Forward Collision Warning: Clues to Optimal Timing of Advisory Warnings

Nazan Aksan, Lauren Sager, Sarah Hacker, Robert Marini, Jeffrey Dawson, Steven Anderson, Matthew Rizzo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We examined the effectiveness of a heads-up Forward Collision Warning (FCW) system in 39 younger to middle aged drivers (25-50, mean = 35 years) and 37 older drivers (66-87, mean = 77 years). The warnings were implemented in a fixed based, immersive, 180 degree forward field of view simulator. The FCW included a visual advisory component consisting of a red horizontal bar which flashed in the center screen of the simulator that was triggered at time-to-collision (TTC) 4 seconds. The bar roughly overlapped the rear bumper of the lead vehicle, just below the driver's line-of-sight. A sustained auditory tone (∼80 dB) was activated at TTC=2 to alert the driver to an imminent collision. Hence, the warning system differed from the industry standard in significant ways. 95% Confidence intervals for the safety gains ranged from -.03 to.19 seconds in terms of average correction time across several activations. Older and younger adults did not differ in terms of safety gains. Closer inspection of data revealed that younger to middle aged drivers were already braking (42%) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than older drivers (26%), p <.001. Conversely, older drivers were still accelerating (38%) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than younger to middle aged drivers (23%) at the time FCW was activated, p <.009. There were no differences in the proportion of activations when drivers were coasting at the time FCW was activated, p =.240. Furthermore, large individual differences in basic visual, motor, and cognitive function predicted the tendency to brake prior to FCW activation. Those who tended to be better functioning in each of these domains were more likely to be already braking prior to FCW activation at the fixed threshold of TTC=4. These findings suggest optimal timing for advisory alerts for forward events may need to be larger than TTC=4.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)107-112
Number of pages6
JournalSAE International Journal of Transportation Safety
Volume4
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 5 2016

Fingerprint

Chemical activation
driver
activation
Alarm systems
Braking
Simulators
Brakes
Lead
Inspection
time
young adult
confidence
Industry
industry
event

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Human Factors and Ergonomics
  • Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
  • Safety Research
  • Mechanical Engineering

Cite this

Forward Collision Warning : Clues to Optimal Timing of Advisory Warnings. / Aksan, Nazan; Sager, Lauren; Hacker, Sarah; Marini, Robert; Dawson, Jeffrey; Anderson, Steven; Rizzo, Matthew.

In: SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety, Vol. 4, No. 1, 05.04.2016, p. 107-112.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Aksan, Nazan ; Sager, Lauren ; Hacker, Sarah ; Marini, Robert ; Dawson, Jeffrey ; Anderson, Steven ; Rizzo, Matthew. / Forward Collision Warning : Clues to Optimal Timing of Advisory Warnings. In: SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety. 2016 ; Vol. 4, No. 1. pp. 107-112.
@article{dcbd2bc39cf046d0aa467ae91e9ccd42,
title = "Forward Collision Warning: Clues to Optimal Timing of Advisory Warnings",
abstract = "We examined the effectiveness of a heads-up Forward Collision Warning (FCW) system in 39 younger to middle aged drivers (25-50, mean = 35 years) and 37 older drivers (66-87, mean = 77 years). The warnings were implemented in a fixed based, immersive, 180 degree forward field of view simulator. The FCW included a visual advisory component consisting of a red horizontal bar which flashed in the center screen of the simulator that was triggered at time-to-collision (TTC) 4 seconds. The bar roughly overlapped the rear bumper of the lead vehicle, just below the driver's line-of-sight. A sustained auditory tone (∼80 dB) was activated at TTC=2 to alert the driver to an imminent collision. Hence, the warning system differed from the industry standard in significant ways. 95{\%} Confidence intervals for the safety gains ranged from -.03 to.19 seconds in terms of average correction time across several activations. Older and younger adults did not differ in terms of safety gains. Closer inspection of data revealed that younger to middle aged drivers were already braking (42{\%}) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than older drivers (26{\%}), p <.001. Conversely, older drivers were still accelerating (38{\%}) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than younger to middle aged drivers (23{\%}) at the time FCW was activated, p <.009. There were no differences in the proportion of activations when drivers were coasting at the time FCW was activated, p =.240. Furthermore, large individual differences in basic visual, motor, and cognitive function predicted the tendency to brake prior to FCW activation. Those who tended to be better functioning in each of these domains were more likely to be already braking prior to FCW activation at the fixed threshold of TTC=4. These findings suggest optimal timing for advisory alerts for forward events may need to be larger than TTC=4.",
author = "Nazan Aksan and Lauren Sager and Sarah Hacker and Robert Marini and Jeffrey Dawson and Steven Anderson and Matthew Rizzo",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "5",
doi = "10.4271/2016-01-1439",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "107--112",
journal = "SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety",
issn = "2327-5626",
publisher = "SAE International",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Forward Collision Warning

T2 - Clues to Optimal Timing of Advisory Warnings

AU - Aksan, Nazan

AU - Sager, Lauren

AU - Hacker, Sarah

AU - Marini, Robert

AU - Dawson, Jeffrey

AU - Anderson, Steven

AU - Rizzo, Matthew

PY - 2016/4/5

Y1 - 2016/4/5

N2 - We examined the effectiveness of a heads-up Forward Collision Warning (FCW) system in 39 younger to middle aged drivers (25-50, mean = 35 years) and 37 older drivers (66-87, mean = 77 years). The warnings were implemented in a fixed based, immersive, 180 degree forward field of view simulator. The FCW included a visual advisory component consisting of a red horizontal bar which flashed in the center screen of the simulator that was triggered at time-to-collision (TTC) 4 seconds. The bar roughly overlapped the rear bumper of the lead vehicle, just below the driver's line-of-sight. A sustained auditory tone (∼80 dB) was activated at TTC=2 to alert the driver to an imminent collision. Hence, the warning system differed from the industry standard in significant ways. 95% Confidence intervals for the safety gains ranged from -.03 to.19 seconds in terms of average correction time across several activations. Older and younger adults did not differ in terms of safety gains. Closer inspection of data revealed that younger to middle aged drivers were already braking (42%) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than older drivers (26%), p <.001. Conversely, older drivers were still accelerating (38%) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than younger to middle aged drivers (23%) at the time FCW was activated, p <.009. There were no differences in the proportion of activations when drivers were coasting at the time FCW was activated, p =.240. Furthermore, large individual differences in basic visual, motor, and cognitive function predicted the tendency to brake prior to FCW activation. Those who tended to be better functioning in each of these domains were more likely to be already braking prior to FCW activation at the fixed threshold of TTC=4. These findings suggest optimal timing for advisory alerts for forward events may need to be larger than TTC=4.

AB - We examined the effectiveness of a heads-up Forward Collision Warning (FCW) system in 39 younger to middle aged drivers (25-50, mean = 35 years) and 37 older drivers (66-87, mean = 77 years). The warnings were implemented in a fixed based, immersive, 180 degree forward field of view simulator. The FCW included a visual advisory component consisting of a red horizontal bar which flashed in the center screen of the simulator that was triggered at time-to-collision (TTC) 4 seconds. The bar roughly overlapped the rear bumper of the lead vehicle, just below the driver's line-of-sight. A sustained auditory tone (∼80 dB) was activated at TTC=2 to alert the driver to an imminent collision. Hence, the warning system differed from the industry standard in significant ways. 95% Confidence intervals for the safety gains ranged from -.03 to.19 seconds in terms of average correction time across several activations. Older and younger adults did not differ in terms of safety gains. Closer inspection of data revealed that younger to middle aged drivers were already braking (42%) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than older drivers (26%), p <.001. Conversely, older drivers were still accelerating (38%) on a larger proportion of FCW activations than younger to middle aged drivers (23%) at the time FCW was activated, p <.009. There were no differences in the proportion of activations when drivers were coasting at the time FCW was activated, p =.240. Furthermore, large individual differences in basic visual, motor, and cognitive function predicted the tendency to brake prior to FCW activation. Those who tended to be better functioning in each of these domains were more likely to be already braking prior to FCW activation at the fixed threshold of TTC=4. These findings suggest optimal timing for advisory alerts for forward events may need to be larger than TTC=4.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84982214204&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84982214204&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4271/2016-01-1439

DO - 10.4271/2016-01-1439

M3 - Article

C2 - 27648455

AN - SCOPUS:84982214204

VL - 4

SP - 107

EP - 112

JO - SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety

JF - SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety

SN - 2327-5626

IS - 1

ER -