Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
OLDER AND YOUNGER DRIVER PERFORMANCE AT COMPLEX INTERSECTIONS:IMPLICATIONS FOR USING PERCEPTION-RESPONSE TIME AND DRIVING SIMULATION Professor: Liu Student: Ruby
Motive & Purpose • Motive • Older drivers have the high accident percentage at interactions. • Purpose • Using driving simulation to test older driver performance at complex intersections.
Reference • When older drivers do the action which in left turn and gap-acceptance crashes are over-represented. (Caird & Hancock, 2002) • The people who are 75 years or more, they were collision fatalities at the intersections. (Preusser et al., 1998)
Reference • Decreasing the useful field of view can be predictors of intersection crashes. (Owsley et al., 1998) • Older drivers are often miss the stop signs and stop lights at intersections. (Preusser et al., 1998)
Reference • Perception response time (PRT) • The duration between the appearance of a situation and the initiation of braking. • (Olson, 1996) found the PRT was related to the age. • (Lerner et al., 1995) found the PRT was not related to the age.
Method – Equipment • Driving Simulator Hardware and Software • The University of Calgary Driving Simulator (UCDS). • 3-channel, 150-degree forward field of view vection simulator.
Method - Procedures • Four experimental routes and each with 4 events. • 4 events included: • The sudden appearance of a pedestrian during a right turn (Pedestrian) • A last-second yellow light (Yellow Light) • The unexpected appearance of a pedestrian using a grey mask to induce change blindness (Dynamic Flicker) • A vehicle violating a red light while the participant had a green light (Vehicle Incursion).
Results - Perception Response Time • PRT was calculated based on any response made by the participants, whether the participants braked or accelerated.
Results - Perception Response Time • Response to the pedestrian event was significant between the age groups, t(16) = - 2.118, p = 0.050. • PRT to the Yellow Light event was significantly different between the age groups, t(17) = -4.508, p = 0.0001. • The response to the Dynamic Flicker presentation and the sudden appearance of a pedestrian was significant, t(17) = -3.468, p = 0.003. • The vehicle incursion was also significantly different between the two age groups, t(18) = -2.715, p = 0.014.
Discussion - Perception Response Time and Response Patterns • Overall, the younger drivers showed faster PRTs than older derivers. • The decision by older drivers to continue through the intersection appears indicative of their inability to respond to the light quickly.
Discussion - Perception Response Time and Response Patterns • This study examined complex intersections, with signs, pedestrians and other vehicles present. • Therefore, the PRT may be more reflective of the attention demands on older drivers than previous PRT studies.
Discussion - Simulator Sickness • 40% of older participants and 14% of younger participants had the simulator sickness. • The people who drop out due to simulator sickness may be more at risk for intersection collisions. • (Stern & Koch, 1996) suggest that women are more effective to simulator sickness than men.