Ch. 5 Section 5.1 & 5.2 Evaluating Driver Response In Path Intrusion Crashes

The explanation for the given correct answer is that reconstructing a crash helps in determining if the crash could have been avoided or not. This is because knowing the time available and the necessary response time for a given scenario is crucial in assessing the avoidability of the crash.

When responding to one object, the response time remains relatively constant regardless of the speed at which the object is moving. This suggests that the brain is able to process and respond to the object efficiently. However, when there are two separate objects to respond to, the response time increases significantly as the speed of the objects increases. This implies that the brain needs more time to process and respond to multiple stimuli simultaneously. Therefore, the statement is true.

As the statement suggests, the longer a driver waits and the denser the traffic becomes, the shorter gap the driver will accept. This implies that when drivers are stuck in heavy traffic for a longer duration, they become more impatient and are willing to take smaller gaps between vehicles to move forward. This behavior is commonly observed in congested traffic situations where drivers try to minimize their waiting time by accepting smaller gaps, even if it means taking more risks. Therefore, the statement is true.

The research discussed in class found that when the responders were aware of the hazard and knew the appropriate response, their response times were faster. This suggests that having knowledge and awareness of potential hazards can help individuals react more quickly and effectively in order to mitigate the risks.

The explanation for the given correct answer is that the research discussed in class found that drivers responded faster in closed course studies, low fidelity simulator studies, and in laboratory studies compared to real-world drivers. This suggests that there may be some factors present in these controlled environments that facilitate quicker response times. However, the statement also mentions that we only need to make an adjustment to account for this difference, implying that the overall conclusion remains true.

Adjustment to Baseline refers to modifying the reported response times from studies to align with the specific methodology and circumstances of a particular case. This means that the response times obtained from various studies may not directly apply to a specific scenario, so adjustments need to be made to ensure accuracy and relevance. By making these adjustments, the response times can be tailored to the specific context, allowing for a more accurate understanding and analysis of the situation at hand.

The question asks for a landmark that is NOT suitable for starting a PRT analysis without adjustment. The correct answer is "Where it is obvious the side road driver is not going to stop". This means that this particular landmark should not be used as a starting point for the analysis. The other options, such as the land landing point of a pedestrian, stop line, or the first point at which a LTAP-OD starts moving laterally, can be considered as suitable landmarks for starting a PRT analysis.

In a path intrusion response scenario, a common eccentricity for a driver looking in his interior rearview mirror when responding to an object straight ahead is 25 degrees. This means that the driver's gaze is slightly off-center, allowing them to maintain some awareness of the rearview mirror while focusing primarily on the object in front of them. This angle provides a balance between monitoring the surroundings and addressing the immediate threat ahead.

Frans Donders is responsible for the Subtractive Method.

Hovering refers to drivers who place their foot over the brake pedal, which reduces their PRT (perception-reaction time) by approximately 0.4 seconds. This means that they are ready to respond quickly in case of any potential hazards or emergencies on the road. By hovering, drivers can minimize the delay between perceiving a danger and reacting to it, thus increasing their chances of avoiding accidents.

Adjustment to Baseline applies the concept of additive factors to driver responses. This means that when making adjustments to the baseline, additional factors are taken into consideration and added to the driver responses. This allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the drivers and their impact on the overall outcome. Therefore, the statement "Adjustment to Baseline applies the concept of additive factors to driver responses" is true.

The main road driver's actual PRT was 3.2 seconds because the side road driver accelerated from the stop line to impact in 3.8 seconds, while the main road driver skidded 0.6 seconds before impact. Therefore, the main road driver's total time from the start of skidding to impact would be 3.8 seconds - 0.6 seconds = 3.2 seconds.

Saul Sternberg is responsible for the Additive Factors Method.

When we consider fewer variables in our analysis, it means that we are not taking into account all the possible factors that could affect the outcome. This leads to a greater variance or range because we are not accounting for all the potential sources of variation. By not considering all the variables, we are leaving room for more uncertainty and variability in the results. Therefore, the statement is true.

The correct answer is "No - you must have an analogous study (path intrusion, cut-off, traffic signal, or lead vehicle)". This means that in order to perform the adjustment to baseline technique, you need to have a study that is similar or comparable to the one you are conducting. The study should involve elements such as path intrusion, cut-off, traffic signal, or lead vehicle. Simply having any published and peer-reviewed study is not enough, it needs to be relevant and analogous to the specific study being conducted.

When drivers approach an intersection at a faster speed and are closer to it when the signal changes, they are more likely to travel through the signal instead of stopping. However, if they do decide to stop, they are more likely to respond faster and decelerate at a greater rate. This implies that drivers who are closer to the intersection and have a higher approach speed are more likely to take risks and try to beat the signal, but if they do stop, they are more attentive and able to quickly react to the changed signal.

According to the study by Harwood et al., the distance traveled by the side road vehicle from a stop to impact is approximately 26.2 ft (8 m).

In a cut off scenario, a vehicle is involved that initially started out in the same direction as the driver. This means that the vehicle was initially traveling in the same direction as the driver, but then cut in front of the driver's vehicle, potentially causing a dangerous situation.

In the I.DRR program, the eccentricity calculation boxes can be made to appear by clicking on the eccentricity box, scrolling to the top, and selecting "CALCULATING ECCENTRICITY". This statement is true as it provides a specific action that can be taken to make the calculation boxes appear.

The correct answer is 0.125 seconds because it states that you would increase the calculated response time by the difference between a passenger car braking latency and that of a commercial vehicle, which is 0.125 seconds.

Based on the given scenario, the driver in the right lane had to respond to the intruder's sudden movement across the highway. The average response time refers to the time it took for the responder to react to the situation. Since the question does not provide any specific information about the responder's reaction time, we can assume that the average response time is the average time it takes for a driver to react to a sudden event on the road. Among the given options, 1.3 sec. (+/- 0.5 sec.) is the closest to the average response time for most drivers in such situations.

not-available-via-ai

The correct answer is Vehicle changing lanes PRT (perception-response time). This refers to the time it takes for a vehicle to perceive the lateral movement of another vehicle in the same direction and respond to it by changing lanes. It measures the time it takes for the driver to perceive the movement and initiate a response.

The correct answer is True. This means that drivers actually perceive the intruder about 0.16 seconds before they arrive at the stop line. This is supported by the statement that a driver may be able to perceive the intruder as a hazard before reaching the stop line. Therefore, starting the PRT from the stop line but adjusting the average PRT downward 0.16 seconds accounts for the time it takes for the driver to perceive the intruder.

The statement is true because drivers neutralize hazards by taking corrective actions. One example of this is when a driver looks both left and right before focusing on their destination, without making glances left and right while traveling through an intersection. This behavior helps the driver to identify potential hazards and take appropriate actions to avoid them, ensuring their safety and the safety of others on the road.

The explanation for the given correct answer is that start-up time refers to the time it takes for a vehicle to start moving forward after the driver has checked for oncoming traffic or when the traffic signal turns green. This means that the statement is true, as it accurately defines the concept of start-up time.

The correct answer suggests that skew is not a factor in driver response times unless the response time is so fast that the difference between the median and average is negligible. When the response time is higher than 1 1/4 seconds, it becomes normally distributed according to the Central Limit Theorem. This implies that skew is not a significant factor in driver response times in most cases.

The average response time for a full braking response when responding to a hazard at a 15 degree eccentricity, at night, and on a straight, rural road is 2.4 sec. (+/- 0.9 sec.). This is the closest PRT (Pre-Reaction Time) to the manner in which drivers have responded in this scenario.

The correct answer is "All of the above." This means that all of the statements mentioned in the options are true. The method mentioned in the question considers anticipation and makes adjustments when necessary, considers the driving task and makes adjustments when necessary, considers experiment types from various settings, and also considers topography as a factor affecting response time.

The correct answer suggests that if someone claims that response times are skewed, they are most likely trying to argue that the average PRT estimate is too high. Skewness refers to the asymmetry of a distribution, indicating that the data is not evenly distributed around the mean. In this case, if response times are skewed, it implies that there are a significant number of slower response times, causing the average PRT estimate to be higher than expected.

The driver only had to respond to one object, which was the pedestrian emerging from the right. The other objects mentioned, such as the vehicle with the left directional signal and the pedestrians on the left side of the road, did not require a response from the driver in this scenario. Therefore, it can be concluded that this is a single stimulus event.

Drivers faced with a head-on impact with a time to contact of 2.5 to 4.8 seconds have been shown to respond similarly to drivers faced with a path intrusion response. This means that their response times can be accurately reported using the path intrusion response time equations and A2B methods. In both scenarios, drivers need to quickly react to a potential collision, whether it is a vehicle or object coming from the side of the road or a head-on impact. Therefore, the same equations and methods can be used to measure their response times in both cases.

The explanation for the given answer, "False," is that according to the information provided, more drivers will actually pull out if the approaching vehicle's speed is slower. This means that the statement in the question, which suggests that more drivers will pull out if the approaching vehicle's speed is slower, is true. Therefore, the correct answer should be "True" instead of "False."

The statement is false because in the I.DRR program, Subject Vehicle making a turn does not refer to drivers negotiating a curve. Therefore, there is no increase in PRT by 0.26 sec when making a turn.

The correct answer is "Reaction." In this context, the term "reaction" refers to the initial movement made by an individual in response to a stimulus. It implies that the person is taking action or responding to the given situation. The other options, "Transition" and "Comment," do not accurately describe the immediate physical response that is being referred to in the question.