Literature DB >> 20728606

Hazard perception as a function of target location and the field of view.

Amit Shahar1, Concetta F Alberti, David Clarke, David Crundall.   

Abstract

A typical hazard perception test presents participants with a single-screen view of the road ahead. This study assessed how increasing this field of view would affect hazard perception abilities. Drivers were shown video clips of driving situations containing at least one hazard either on a single screen, or with the addition of side views on two separate but adjacent screens that extended the perceived worldview to approximately 180 degrees. Mirror information was also included to allow information from behind the vehicle to be attended. Participants were instructed to press a button as soon as they saw a hazard. Faster response times were found for hazards that appeared in the centre of the central screen, than in the periphery of the central screen, with hazards that first appeared in the lateral screens responded to slowest. Additionally, responses to the hazards were faster and were more likely to occur in the three-, as compared to the single-screen condition. These results suggest that providing participants with a wider field of view, which includes more environmental cues that are related to the relevant hazardous situation increases their ability to detect hazards, and some limited support to that providing them with a wider view increases this ability even when all hazard-relevant information appear only in the central screen. A number of reasons for the three-screen advantage are discussed. This study suggests that even responses to central hazards may be under-estimated in a typical single-screen hazard perception test, and that improvements can be made for new hazard perception tests, by including visual information from the side and from behind the driver. This new methodology not only allows testing hazard perception skills in a potentially more immersive and realistic environment, but also enables to create hazard perception clips that cannot be realised in a typical single-screen test. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20728606     DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.03.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Accid Anal Prev        ISSN: 0001-4575


  8 in total

1.  Using an eye-tracker to assess the effectiveness of a three-dimensional riding simulator in increasing hazard perception.

Authors:  Concetta F Alberti; Luciano Gamberini; Anna Spagnolli; Diego Varotto; Luca Semenzato
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw       Date:  2012-04-23

2.  A toolkit for wide-screen dynamic area of interest measurements using the Pupil Labs Core Eye Tracker.

Authors:  Yasmin Faraji; Joris W van Rijn; Ruth M A van Nispen; Ger H M B van Rens; Bart J M Melis-Dankers; Jan Koopman; Laurentius J van Rijn
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-10-17

3.  Hazard detection with a monocular bioptic telescope.

Authors:  Amy L Doherty; Eli Peli; Gang Luo
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Hazard Perception, Presence, and Simulation Sickness-A Comparison of Desktop and Head-Mounted Display for Driving Simulation.

Authors:  Sarah Malone; Roland Brünken
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-04-22

5.  Eye movements and hazard perception in active and passive driving.

Authors:  Andrew K Mackenzie; Julie M Harris
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2015-09-07

6.  The Multiple Object Avoidance (MOA) task measures attention for action: Evidence from driving and sport.

Authors:  Andrew K Mackenzie; Mike L Vernon; Paul R Cox; David Crundall; Rosie C Daly; Duncan Guest; Alexander Muhl-Richardson; Christina J Howard
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-11-16

7.  Improvements of Warning Signs for Black Ice Based on Driving Simulator Experiments.

Authors:  Ghangshin Lee; Sooncheon Hwang; Dongmin Lee
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 4.614

8.  Contingent negative variation during a modified cueing task in simulated driving.

Authors:  Zizheng Guo; Xi Tan; Yufan Pan; Xian Liu; Guozhen Zhao; Lin Wang; Zhen Peng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.