Vehicle-train collisions at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings continue to be a safety concern and despite improvements in warnings, many of these incidents are attributed to human error. In some cases, distractions other than railroad traffic, such as nearby highway intersections, may create additional burdens for drivers’ decision making. In this study, we systematically examined safety concerns across two types of Highway-Rail Grade Crossings: non-short storage and short-storage. In a controlled experiment, 48 college-aged drivers viewed a series of driving scene images and identified, rated, and explained up to five safety concerns in each image. Participants reported more safety concerns and higher average severity of those concerns for short-storage rail crossings than non-short storage, but these findings did not depend on rural vs. urban driving experience. Content analysis of the 1,230 safety concerns using chi-squared analysis revealed differences in attention to dynamic safety concerns by rail crossing type, but not to static concerns.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmbrosJ.PerůtkaJ.SkládanýP.TučkaP. (2019). Enhancing the insight into Czech railway level crossings’ safety performance. International Journal of Rail Transportation, 8(1),99-108.
2.
BeanlandV.WynneR. A. (2019, November). Does familiarity breed competence or contempt? Effects of driver experience, road type and familiarity on hazard perception. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 2006-2010). Los Angeles: CA, SAGE Publications.
3.
CoxJ. A.BeanlandV.FiltnessA. J. (2017). Risk and safety perception on urban and rural roads: Effects of environmental features, driver age and risk sensitivity. Traffic injury prevention, 18(7), 703-710.
4.
CraigC. M.LevulisS. J. (2017, September). The relationship between global and information processing factors and self-perceived risky driving among older adults. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 1447-1451), Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
5.
HankeyJ. M.PerezM. A.McClaffertyJ. A. (2016). Description of the SHRP 2 naturalistic database and the crash, near-crash, and baseline data sets. Virginia Tech Transportation Institute.
6.
HansbergerJ. T.HoltR. W. (2001, October). The implications of goals and experience for driving expertise. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 45, No. 13, pp. 921-925). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
7.
Highway–Rail Grade Crossing Technical Working Group. (2002). Guidance on Traffic Control Devices at Highway–Rail Grade Crossings. Washington (DC): Federal Highway Administration.
8.
HorreyW. J.LeschM. F.Mitsopoulos-RubensE.LeeJ. D. (2015). Calibration of skill and judgment in driving: Development of a conceptual framework and the implications for road safety. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 76, 25-33.
9.
HorswillM. S.McKennaF. P. (2004). Drivers’ hazard perception ability: Situation awareness on the road. In BanburyS.TremblayS. (Eds.). A Cognitive Approach to Situation Awareness (pp.155-175). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
10.
HuesteggeL.SkottkeE. M.AndersS.MüsselerJ.DebusG. (2010). The development of hazard perception: Dissociation of visual orientation and hazard processing. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 13, 1-8.
11.
KatrahmaniA.RomoserM.SamuelS. (2016, September). Investigating a non-invasive method of measuring the quality of Latent Hazard Schemas of Novice Teen and Experienced Adult Drivers: A New Perspective using Traditional Tools. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 712-716). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
12.
KlauerS. G.GuoF.SudweeksJ.DingusT. A. (2010). An analysis of driver inattention using a case-crossover approach on 100-car data (No. HS-811 334).
13.
LandryS.WangY.LautalaP.NelsonD.JeonM. (2018, July). Driver behavior at simulated railroad crossings. In International Conference on Digital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management (pp. 599-609). Springer, Cham.
14.
LautalaP.MuhireM.SalimA.JeonM.NelsonD.DeanA. (2018). The Assessment of Driver Compliance at Highway–Railroad Grade Crossings Based on Naturalistic Driving Study Data (No. 18-06234).
15.
LennéM. G.Mitsopoulos-RubensE.CandappaN.BeanlandV. (2014, September). Drivers’ response to dynamic gap assistance signs at simulated rural unsignalised T-intersections. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp. 2240-2244). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
LernerN.RatteD.WalkerJ. (1990). Driver Behavior at Rail-Highway Crossings (FHWA-SA-90-008). Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, Office of Highway Safety.
18.
McCarleyJ. S.SteelmanK. S.HorreyW. J. (2014). The view from the driver’s seat: What good is salience?. Applied cognitive psychology, 28(1), 47-54.
19.
McDonaldC. C.GoodwinA. H.PradhanA. K.RomoserM. R.WilliamsA. F. (2015). A review of hazard anticipation training programs for young drivers. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(1), S15-S23.
20.
MourantR. R.RockwellT. H. (1972). Strategies of visual search by novice and experienced drivers. Human factors, 14(4), 325-335.
21.
MuellerS. T.PiperB. J. (2014). The psychology experiment building language (PEBL) and PEBL test battery. Journal of neuroscience methods, 222, 250-259.
22.
MuhireM.LautalaP.NelsonD.DeanA. (2017). Selection of representative crossings database for the evaluation of driver behavior over highway-rail grade crossings. In 2017 Joint Rail Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection.
23.
PelzD. C.KrupatE. (1974). Caution profile and driving record of undergraduate males. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 6(1), 45-58.
24.
PlummerJ. P.DiamondA.ChaparroA.NiR. (2019, November). Hazard Perception in City and Highway Environments. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting ( pp. 1404-1408).Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
25.
SalimA.JeonM.LautalaP.NelsonD. (2018, April). Using Naturalistic Driving Study Data to Investigate Driver Behavior at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. In 2018 Joint Rail Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection.
26.
TidwellJ. E.JrHumphreysJ. B. (1981). Improving Safety at Passive Crossings with Restricted Sight Distance. Transportation Research Record, 841 (36), pp. 29-36.
27.
UnderwoodG.CrundallD.ChapmanP. (2011). Driving simulator validation with hazard perception. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 14, 435-446.
WardN. J.WildeG. J. (1996). Driver approach behaviour at an unprotected railway crossing before and after enhancement of lateral sight distances: an experimental investigation of a risk perception and behavioural compensation hypothesis. Safety Science, 22, 63-75.
30.
ZimmermanL. A.MuellerS. T.MarconJ. L.DanielsJ. B.VowelsC. L. (2011). Improving soldier threat detection skills in the operational environment. In Interservice/ Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (IITSEC) (pp. 1-12). Orlando: Florida: IITSEC.
