Many agencies use dynamic message signs to display behavioral traffic safety (BTS) messages (e.g., CLICK IT OR TICKET, DONT DRINK AND DRIVE). However, little guidance exists on how best to design and display such messages on those signs. In this paper, the results of a human factors laptop-based study are described, which examined how well drivers can read and interpret BTS messages while simultaneously attending to a secondary control task similar to how drivers must operate their vehicle while simultaneously reading road signs. The study results indicated that displaying BTS messages that include humor, wit, or pop culture references could have adverse consequences on driving behavior for motorists who are unable to correctly interpret the safety topic of those messages. The results also indicated that BTS messages should only address a single safety topic. The length of the BTS message should be kept to 16 words or fewer in low to moderate driver workload environments; in high driver workload environments, BTS messages should be limited to 11 words or fewer.
DudekC. L.HuchingsonR. D.Manual on Real-Time Motorist Information Displays. Report No. FHWA-IP-86-16. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, August1986.
2.
BensonB. G.Motorist Attitudes About Content of Variable-Message Signs. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1996. 1550: 48–57.
3.
TayR.DebarrosA.Public Perceptions of the use of Dynamic Message. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2008, pp. 95–110.
4.
RodierC.FinsonR. S.LidickerJ.ShaheenS. A.An Evaluation of the Consequences and Effectiveness of Using Highway Changeable Message Signs for Safety Campaigns. Report No. UCF-ITS-PRR-2010-3. Institute of Transportation Studies, university of California-Berkeley, 2010.
5.
SchroederJ.PlapperE.ZengH.KrileB.Public Perception of Safety Messages and Public Service Announcements on Dynamic Message Signs in Rural Areas. Report No. FHWA-HOP-16-048. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2016.
6.
SchrammA. J.RakotonirainyA.SmithS. S.LewisI. M.SooleD. W.WatsonB. C.TroutbeckR. J.Effects of Speeding and Headway-Related Variable Message Signs on Driver Behavior and Attitudes. Department of Transport and Main Roads, Brisbane, Australia, 2012.
7.
BoyleL.CordahiG.GrabensteinK.MadiM.MillerE.SilbermanP.Effectiveness of Safety and Public Service Announcement (PSA) Messages on Dynamic Message Signs. Report No. FHWA-HOP-14-015. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2014.
8.
MitranE.CumminsD.SmithersA.Traffic Safety Messages on Dynamic Message Signs (DMS). Report No. FHWA/LA.18/17-01TA-SA. Louisiana Transportation Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, 2018.
9.
TayR.DebarrosA.Effectiveness of Road Safety Messages on Variable Message Signs. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, Vol. 10, No. 3, 2010, pp. 18–23.
10.
JamsonA. H.MeratN.The Effectiveness of Safety Campaign VMS messages – A Driving Simulator Investigation. Proc., Fourth International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design, Stevenson, WA, July2007, pp. 459–465.
11.
SchroederJ. L.DemetskyM. J.Evaluation of Driver Reactions for Effective Use of Dynamic Message Signs in Richmond, Virginia. Report No. FHWA/VTRC 10-R16. Virginal Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, VA, 2010.
12.
CooperB. R.MitchellJ.Safety and Effectiveness of the Wider use of VMS. Report TRL526. Transport Research Laboratory, Wokingham, Berkshire, UK, 2002.
13.
HardyA.LeeS.Al-KaisyA. F.Effectiveness of Animal Advisory Messages on Dynamic Message Signs as a Speed Reduction Tool. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2006. 1973: 54–72.
14.
Megat-JohariN.Megat-JohariM.SavolainenP.GatesT.Kassens-NoorE.Examining Driver Compliance with a Move-Over/Slow Down Law in Consideration of Vehicle Type and Messages Displayed on Upstream Dynamic Message Signs. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2021. Vol. pp. 1–11.
15.
KostyniukL. P.BlowerD.MolnarL. J.EbyD .W.St. LouisR. M.ZanierN.Evaluation of the Michigan TACT Program. Report No. UMTRI 2014-24. University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, Lansing, MI, 2014.
16.
ChengJ. J.FirminP. E.Perception of VMS Effectiveness: A British and Canadian Perspective. 12th IEE International Conference and Road Transport Information & Control, London, England, April 20–22, 2004.
17.
HarderK. A.BloomfieldJ.The Effectiveness and Safety of Traffic and Non-Traffic Related Messages Presented on Changeable Message Signs- Phase II. Report No. MN/RC-2008-27. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 2008.
18.
JeihaniM.BanerjeeS.AhangariS.BrownD. D.The Potential Effects of Composition and Structure of Dynamic message sign messages on Driver Behavior Using a Driving Simulator. Report No. MD-18-SHA/MSU/4-14. Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD, 2018.
19.
GuattariC.De BlasiisM. R.CalviA.The Effectiveness of Variable Message Signs Information: A Driving Simulation Study. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 53, 2012, pp. 692–702.
20.
ShealyT.KryschtalP.FranczekK.KatzB. J.Driver Response to Dynamic Message Sign Safety Campaign Messages. Report No. FHWA/VRTRC 20-R16. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, VA, 2020.
21.
KehrliM. R.Uses of and Non-Standard Syntax on Changeable Message Signs. MUTCD-Official Ruling No. 2(09)-174(I). FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2021.
22.
GuttmanN.Persuasive Appeals in Road Safety Communication Campaigns: Theoretical Frameworks and Practical Implications from the Analysis of a Decade of Road Safety Campaign Materials. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 84, 2015, pp. 153–164.
23.
HallJ. D.MadsenJ. M.Can Behavioral Interventions Be Too Salient? Evidence From Traffic Safety Messages. Science, Vol. 376, No. 6591, 2022, p. 370.
24.
PetzoldtT.BellemH.KremsJ. F.The Critical Tracking Task: A Potentially Useful Method to Assess Driver Distraction?Human factors, Vol. 56, No. 4, 2014, pp. 789–808.
25.
RehmannJ.SteinE.RosenbergB.Subjective Pilot Workload Assessment. Human Factors, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1983, pp. 297–301.
26.
WagnerR. C.WeirD. H.Software Users Guide for the Critical Tracking Task (CTT). Report No. DRI-TM-140-4. Dynamic Research, Inc., Torrance, CA, 2006.
27.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2009.
28.
UllmanG. L.HigginsL. L.ChryslerS. T.GeiselbrechtT.SimekC.StoeltjeG.WolfeD.BensonG.Behavioral Traffic Messaging on Variable Message Signs. BTSCRP Research Report 3. TRB of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2022.
