Perceptual learning and the visual control of braking

Fajen, Brett R.

doi:10.3758/pp.70.6.1117

Cited by 48 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, a much more powerful explanation for the present observations can be obtained from response threshold models of brake timing, which postulate that drivers initiate braking once some visual cue, for example , reaches a certain threshold value (Lee, 1976;Kiefer et al, 2003Kiefer et al, , 2005Flach et al, 2004;Fajen, 2005Fajen, , 2008Wada et al, 2009;Treiber et al, 2013). Previously, such models have mainly been studied in the context of routine driving, but the results presented here, for example in Figure 6, suggest that a threshold-based model also works very well for describing behavior in surprise rear-end emergencies: In eyes-on-threat events, few drivers responded before visual looming reached s (or rad s, or m s ), and most drivers responded within a second after reaching this threshold 3 .…”

Section: Deceleration Timing From Looming Thresholds?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Inverse tau is a visually available estimate of inverse TTC (Lee, 1976), and thus increases as the potential collision draws nearer. Furthermore, it has often been suggested that inverse tau and similar quantities play an important role in determining drivers' responses to obstacles and collision threats (Lee, 1976;Kiefer et al, 2003Kiefer et al, , 2005Fajen, 2005Fajen, , 2008Kondoh et al, 2008Kondoh et al, , 2014Jurecki & Stanczyk, 2009, 2014.…”

Section: Analyses Of Kinematics-dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lamble et al, 1999;Maddox and Kiefer, 2012), or (2) the quantity , with being the longitudinal speed of the own vehicle (cf. Kiefer et al, 2003Kiefer et al, , 2005Fajen, 2005Fajen, , 2008Treiber and Kesting, 2013;Kusano et al, 2015).…”

Section: Analyses Of Kinematics-dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies

Markkula

Engström

Lodin

et al. 2016

Accident Analysis & Prevention

124

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ReuseUnless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version -refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher's website. TakedownIf you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request.Note: This is a freely distributable postprint, which does not reflect final copyediting and typesetting of the published article, to be cited as: Markkula, G., Engström, J., Lodin, J., Bärgman, J., Victor, T., 2016. A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies. Accident Analysis & Prevention, xx(x), xxxx-xxxx. Abstract: Driver braking behavior was analyzed using time-series recordings from naturalistic rear-end conflicts (116 crashes and 241 near-crashes), including events with and without visual distraction among drivers of cars, heavy trucks, and buses. A simple piecewise linear model could be successfully fitted, per event, to the observed driver decelerations, allowing a detailed elucidation of when drivers initiated braking and how they controlled it. Most notably, it was found that, across vehicle types, driver braking behavior was strongly dependent on the urgency of the given rear-end scenario's kinematics, quantified in terms of visual looming of the lead vehicle on the driver's retina. In contrast with previous suggestions of brake reaction times (BRTs) of 1.5 s or more after onset of an unexpected hazard (e.g., brake light onset), it was found here that braking could be described as typically starting less than a second after the kinematic urgency reached certain threshold levels, with even faster reactions at higher urgencies. The rate at which drivers then increased their deceleration (towards a maximum) was also highly dependent on urgency. Probability distributions are provided that quantitatively capture these various patterns of kinematics-dependent behavioral response. Possible underlying mechanisms are suggested, including looming response thresholds and neural evidence accumulation. These accounts argue that a naturalistic braking response should not be thought of as a slow reaction to some single, researcher-defined "hazard onset", but instead as a relatively fast response to the visual looming cues that build up later on in the evolving traffic scenario.

show abstract

Section: Deceleration Timing From Looming Thresholds?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Analyses Of Kinematics-dependencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies

Markkula

Engström

Lodin

et al. 2016

Accident Analysis & Prevention

124

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One interpretation of such changes is as improvements in perception of aVordances (see Ramenzoni et al 2008Ramenzoni et al , 2010StoVregen et al 2009;Weast et al 2011). For example, perception of aVordances for passing through an opening more closely approximates actual ability following practice performing this behavior (Franchak et al 2010), and the distance between actual and intended stopping location decreases with practice in a simulated braking task (Fajen 2008;Fajen and Devany 2006). Moreover, such changes in perception often transfer to perception of aVordances for unpracticed (but related) behaviors.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Perception of maximum reaching height reflects impending changes in reaching ability and improvements transfer to unpracticed reaching tasks

Wagman

2012

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perception of whether a given behavior is possible typically reflects a person's action capabilities even before the behavior is performed and even when the person has undergone recent changes to their action capabilities. Importantly, perception of affordances for a given behavior also reflects impending changes to action capabilities. Two experiments investigated perception of affordances for reaching when the means of reaching would bring about changes in reaching ability. Experiment 1 found that perception of maximum reaching height is relative to impending changes brought on by a change in posture and use of a hand-held tool. Experiment 2 found that practice performing a reaching task in which reaching ability is unchanged is sufficient to bring about improvements in perception of maximum reaching height when the means of reaching would change reaching ability. The results are discussed in the context of the prospectivity of perception of affordances, and the experiences that may be necessary to bring about (transfer of) improvements in perception of affordances.

show abstract

“…Perceivers often start with the detection of variables that relate ambiguously to the environmental property, but move to the exploitation of specifying information after feedback; that is, they converge on the detection of informational variables that relate one-toone to the to-be-perceived property. The recent upsurge in studies of perceptual learning has demonstrated that this process occurs in many tasks: the visual perception of the pulling force of a stick figure (e.g., Michaels & de Vries, 1998), the visual perception of the relative mass of colliding balls (e.g., Jacobs, Michaels, & Runeson, 2000;Jacobs, Runeson, & Michaels, 2001;Runeson & Andersson, 2007;Runeson, Juslin, & Olsson, 2000), height and length perception by dynamic touch (Michaels, Arzamarski, Isenhower, & Jacobs, 2008;Wagman, Shockley, Riley, & Turvey, 2001;Withagen & Michaels, 2005;Withagen & van Wermeskerken, 2009), visually guided braking (Fajen, 2008;Fajen & Devaney, 2006), and visually guided catching (van Hof, van der Kamp, & Savelsbergh, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How mechanical context and feedback jointly determine the use of mechanical variables in length perception by dynamic touch

Menger

Withagen

2009

Attention, Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Earlier studies have revealed that both mechanical context and feedback determine what mechanical invariant is used to perceive length by dynamic touch. In the present article, the authors examined how these two factors jointly constrain the informational variable that is relied upon. Participants were to judge length while wielding a rod or while holding it stationary. In two experiments, it was tested whether perceptual learning effects in the wielding condition transferred to the holding condition and vice versa. There was an asymmetry in transfer across mechanical conditions: Improvements in the holding context transferred to the wielding condition, but not vice versa. Examining the individuals' exploitation of mechanical variables, we found that, after feedback, participants changed in information usage in both mechanical conditions. For many participants, these changes were not confined to the mechanical context in which the feedback was provided. Indeed, feedback in one mechanical context brought about changes in information usage that often manifested themselves in the other mechanical condition. The authors explore the implications of these findings for research on perceptual learning in dynamic touch and the salience hypothesis.

show abstract

Perceptual learning and the visual control of braking

Cited by 48 publications

References 34 publications

A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies

A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies

Perception of maximum reaching height reflects impending changes in reaching ability and improvements transfer to unpracticed reaching tasks

How mechanical context and feedback jointly determine the use of mechanical variables in length perception by dynamic touch

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About