served as contracting officer's technical representatives for this work. AbstractThe purpose of this report was to conduct in-depth analyses of driver inattention using the driving data collected in the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study. An additional database of baseline epochs was reduced from the raw data and used in conjunction with the crash and near-crash data identified as part of the original 100-Car Study to account for exposure and establish near-crash/crash risk. The analyses presented in this report are able to establish direct relationships between driving behavior and crash and near-crash involvement. Risk was calculated (odds ratios) using both crash and near-crash data as well as normal baseline driving data for various sources of inattention. The corresponding population attributable risk percentages were also calculated to estimate the percentage of crashes and near-crashes occurring in the population resulting from inattention. Additional analyses involved: driver willingness to engage in distracting tasks or driving while drowsy; analyses with survey and test battery responses; and the impact of driver's eyes being off of the forward roadway.The results indicated that driving while drowsy results in a four-to six-times higher near-crash/crash risk relative to alert drivers. Drivers engaging in visually and/or manually complex tasks have a three-times higher near-crash/crash risk than drivers who are attentive. There are specific environmental conditions in which engaging in secondary tasks or driving while drowsy is more dangerous, including intersections, wet roadways, and areas of high traffic density. Short, brief glances away from the forward roadway for the purpose of scanning the driving environment are safe and actually decrease near-crash/crash risk. Even in the cases of secondary task engagement, if the task is simple and requires a single short glance the risk is elevated only slightly, if at all. However, glances totaling more than 2 seconds for any purpose increase near-crash/crash risk by at least two times that of normal, baseline driving. DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this report was to conduct in-depth analyses of driver inattention using the driving data collected in the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study. These data provide unique opportunities for transportation researchers as data were collected over an 18-month period and represent normal, daily driving with all the stress and pressures that occur in a metropolitan environment.This analysis also demonstrates one of the primary strengths of large-scale naturalistic driving data in that analytical methods from epidemiology, empirical research, and qualitative research can all be employed to answer research questions. Figure ES.1 shows the relationship of naturalistic data to empirical and epidemiological data. Naturalistic data can help complete gaps in the transportation research between epidemiology and empirical methods by collecting enough data to conduct epidemiological analy...

Previous laboratory and simulator research has indicated that hazard detection skills and abilities are less developed among novice drivers compared with experienced adult drivers. Novices tend to miss some relevant cues and may be less able to process important elements in the environment while driving. As was found with other research methods, it was hypothesized that novices would have lower hazard detection skills and will react less appropriately to hazards than older and more experienced drivers.Three hazard perception scenarios were simulated on a test track and data were collected on newly licensed teen drivers (within 2 weeks of licensure) and a comparison group of adults. The scenarios included a hidden stop sign, hidden pedestrian, and hidden pedestrian with lane closure (this last included a text-messaging task). Discrete quantitative performance metrics were evaluated for this analysis, including: 1) Did the participant glance at the potential hazard (e.g., stop sign, pedestrian)? 2) Did the participant stop (for the stop sign scenario)? 3) Did the participant show signs of indecision, caution, or awareness (for all hazards)?Significant differences between teen drivers and more experienced adult drivers were found in a combined hazard detection analysis. Results indicate that the adult drivers observed hazards and demonstrated overt recognition of hazards more frequently than the teen drivers. Results indicated that a large portion of teen drivers failed to disengage from peripheral task engagement in the presence of hazards. The results will later be compared to naturalistic data for the same set of drivers to see whether these test track results are predictive of real-world behavior.

This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. If trade names, manufacturers' names, or specific products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.

No abstract

No abstract