Poor-Visibility Road Accidents: Theories Entailing “Target” Risk Level and Relative Visual Motion

Theories about ``target'' risk level are thought to explain why road casualty rates remain steady despite interventions to reduce them. Unfortunately, such theories appear inconsistent with the higher casualty rates associated with poor visibility because they imply that input to the road user is accurately and veridically processed. Motion perception for a driver, however, is highly dependent on relative motion in the retinal image: In poor visibility, the associated processing may be inaccurate and nonveridical. In this article, practical implications regarding conspicuity and lighting are outlined, and the difficulty of developing global theories to explain ``real-world'' activities is shown. Theories to explain the restricted aspects of such activities may be necessary, and the definition of risk may require considerable elaboration or change.

[1]  A. Reinhardt-Rutland,et al.  Aftereffect of visual movement—the role of relative movement: A review , 1987 .

[2]  G G Denton.  The use made of the speedometer as an aid to driving. , 1969, Ergonomics.

[3]  Gerald J.S. Wilde,et al.  Critical Issues in Risk Homeostasis Theory , 1982 .

[4]  A. Reinhardt-Rutland.  Induced movement in the visual modality: an overview. , 1988 .

[5]  John Adams,et al.  RISK HOMEOSTASIS AND THE PURPOSE OF SAFETY REGULATION , 1988 .

[6]  C J Overbeeke,et al.  Depth on a Flat Screen , 1987, Perceptual and motor skills.

[7]  A H Wertheim,et al.  On the relativity of perceived motion. , 1981, Acta psychologica.

[8]  David Shinar.  The Effects of Expectancy, Clothing Reflectance, and Detection Criterion on Nighttime Pedestrian Visibility , 1985 .

[9]  H. Wallach,et al.  Extent-of-motion thresholds under subject-relative and object-relative conditions , 1966 .

[10]  F. McKenna.  WHAT ROLE SHOULD THE CONCEPT OF RISK PLAY IN THEORIES OF ACCIDENT INVOLVEMENT , 1988 .

[11]  Gerald J.S. Wilde,et al.  Risk homeostasis theory and traffic accidents: propositions, deductions and discussion of dissension in recent reactions , 1988 .

[13]  J Allman,et al.  Direction- and Velocity-Specific Responses from beyond the Classical Receptive Field in the Middle Temporal Visual Area (MT) , 1985, Perception.

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

[15]  B Rogers,et al.  Motion Parallax as an Independent Cue for Depth Perception , 1979, Perception.

[16]  J. Gibson.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

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

[18]  The vista paradox: Is the effect partly explained by induced movement? , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  James T. Walker,et al.  The vista paradox: A natural visual illusion , 1989, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  A. T. Smith,et al.  Motion after-effects in cat striate cortex elicited by moving texture , 1986, Vision Research.

[21]  K. Nakayama,et al.  A Velocity Analogue of Brightness Contrast , 1973, Perception.

[22]  G. Mandl.  Responses of visual cells in cat superior colliculus to relative pattern movement , 1985, Vision Research.

[23]  John A. C. Conybeare.  Evaluation of automobile safety regulations: The case of compulsory seat belt legislation in Australia , 1980 .

[24]  Abishai Polus,et al.  An analysis of nighttime pedestrian accidents at specially illuminated crosswalks , 1978 .

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

[26]  Arien Mack,et al.  Perceived movement of the afterimage during eye movements , 1969 .

[27]  G G Denton.  The Influence of Visual Pattern on Perceived Speed , 1980, Perception.