Truck-related crash occurrences in Manhattan, New York City, are analyzed during four time blocks: morning peak (AMP, 6:00 to 10:00 a.m.), midday (MD, 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.), afternoon peak (PMP, 3:00 to 7:00 p.m.), and nighttime (NT, 7:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). The results of zero-inflated negative binomial models indicate that both the built environment and traffic flows contribute to temporal variation in truck-related crash occurrences. More specifically, tracts with larger populations and higher employment in the finance, insurance, and health care sectors tend to have fewer crashes at night. In contrast, larger household sizes and the retail, professional services, education, and accommodation industry sectors are associated with increased NT crash occurrences. In addition, if 1,000 trucks were shifted from AMP to the NT, the average tract would experience a net increase of truck crashes of 0.2160; the net increase would be 0.1948 if the trucks were shifted from the PMP to the NT. Shifting trucks from the MD to the NT reduces the count by 0.0267; this result suggests that this strategy might provide the best safety benefits. When possible induced nontruck demand is accounted for, even the largest impact on safety (during the PMP) increased crashes by only 3.56%. These findings fill the void of studies that focused on the influence of temporal effects on truck crash occurrences in congested urban settings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Traffic Safety Facts 2011.NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2012.
2.
Injury Prevention and Control: Motor Vehicle Safety.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety. Accessed March 11, 2013.
3.
SchrankD., EiseleB., and LomaxT.. 2012 Urban Mobility Report.Texas A&M Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University System, College Station, Tex., 2012, pp. 29–33.
4.
Holguín-VerasJ., OzbayK., KornhauserA., BromM. A., IyerS., YushimitoW. F., UkkusuriS., AllenB., and SilasM. A.. Overall Impacts of Off-Hour Delivery Programs in New York City Metropolitan Area. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2238, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011, pp. 68–76.
5.
Abdel-AtyM.Analysis of Driver Injury Severity Levels at Multiple Locations Using Ordered Probit Models. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2003, pp. 597–603.
6.
Al-GhamdiA. S.Using Logistic Regression to Estimate the Influence of Accident Factors on Accident Severity. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 34, No. 6, 2002, pp. 729–741.
7.
DuncanC. S., KhattakA. J., and CouncilF. M.. Applying the Ordered Probit Model to Injury Severity in Truck-Passenger Car Rear-End Collisions. In Transportation Research Record 1635, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 63–71.
8.
KockelmanK. M., and KweonY.-J.. Driver Injury Severity: An Application of Ordered Probit Models. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 34, No. 3, 2002, pp. 313–321.
9.
SavolainenP., and ManneringF.. Probabilistic Models of Motor cyclists' Injury Severities in Single- and Multi-Vehicle Crashes. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 39, No. 5, 2007, pp. 955–963.
10.
ShankarV., ManneringF., and BarfieldW.. Statistical Analysis of Accident Severity on Rural Freeways. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 28, No. 3, 1996, pp. 391–401.
11.
RifaatS. M., and ChinH. C.. Accident Severity Analysis Using Ordered Probit Model. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2007, pp. 91–114.
12.
LordD., and ManneringF.. The Statistical Analysis of Crash-Frequency Data: A Review and Assessment of Methodological Alternatives. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 44, No. 5, 2010, pp. 291–305.
13.
JoshuaS. C., and GarberN. J.. Estimating Truck Accident Rate and Involvements Using Linear and Poisson Regression Models. Transportation Planning and Technology, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1990, pp. 41–58.
14.
JonesB., JanssenL., and ManneringF.. Analysis of the Frequency and Duration of Freeway Accidents in Seattle. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 23, No. 4, 1991, pp. 239–255.
15.
MiaouS.-P.The Relationship Between Truck Accidents and Geometric Design of Road Sections: Poisson Versus Negative Binomial Regressions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 26, No. 4, 1994, pp. 471–482.
16.
CarsonJ., and ManneringF.. The Effect of Ice Warning Signs on Ice-Accident Frequencies and Severities. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2001, pp. 99–109.
17.
KarlaftisM. G., and TarkoA. P.. Heterogeneity Considerations in Accident Modeling. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 30, No. 4, 1998, pp. 425–433.
18.
MalyshkinaN. V., and ManneringF. L.. Empirical Assessment of the Impact of Highway Design Exceptions on the Frequency and Severity of Vehicle Accidents. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2010, pp. 131–139.
19.
ShankarV., ManneringF., and BarfieldW.. Effect of Roadway Geo-metrics and Environmental Factors on Rural Freeway Accident Frequencies. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1995, pp. 371–389.
20.
MiltonJ., and ManneringF.. The Relationship Among Highway Geometrics, Traffic-Related Elements and Motor-Vehicle Accident Frequencies. Transportation, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1998, pp. 395–413.
21.
PochM., and ManneringF.. Negative Binomial Analysis of Intersection-Accident Frequencies. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 122, No. 2, 1996, pp. 105–113.
22.
RidoutM., DemétrioC. G. B., and HindeJ.. Models for Count Data with Many Zeros. Proc., XIXth International Biometric Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, 1998.
23.
LeeJ., and ManneringF.. Impact of Roadside Features on the Frequency and Severity of Run-Off-Roadway Accidents: An Empirical Analysis. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2002, pp. 149–161.
24.
LordD., WashingtonS. P., and IvanJ. N.. Poisson, Poisson-Gamma and Zero-Inflated Regression Models of Motor Vehicle Crashes: Balancing Statistical Fit and Theory. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2005, pp. 35–46.
25.
KimD.-G., and WashingtonS.. The Significance of Endogeneity Problems in Crash Models: An Examination of Left-Turn Lanes in Intersection Crash Models. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2006, pp. 1094–1100.
26.
CafisoS., Di GrazianoA., Di SilvestroG., La CavaG., and PersaudB.. Development of Comprehensive Accident Models for Two-Lane Rural Highways Using Exposure, Geometry, Consistency and Context Variables. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 42, No. 4, 2010, pp. 1072–1079.
27.
MountainL., FawazB., and JarrettD.. Accident Prediction Models for Roads with Minor Junctions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 28, No. 6, 1996, pp. 695–707.
28.
MountainL., MaherM., and FawazB.. The Influence of Trend on Estimates of Accidents at Junctions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 30, No. 5, 1998, pp. 641–649.
29.
HeydeckerB., and WuJ.Identification of Sites for Road Accident Remedial Work by Bayesian Statistical Methods: An Example of Uncertain Inference. Advances in Engineering Software, Vol. 32, No. 10, 2001, pp. 859–869.
30.
HirstW., MountainL., and MaherM.. Sources of Error in Road Safety Scheme Evaluation: A Method to Deal with Outdated Accident Prediction Models. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 36, No. 5, 2004, pp. 717–727.
31.
LeeC., and Abdel-AtyM.. Presence of Passengers: Does It Increase or Reduce Driver's Crash Potential?Accident Analysis and Prevention Vol. 40, No. 5, 2008, pp. 1703–1712.
32.
QuddusM. A.Time Series Count Data Models: An Empirical Application to Traffic Accidents. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 40, No. 5, 2008, pp. 1732–1741.
33.
XieY., LordD., and ZhangY.. Predicting Motor Vehicle Collisions Using Bayesian Neural Network Models: An Empirical Analysis. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 39, No. 5, 2007, pp. 922–933.
Ben-AkivaM. E., and LermanS. R.. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand.MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
36.
StephanP. E., GurmuS., SumellA. J., and BlackG.. Who's Patenting in the University? Evidence from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2007, pp. 71–99.
