and railway crossing collisions. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[30]  Benjamin J Chihak,et al.  How children and adults learn to intercept moving gaps. , 2014, Journal of experimental child psychology.