Search Results

The design of a safe transportation system requires numerous design decisions that should be based on data acquired by rigorous scientific method. Naturalistic data collection and analysis methods are a relatively new addition to the engineer's toolbox. The naturalistic method is based on unobtrusively monitoring driver and vehicle performance under normal, everyday, driving conditions; generally for extended collection periods. The method generates a wealth of data that is particularly well-suited for identifying the underlying causes of safety deficiencies. Furthermore, the method also provides robust data for the design and evaluation of safety enhancement systems through field studies. Recently the instrumentation required to do this type of study has become much more cost effective allowing larger numbers of vehicles to be instrumented at a fraction of the cost. This paper will first provide an overview of the naturalistic method including comparisons to other available methods.

Driver distraction, defined here as engaging in a secondary task or activity that is not central to the primary task of driving, has been shown to be a contributing factor for many crashes. The secondary tasks and other activities in which drivers choose to engage while driving is also known to be highly varied, including very complex activities(e.g., text messaging on a cellular device) to very simple activities (e.g., selecting a radio preset). Several important distinctions affect the relative risk of engaging in these tasks. Recent data from large-scale instrumented vehicle studies (i.e., “naturalistic” driving studies like the recently released “100 car study” (1)) have begun to provide data where the relative risk, in terms of crash and near crash involvement, can be directly assessed for differing secondary tasks. These data have provided some important insights into the features that create risk.