Perceptual difficulty is one of the main explanations given for the behavioral modifications and high accident rate associated with driving in fog. The present study investigates how fog and the characteristics of vehicle rear lights affect distance perception. Two experiments in a fog chamber (meteorological visibility range of 5-15 m) were run under conditions simulating nighttime fog. The participants gave verbal estimates of the distance (8-28 m) of vehicles simulated by rear-light arrangements. The results revealed an average increase of 60% in the perceived distance of vehicles in fog as compared with normal visibility conditions. Distance overestimation was particularly pronounced when the vehicle had only 1 fog light instead of 2 and when the lights were close together. No effect of light height was observed. These results suggest that the perception of vehicle distance in nighttime fog could be significantly improved by the presence of 2 lights with maximal spacing. Actual or potential applications of this research include vehicle rear light design.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bonnet, C. (1986). Manuel pratique de psychophysique [Practical handbook of psychophysics].Paris: Armand Colin.
2.
Brown, I. (1970, December 24). Motorway crashes in fog --- who's to blame?New Scientist, pp. 544-545.
3.
Bulté, B. (1985). Brouillard. Comportement par visibilité réduite [Fog. Behavior under reduced visibility conditions] (Tech. Rep.).Lille, France: Centre d'Etudes Techniques de I'Equipement Nord Picardie.
4.
Büthoff, H. H., & Mallot, H. A. (1988). Integration of depth modules: Stereo and shading. Journal of the Optical Society of America, A, 5, 1749-1758.
5.
Cavallo, V., Doré, J., & Colomb, M. (1999). Simulation de la conduite automobile: Etude de problémes perceptifs de la conduite dans le brouillard [Simulation of automobile driving: Study of perceptual problems of driving in fog] (Tech. Rep. No. 96MT24)Arcueil, France: Institut National de Recherche sur les Transports et leur Sécurité-Laboratoire de Psychologie de la Conduite.
6.
Cavallo, V., Laya, O., & Malaterre, G. (1986). Etude d'un simulateur de conduite par temps de brouillard. Etude de faisabilité [The simulation of driving in fog. Study of feasibility] (Tech. Rep)Arcueil, France: Organisme National de Sécurité Routiére-Laboratoire de Psychologie de la Conduite.
7.
Colomb, M., Sérézat, L., & Boreux, J. J. (1995). Microphysical characteristics of artificial fog produced in laboratory to study road visibility. In Proceedings of the 23rd Session of the Commission Internationale d'Eclairage (Vol. 1, pp. 346-349). Vienna, Austria: Commission Internationale d'Eclairage.
8.
Cutting, J. A. (1986). Perception with an eye for motion.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9.
Dosher, B. A., Sperling, G., & Wurst, S. A. (1986). Tradeoffs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure. Vision Research, 26, 973-990.
10.
Fárber, B. (1986). Abstandswahrnehmung und Bremsverhalten von Kraftfahrern im fliessenden Verkehr [The drivers' headway perception and braking behavior in traffic flow]. Zeitschrift für Verkehrssicherheit, 32, 9-13.
11.
Gogel, W. C. (1972). Scalar perceptions with binocular cues of distance. American Journal of Psychology, 85, 477-497.
12.
Hawkins, R. K. (1988). Motorway traffic behavior in reduced visibility conditions. In A. G. Gale, M. H. Freeman, C. M. Haslegrave, P. Smith, S. P. Taylor (Eds.), Vision in vehicles II (pp. 9-18). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
13.
Hogema, J. H., & van der Horst, A. R. A. (1994). Driving behaviour in fog: Analysis of inductive loop data (TNO-Report TM 1994 C-6). Soesterberg, Netherlands: TNO Human Factors Research Institute.
14.
Kiegeland, P. (1996). Fahrzeugführung im Nebel [Driving in fog]. Zeitschrift für Verkehrssicherheit, 42, 78-82.
15.
Landy, M. S., Maloney, L. T., Johnston, E. B., & Young, M. (1995). Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: In defense of weak fusion. Vision Research, 35, 389-412.
16.
Meatyard, A. G. (1988). A study of the effectiveness of rear lighting arrangements for cars (TRRL Contract Report 92). Crowthorne, UK: Transport and Road Research Laboratory.
17.
O'Shea, R. P., Blackburn, S. G., & Ono, H. (1994). Contrast as a depth cue. Vision Research, 34, 1595-1604.
18.
Reinhardt-Rutland, A. H. (1986). Misleading perception and vehicle guidance under poor conditions of visibility. In A. G. Gale, M. H. Freeman, C. M. Haslegrave, P. Smith, S. P. Taylor (Eds.), Vision in vehicles (pp. 413-416). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
19.
Ross, H. E. (1967, June 19). Mist, murk and visual perception. New Scientist, pp. 658-660.
20.
Ross, H. E. (1975). Water, fog and the size-distance hypothesis. British Journal of Psychology, 58, 301-313.
21.
Schiff, W. (1980). Perception: An applied approach.Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
22.
Schönbach, P. (1996). Massenunfálle bei Nebel [Multiple car collisions in fog.]Zeitschrift für Sozialspychologie, 2, 109-125.
23.
Snowden, R. J., Stimpson, N., & Ruddle, R. A. (1998). Speed perception fogs up as visibility drops. Nature, 392, 450.
24.
Sumner, R., Bagulay, C., & Burton, J. (1977). Driving in fog on the M4 (TRRL Report SR 281). Crowthorne, UK: Transport and Road Research Laboratory.
25.
Teghtsoonian, M., & Teghtsoonian, R. (1969). Scaling apparent distance in natural indoor settings. Psychonomic Science, 16, 281-283.
26.
Teghtsoonian, R., & Teghtsoonian, M. (1970). Scaling apparent distance in a natural outdoor setting. Psychonomic Science, 21, 215-216.
27.
Theeuwes, J., & Alferdinck, J. W. A. M. (1995). Rear light arrangements for cars equipped with a center high-mounted stop lamHuman Factors, 37, 371-380.
28.
White, M. E., & Jeffery, D. J. (1980). Some aspects of motorway traffic behaviour in fog (TRRL Laboratory Report 958). Crowthorne, UK: Transport and Road Research Laboratory.
