The purpose of this research is to assess the effectiveness of the Graded Deceleration Display (GDD) that is designed to replace the rear center high mounted stop lamp on automobiles. Licensed drivers were treated in simulation to both a standard brake light displays (binary) and the GDD display while the lead vehicle (LV) varied its deceleration magnitude and ramping behavior. Results entailed that the graded system produced more accurate behavioral responses during deceleration, fewer collisions, and a safer following distance than the binary system. Future research should be concerned with solidifying this framework so that it can be used to improve safety, effectiveness, and efficiency for vehicle transportation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrownT. L.LeeJ. D.McGeheeD. V. (2001). Human performance models and rear-end collisions avoidance algorithms. Human Factors, 43(3), 462-482.
2.
CampbellB. J.RouseW. S. (1968). Reflectorized license plates and rear end collisions at night. Research Review, 12(2), 40-45.
3.
DelaigueP.EskandarianA. (2004). A comprehensive vehicle braking model for predictions of stopping distances. Automobile Engineering, 218, 1409-1417.
4.
van DrielC.J.G.HoedemaekerM.van AremB. (2007). Impacts of a Congestion Assistant on driving behaviour and acceptance using a driving simulator, Transportation Research Part F, 10(2), 139-152.
HoR.ReedNSpenceC. (2006). Assessing the effectiveness of “intuitive” vibrotactile warning signals in preventing front-to-rear-end collisions in a driving simulator. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38(5), 988-996.
8.
HorstR.HogemaJ. (1993). Time-to-collision and collision avoidance systems. In Proceedings of the 6th International Cooperation on Theories and Concepts in Traffic Series Human-Computer Interaction. Salzburg.
9.
KitamuraF.MatsunagaK.NagaoI. (1994). Influence of looking at hazard lights on car-driving performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78(3), 1059-1065.
10.
KostyniukL.P.EbyD.W.1998. Exploring rear-end roadway crashes from the driver’s perspective. Technical Report, UMTRI-98-52, Transportation Research Institute, The University of Michigan.
11.
LeeJ. D.McGeheeD. V.BrownT. L.ReyesM. L. (2002). Collision warning timing, driver distraction, and driver response to imminent rear-end collisions in a high fidelity driving simulator. Human Factors, 44(2), 2002.
12.
LiZ.MilgramP. (2008). 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, 66, 158-172.
13.
PiechullaW.MayserC.GehrkeH.KonigW. (2003). Reducing drivers’ mental workload by means of an adaptive man-machine interface. Transportation Research, F6, 233-248.
14.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (1999b). General Estimates System [Data File]. Downloadable from ftp://ftp.nhtsa.dot.gov/ges/GES99/
15.
SivakM.FlannaganM. J.SatoT.TraubeE. C.AokiM. (1994). Reaction times to neon, LED, and fast incandescent brake lamps. Ergonomics, 37, 989-994.
16.
SummalaH.LambleD.LaaksoM. (1998). Driving perception of the lead car’s braking when looking at in-car targets. Department of Psychology, Traffic Research Unit, University of Helsinki, Finland.
17.
TheeuwesJ.AlfredinckW. A. M. (1995) Rear light arrangement for cars equipped with a center high-mounted stop lamp. Human Factors, 37, 371-380.
18.
VoevodskyJ. (1974). Evaluation of a deceleration warning light for reducing rear-end automobile collisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(3), 270-273.
19.
WardN. J.HirstS. (1997) In-vehicle intelligent information technologies as safety benefit systems: Consideration of philosophy and function. Behavior and information technologies, 16, 88-97.
20.
WierwilleW. W.LeeS. E.DeHartM. C.PerelM. (2006). Test road experiment on imminent warning rear lighting and signaling. Human Factors, 48, 615-626.
