When drivers encounter a traffic conflict, making a prompt and correct decision to take evasive actions is crucial to prevent collisions. Therefore, studying information processing in drivers’ decision-making is essential for driving safety. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews reporting guidelines, the aim of this scoping review was to map current studies on drivers’ decision-making in such situations. Our search strategy identified 2,506 peer-reviewed articles, out of which 20 were selected. The results indicated that the selected studies mainly measured drivers’ decision-making less holistically by focusing only on the perception phase instead of measuring the entire information processing phase involved in decision-making. Additionally, these studies explored interactions between drivers, vehicles, and the environment less comprehensively. There are opportunities to explore drivers’ decision-making in traffic conflict situations further, and this scoping review presents several challenges for further research and some strategies for overcoming them.
Van der HorstR.The Performance of Road Users: Hierarchical Task Levels. In Designing Safe Road Systems: A Human Factors Perspective (TheewesJ.van der HorstR.KuikenM., eds.), Ashgate Publishing, Farnham, 2012, pp. 41–56.
2.
TheeuwesJ.Workload Management. In Designing Safe Road Systems: A Human Factors Perspective (TheewesJ.van der HorstR.KuikenM., eds.), Ashgate Publishing, Farnham, 2012, pp. 57–69.
3.
ShinarD.Traffic Safety and Human Behavior. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, 2017.
4.
MichonJ. A.A Critical View of Driver Behavior Models: What Do We Know, What Should We Do? In Human Behavior and Traffic Safety (EvansL.SchwingR. C., eds.), Plenum Press, New York, 1985, pp. 485–520.
5.
WickensC. D.HollandsJ. G.BanburyS.ParasuramanR.Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, 4th ed.Routledge, New York, 2016.
6.
KaberD.JinS.ZahabiM.PankokC.The Effect of Driver Cognitive Abilities and Distractions on Situation Awareness and Performance under Hazard Conditions. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 42, 2016, pp. 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.07.014.
7.
GreenM.“How Long Does It Take to Stop?” Methodological Analysis of Driver Perception–Brake Times. Transportation Human Factors, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2000, pp. 195–216.
8.
MahmudS. M. S.FerreiraL.HoqueM. S.TavassoliA.Reviewing Traffic Conflict Techniques for Potential Application to Developing Countries. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, Vol. 13, No. 6, 2018, pp. 1869–1890.
9.
ZhengL.IsmailK.MengX.Traffic Conflict Techniques for Road Safety Analysis: Open Questions and Some Insights. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 41, No. 7, 2014, pp. 633–641.
ParkerM. R.ZegeerC. V.Traffic Conflict Techniques for Safety and Operations-Observer Manual. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, Richmond, VA, 1989.
12.
HydenC.The Development of a Method for Traffic Safety Evaluation: The Swedish Traffic Conflict Technique. Departement of Traffic Planning and Engineering Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden, 1987.
BurgeR.ChaparroA.An Investigation of the Effect of Texting on Hazard Perception Using Fuzzy Signal Detection Theory (fSDT). Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 58, 2018, pp. 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.05.033.
15.
TiwariG.Urban Safety and Mobility. In Transport Planning & Traffic Safety: Making Cities, Roads, & Vehicle Safer (TiwariG.MohanD., eds.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2016, pp. 241–262.
16.
PetersM. D. J.GodfreyC. M.McInerneyP.MunnZ.TriccoA. C.KhalilH. In JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis (AromatarisE.MunnZ., eds.), JBI, Adelaide, 2020, pp. 406–451. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01.
17.
MoranC.BennettJ. M.PrabhakharanP.Road User Hazard Perception Tests: A Systematic Review of Current Methodologies. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 129, 2019, pp. 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2019.05.021.
18.
CaoS.SamuelS.MurzelloY.DingW.ZhangX.NiuJ.Hazard Perception in Driving: A Systematic Literature Review. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2022. 2676: 666–690.
MoranC.BennettJ. M.PrabhakharanP.The Relationship between Cognitive Function and Hazard Perception in Younger Drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 74, 2020, pp. 104–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.08.008.
21.
Egea-CaparrósD. A.García-SevillaJ.PedrajaM. J.Romero-MedinaA.Marco-CramerM.Pineda-EgeaL.Late Detection of Hazards in Traffic: A Matter of Response Bias?Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 94, 2016, pp. 188–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.06.002.
22.
BelletT.BanetA.Towards a Conceptual Model of Motorcyclists’ Risk Awareness: A Comparative Study of Riding Experience Effect on Hazard Detection and Situational Criticality Assessment. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 49, 2012, pp. 154–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.10.007.
23.
WallisT. S. A.HorswillM. S.Using Fuzzy Signal Detection Theory to Determine Why Experienced and Trained Drivers Respond Faster Than Novices in a Hazard Perception Test. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 39, No. 6, 2007, pp. 1177–1185.
24.
JohnstonK. A.ScialfaC. T.Hazard Perception in Emergency Medical Service Responders. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 95, 2016, pp. 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.06.021.
25.
RosenbloomT.PerlmanA.PeregA.Hazard Perception of Motorcyclists and Car Drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 43, No. 3, 2011, pp. 601–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.08.005.
26.
LimP. C.SheppardE.CrundallD.Cross-Cultural Effects on Drivers’ Hazard Perception. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 21, 2013, pp. 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2013.09.016.
27.
ShangguanQ.FuT.LiuS.Investigating Rear-End Collision Avoidance Behavior under Varied Foggy Weather Conditions: A Study Using Advanced Driving Simulator and Survival Analysis. Accident Analysis Prevention, Vol. 139, 2020, Article 105499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2020.105499.
28.
XueQ.MarkkulaG.YanX.MeratN.Using Perceptual Cues for Brake Response to a Lead Vehicle: Comparing Threshold and Accumulator Models of Visual Looming. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 118, 2018, pp. 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.06.006.
29.
NilssonE. J.AustM. L.EngströmJ.SvanbergB.LindénP.Effects of Cognitive Load on Response Time in an Unexpected Lead Vehicle Braking Scenario and the Detection Response Task (DRT). Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 59, 2018, pp. 463–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.09.026.
30.
DozzaM.What Factors Influence Drivers’ Response Time for Evasive Maneuvers in Real Traffic?Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 58, 2013, pp. 299–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.06.003.
31.
HillsP. J.ThompsonC.PakeJ. M.Detrimental Effects of Carryover of Eye Movement Behaviour on Hazard Perception Accuracy: Effects of Driver Experience, Difficulty of Task, and Hazardousness of Road. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 58, 2018, pp. 906–916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.07.014.
32.
IkedaA.KatouT.KinoshitaM.AiharaM.Study of Driver Characteristics Using Driving Simulator Considerations on Difference in Accident Avoidance Performance due to Age. JSAE Review, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2002, pp. 219–222.
33.
LiZ.MilgramP.An Empirical Investigation of a Dynamic Brake Light Concept for Reduction of Rear-End Collisions through Manipulation of Optical Looming. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2008, pp. 158–172.
34.
Di StasiL. L.Diaz-PiedraC.MoralesJ. M.KurapovA.TagliabueM.BjärtåA.MegiasA., et al. A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Visual Search Strategies and Response Times in Road Hazard Perception Testing. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 148, 2020, Article 105785.
35.
ZhangZ.GuoY.YuanW.WangC.The Impact of Cognitive Distraction on Driver Perception Response Time under Different Levels of Situational Urgency. IEEE Access, Vol. 7, 2019, pp. 184572–184580.
36.
ZimasaT.JamsonS.HensonB.Are Happy Drivers Safer Drivers? Evidence from Hazard Response Times and Eye Tracking Data. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 46, 2017, pp. 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.12.005.
37.
VentsislavovaP.GugliottaA.Penã-SuarezE.Garcia-FernandezP.EismanE.CrundallD.CastroC.What Happens When Drivers Face Hazards on the Road?Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 91, 2016, pp. 43–54.
38.
SeacristT.DouglasE. C.HannanC.RogersR.BelwadiA.LoebH.Near Crash Characteristics among Risky Drivers Using the SHRP2 Naturalistic Driving Study. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 73, 2020, pp. 263–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2020.03.012.
39.
McClureK. S.Selecting and Describing Your Research Instruments. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 2020.
40.
ColtonD.CovertR. W.Designing and Constructing Instruments for Social Research and Evaluation. Jossey-Bass, San Fransisco, CA, 2007.
41.
MaloneS.BrünkenR.The Role of Ecological Validity in Hazard Perception Assessment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 40, 2016, pp. 91–103.
42.
Van SchagenI.SagbergF.The Potential Benefits of Naturalistic Driving for Road Safety Research: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations and Challenges for the Future. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 48, 2012, pp. 692–701.
43.
AASHTO. Highway Safety Manual. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 2010.
44.
SusiloY. O.JoewonoT. B.VandebonaU.Reasons Underlying Behaviour of Motorcyclists Disregarding Traffic Regulations in Urban Areas of Indonesia. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 75, 2015, pp. 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.12.016.
45.
World Health Organization. Global Status Report on Road Safety 2018. World Health Organization, Geneva, 2018.
46.
HorswillM. S.HelmanS.A Behavioral Comparison between Motorcyclists and a Matched Group of Non-Motorcycling Car Drivers: Factors Influencing Accident Risk. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2003, pp. 589–597.
47.
UcE. Y.RizzoM.Driving and Neurodegenerative Diseases. Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, Vol. 8, 2008, pp. 377–383.
48.
BarragánD.PetersonM. S.LeeY. C.Hazard Perception–Response: A Theoretical Framework to Explain Drivers’ Interactions with Roadway Hazards. Safety, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2021, pp. 1–14.
49.
DavoodiS. R.HamidH.PazhouhanfarM.MuttartJ. W.Motorcyclist Perception Response Time in Stopping Sight Distance Situations. Safety Science, Vol. 50, No. 3, 2012, pp. 371–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.09.004.
50.
da CostaD. G. N.MalkhamahS.SuparmaL. B.Use of the Safety Factor and Margin of Safety in Motorcyclist Accident Risk Management. International Journal of Technology, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2018, pp. 737–750.
51.
VentsislavovaP.RosenbloomT.LeunissenJ.SpivakY.CrundallD.An Online Hazard Prediction Test Demonstrates Differences in the Ability to Identify Hazardous Situation between Different Driving Groups. Ergonomics, Vol. 65, No. 8, 2022, pp. 1119–1137.
52.
FrancisE. L.TyrrellR. A.OwensD. A.Perception Response Time and Its Misapplication: An Historical and Forensic Perspective. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2020, pp. 327–346.
53.
WettonM. A.HillA.HorswillM. S.The Development and Validation of a Hazard Perception Test for Use in Driver Licensing. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 43, No. 5, 2011, pp. 1759–1770.
54.
ElmehrazN.KatkooriS.KourtellisA.LinP. S.Prototyping of a Portable Data Logging Embedded System for Naturalistic Motorcycle Study. Proc., International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo, ICCVE 2013, Las Vegas, NV. IEEE, New York, 2013, pp. 471–472.
55.
DingusT. A.KlauerS. G.NealeV. L.PetersenA.LeeS. E.SudweeksJ.PerezM. A., et al. The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment. NHTSA, Washington, D.C., 2006.
56.
ChenR.KusanoK. D.GablerH. C.Driver Behavior during Overtaking Maneuvers from the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study. Traffic Injury Prevention, Vol. 16, 2015, pp. S176–S181.
57.
MontgomeryJ.KusanoK. D.GablerH. C.Age and Gender Differences in Time to Collision at Braking from the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study. Traffic Injury Prevention, Vol. 15, 2014, pp. S15–S20.
58.
SeppeltB. D.SeamanS.LeeJ.AngellL. S.MehlerB.ReimerB.Glass Half-Full: On-Road Glance Metrics Differentiate Crashes from Near-Crashes in the 100-Car Data. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 107, 2017, pp. 48–62.
59.
Van SchagenI.WelshR.Backer-GrondahlA.HoedemaekerM.LotanT.MorrisA.SagbergF.WinkelbauerM.Towards a Large Scale European Naturalistic Driving Study: Final Report of PROLOGUE. Deliverable D4.2. SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, Leidschendam, Netherlands, 2011.
60.
WangX.YangM.HurwitzD.Analysis of Cut-In Behavior Based on Naturalistic Driving Data. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 124, 2019, pp. 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.006.
61.
HerawatiH.Karakteristik dan penyebab kecelakaan lalu lintas di Indonesia tahun 2012. War Penelit Perhub, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2019, pp. 133–142.
62.
SummalaH.Brake Reaction Times and Driver Behavior Analysis. Transportation Human Factors, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2000, pp. 217–226.
63.
OppenheimI.ShinarD.Human Factors and Ergonomics. In Handbook of Traffic Psychology (PorterB. E., ed.), Academic Press, London, 2011, pp. 193–211.
64.
BoberminM. P.SilvaM. M.FerreiraS.Driving Simulators to Evaluate Road Geometric Design Effects on Driver Behaviour: A Systematic Review. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2021, Vol. 150, article 105923.
65.
Van der HorstR.Information Carriers Meet Basic Ergonomic Principles. In Designing Safe Road Systems: A Human Factors Perspective (TheeuwesJ.van der HorstR.KuikenM., eds.), Ashgate Publishing, Farnham, 2012, pp. 71–86.
66.
BorsosA.BirthS.VollprachtH. J.The Role of Human Factors in Road Design. Proc., 6th IEEE Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications, Gyor, Hungary. IEEE, New York, 2015, pp. 363–367.
67.
VlahogianniE. I.YannisG.GoliasJ. C.Overview of Critical Risk Factors in Power-Two-Wheeler Safety. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 49, 2012, pp. 12–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.04.009.
68.
DamaniJ.VedagiriP.Safety of Motorised Two Wheelers in Mixed Traffic Conditions: Literature Review of Risk Factors. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English edition), Vol. 8, No. 1, 2021, pp. 35–56.
69.
PaiC. W.Motorcycle Right-of-Way Accidents – A Literature Review. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 43, No. 3, 2011, pp. 971–982.
70.
ClabauxN.BrenacT.PerrinC.MagninJ.CanuB.Van ElslandeP.Motorcyclists’ Speed and “Looked-but-Failed-to-See” Accidents. Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 49, 2012, pp. 73–77.
71.
SchneiderW. H.SavolainenP. T.MooreD. N.Effects of Horizontal Curvature on Single-Vehicle Motorcycle Crashes along Rural Two-Lane Highways. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2010. 2194: 91–98.
72.
JohnsonM. T.Safety Impacts of Signing and Pavement Markings on Property-Damage-Only Crashes at Multi-Lane Roundabouts. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2019. 2673: 477–488.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
