Rear Vehicle Matters: How Tailgaters Influence the Car-Following Behaviors of the Ego-Vehicle

Abstract

Rear-end collisions account for a significant proportion of traffic accidents, highlighting the importance of analyzing drivers’ car-following (CF) behavior for traffic safety research. Previous studies, whether based on modeling or data analysis, have primarily focused on the influence of the lead vehicle’s (LV) state on a driver’s CF behavior. However, in real-world driving, the information perceived by drivers is not limited to the LV; drivers also receive information about the following vehicle (FV), and their behavior may be influenced accordingly. Thus, this paper investigates the influence of FV states on the CF behavior of the ego-vehicle, specifically the impact of tailgating (where the time headway between the FV and the ego-vehicle is less than 2 s) on the behavior of the ego-vehicle. The results indicate that when being tailgated, ego-vehicles tend to keep a smaller time headway to their LVs, confirming the nudging effects of the FV in CF events.

Keywords

car-following driver behavior tailgating

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdi

(2010). Coefficient of variation. In Salkind

N. J.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 169–171). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288.n55

Ahmed

H. U.

Huang

(2021). A review of car-following models and modeling tools for human and autonomous-ready driving behaviors in micro-simulation. Smart Cities, 4(1), 314–335.

Almutairi

M. S.

Almutairi

Chiroma

(2023). Hybrid of deep recurrent network and long short term memory for rear-end collision detection in fog based internet of vehicles. Expert Systems with Applications, 213, 119033.

Alonso-Mora

Breitenmoser

Beardsley

Siegwart

(2012, May). Reciprocal collision avoidance for multiple car-like robots. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (pp. 360–366). IEEE.

Bella

Russo

(2011). A collision warning system for rear-end collision: A driving simulator study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 676–686.

Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency. (2014, February 5). Highways Agency warns tailgaters that 'only a fool breaks the 2-second rule'. GOV.UK. Retrieved February 5, 2014 from, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/highways-agency-warns-tailgaters-that-only-a-fool-breaks-the-two-second-rule

Flannagan

M. J.

(2005). Distance perception with a camera-based rear vision system in actual driving (UMTRI-2005-38). University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.

Gunawan

F. E.

(2012). Two-vehicle dynamics of the car-following models on realistic driving condition. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 12(2), 67–75.

Huang

Wen

(2024). Characteristics of rear-end collisions: a comparison between automated driving system-involved crashes and advanced driving assistance system-involved crashes. Transportation Research Record, 2678(7), 771–782.

10.

Jiang

Zhu

(2001). Full velocity difference model for a car-following theory. Physical Review E, 64(1), 017101.

11.

Konno

Koshizuka

(2005). Mean-absolute deviation model. IIE Transactions, 37(10), 893–900.

12.

Lee

D. K.

Lee

(2015). Standard deviation and standard error of the mean. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 68(3), 220–223.

13.

Wang

Liang

Xiao

(2023). Improved car-following model for connected vehicles considering backward-looking effect and motion information of multiple vehicles. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems, 149(2), 04022148.

14.

Müller

(2007). Dynamic time warping. In Information retrieval for music and motion (pp. 69–84). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74048-3_4

15.

Nakajima

(2011). Time-varying parameter VAR model with stochastic volatility: An overview of methodology and empirical applications. Monetary and Economic Studies, 29, 107–142.

16.

Poudel

(2023). Beyond simulated drivers: Evaluating the impact of real-world car-following in mixed traffic control. arXiv Preprint arXiv:2311.12261.

17.

Stephens

Stephan

Crotty

O'Hern

Björklund

(2023). Too close for comfort: A mixed methods study to understand self-reported tailgating using the theory of planned behaviour. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 93, 11–22.

18.

Swaroop

Rajagopal

(2001). A review of constant time headway policy for automatic vehicle following. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC) (Cat. No. 01TH8585, pp. 65–69). IEEE.

19.

Treiber

Hennecke

Helbing

(2000). Congested traffic states in empirical observations and microscopic simulations. Physical Review E, 62(2), 1805.

20.

Wang

Huang

Tang

Meng

(2022). Velocity control in car-following behavior with autonomous vehicles using reinforcement learning. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 174, 106729.

21.

Wen

Cui

Jian

(2022). Characterizing car-following behaviors of human drivers when following automated vehicles using the real-world dataset. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 172, 106689.

22.

Wen

Jian

(2023). Modeling the effects of autonomous vehicles on human driver car-following behaviors using inverse reinforcement learning. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(12), 13903–13915.

23.

Yan

Huang

Xie

(2023). HMI design for chain-braking event based on V2V communication. In Adjunct proceedings of the 15th international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications (AutomotiveUI ’23 Adjunct) (pp. 105–110). Association for Computing Machinery.

24.

Zadka-Peer

Rosenbloom

(2024). Targeted nudging for speeding behavior: The influence of interpersonal characteristics on responses to in-vehicle road nudges. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 204, 107638.

25.

Zhu

Wang

(2018). Human-like autonomous car-following model with deep reinforcement learning. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 97, 348–368.