Variability of reaction time and susceptibility to automobile accidents.

Abstract

Reactions to visual and auditory stimuli are made more or less continuously by the automobile driver, particularly on a heavily-traveled street or highway. Individual differences exist in the speed with which drivers are able to respond to these stimuli. Measurements of reaction time have been traditionally included in experimental test batteries designed to predict accident susceptibility of drivers, on the premise that the number of accidents or the accident-rate of an individual driver is partially a function of his reaction time.However, the reported correlations between reaction time and accident rate have been disappointingly low. One explanation which has been advanced for these low correlations is that the "slow reactor" soon becomes aware of his "handicap" and makes adjustments or compensations accordingly in his driving habits. Another explanation is that it is variability of reaction time which is the reaction-time factor related to accident-rate rather than reaction time per se. In other words, it may be that the driver who is consistent in the speed with which he reacts to a stimulus, regardless of how high or how low his mean reaction time may be, is le.ast susceptible to accidents.The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that an individual whose reaction times are relatively consistent throughout a short series of measurements, regardless of the magnitude of his mean reaction time, will be found to be less susceptible to automobile accidents than is the individual whose reaction times are more variable.A review of the published studies since 1930 has shown them to be inconclusive on one or more points. Johnson (3), in his review of the literature pertaining to the detection and treatment of * The writers gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of Capt. N. A. McQuown and Sgt. F. L. Crewe of the Traffic Education Unit, Los Angeles Police Department, in conducting this study.

Relationship between perceptual style and driver reaction to an emergency situation.

“…The predictor in this study had a logical relationship to the criterion behavior. Often simple brake reaction to a red light is correlated with accident records (e.g., Cation, Mount, & Brenner, 1951) where there is little correspondence between the braking response elicited by the red light and the complex perceptual process in the real world.…”

Bus driver accident record: the return of accident proneness

“…Regarding the criterion, culpability should mean that the drivers were to some extent a cause of the event due to their driving behaviour. However, criterions for this would seem to differ between studies, because, although the criterion itself is almost never reported, the differing percentages of culpable drivers between studies (compare for example Cation, Mount & Brenner, 1951;Brandaleone & Flamm, 1955;Quimby, Maycock, Carter, Dixon & Wall, 1986;Dobson, Brown, Ball, Powers & McFadden, 1999), as well as the correlations between culpable and non-culpable in different studies (e.g. Goldstein & Mosel, 1958;McBain, 1970;Gully, Whitney & Vanosdall, 1995;Arthur & Graziano, 1996), show that in many cases, the criterion does not achieve what it set out to do with any large degree of precision (af Wåhlberg & Dorn, 2007).…”

Work‐Related Road Safety: An Analysis Based on U.K. Bus Driver Performance

“…Although some effects of age and/or experience can almost always be found in crash risk calculations, there exists an inherent problem in such data; the matter of culpability for crashes, which is often not taken into consideration. As all drivers are exposed to events that are due to other drivers' behavior, studies that use all crashes as the dependent measure, instead of culpable ones, probably underestimate the effects of their independent variables (studies that have found this effect include References 26–29).…”