Road Users Fail to Appreciate the Special Optical Properties of Retroreflective Materials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether typical road users appreciate the special optical properties of retroreflective materials. BACKGROUND: Retroreflective surfaces reflect light back towards the source of the illumination. All drivers benefit from retroreflective materials, as they are required on road signs, on large trailers, in lane delineation, and other traffic control devices. Retroreflective markings can also greatly enhance the conspicuity of pedestrians at night, but pedestrians typically underuse retroreflective markings. One possible reason is that pedestrians may not appreciate the special optical properties of retroreflective materials. METHOD: Two experiments tested whether observers could correctly predict that retroreflective materials appear remarkably bright when illuminated by a source that is aligned with the observers' eyes. Observers used a magnitude estimation procedure to predict how bright retroreflective and non-retroreflective stimuli would appear during a demonstration designed to highlight retroreflectivity. They then judged the brightness again during the demonstration. RESULTS: In general, observers underestimated how bright retroreflective stimuli would be and overestimated how bright diffuse reflective and fluorescent stimuli would be. The underestimates for retroreflective stimuli were particularly striking when the observers had not closely examined the stimuli in advance. CONCLUSION: The fact that road users do not appreciate retroreflectivity may help explain why pedestrians underuse retroreflective markings at night. APPLICATION: Educational interventions could prove useful in this domain.

Highlighting Bicyclist Biological Motion Enhances Their Conspicuity in Daylight.

For safety purposes, it is critical that bicyclists be conspicuous to drivers. We report two experiments that investigated the benefits of bicycle taillights and fluorescent clothing for enhancing the bicyclist's rear conspicuity in daylight. In Experiment 1, 24 participants sat in a car parked on a closed road at each of three distances and rated the conspicuity of four bicyclists displaying taillights that varied in their placement, intensity, and mode. The results confirmed that bicycle taillights can significantly enhance conspicuity in daylight. Varying the placement of the taillights revealed that having an "always on" taillight mounted to each of the rider's ankles was the most conspicuous location to mount taillights, and this effect was particularly strong at greater viewing distances. For seat post-mounted taillights, flashing taillights were rated as more conspicuous. In Experiment 2, 186 participants were passengers on a short drive during which they pressed a button each time they recognized that a bicyclist was present. Each participant passed a test bicyclist wearing one of four clothing configurations. When the cyclist wore a fluorescent yellow jersey paired with fluorescent yellow leg covers, participants responded from a distance that was 3.3 times greater than when the cyclist wore the same jersey without the yellow leg covers. Both of these experiments demonstrate that highlighting bicyclists' pedaling motion enhances their conspicuity when viewed from behind. These results further emphasize the conspicuity benefits of biological motion and provide bicyclists with techniques to enhance their own conspicuity in daylight.

Night-time pedestrian conspicuity: effects of clothing on drivers' eye movements.

PURPOSE: Drivers' responses and eye movements were assessed as they approached pedestrians at night in order to explore the relative conspicuity benefits of different configurations of retroreflective markings. METHODS: Eye movements were recorded using an ASL Mobile Eye (Applied Science Technologies, www.asleyetracking.com) from 14 young licensed drivers (M = 24.1 ± 6.4 years) as they drove along a closed-road circuit at night. At two locations, pedestrians walked in place facing either towards or away from the road. Pedestrians wore black clothing with a standard retroreflective vest either alone or with additional retroreflective markers positioned in a configuration conveying biological motion (biomotion). Drivers responded when they recognised that a pedestrian was present and again when they identified the direction the pedestrian was facing. RESULTS: Drivers recognised pedestrians from a significantly greater distance (p < 0.05) when the pedestrian's clothing included the biomotion configuration (319.1 m) than when the biomotion markings were absent (184.5 m). Further, the drivers recognised the direction that the pedestrian faced from a longer distance when biomotion markings were present (215.4 m vs 95.6 m). Eye movement data suggested that the biomotion configuration attracted drivers' attention significantly sooner than the vest (time to first fixation: 1.1 vs 3.5 s), that drivers fixated on pedestrians wearing biomotion for significantly less time prior to responding (3.4 s vs 6.1 s), and the time to first recognise a pedestrian was approximately half that for biomotion compared to vest (6.4 vs 13.9 s). CONCLUSION: Adding biomotion reflectors to the vest facilitated earlier recognition of pedestrians and faster identification of the direction that the pedestrian faced. These findings confirm that the conspicuity advantages of biomotion configurations on pedestrians at night result in part from drivers fixating pedestrians earlier and more efficiently.

The conspicuity of pedestrians at night: a review.

Drivers' visual limitations are a leading contributor to night-time traffic crashes involving pedestrians. This paper reviews the basic changes in vision that occur at night for young and old visually healthy drivers, as well as those with common ocular pathology. To maximise their safety at night, pedestrians should be conspicuous. That is, beyond being simply visible (detectable as an ambiguous object), they should attract the attention of drivers and be readily perceivable as pedestrians. Research has established that the conspicuity of pedestrians can be optimised by attaching retroreflective markings to the pedestrian's extremities. Doing so highlights the pedestrian's 'biological motion,' which facilitates the accurate perception of a person; however, retroreflective markings on the torso (for example, vests) are less effective. Importantly, behavioural evidence indicates that most road users - drivers and pedestrians alike - are not aware of the limitations of night vision. For example, drivers typically 'overdrive' the useful range of their headlight beams and under-use their high beam headlight setting. Further, pedestrians overestimate their own conspicuity at night and fail to appreciate the extent to which their own conspicuity depends on their clothing. The widespread misunderstanding of the challenges associated with night driving reflects a lack of awareness of the fundamental limitations of night vision. Educational interventions are needed to ameliorate these dangerous misunderstandings and to improve the safety of all road users at night.

Electroluminescent Materials Can Further Enhance the Nighttime Conspicuity of Pedestrians Wearing Retroreflective Materials.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the nighttime conspicuity benefits of adding electroluminescent (EL) panels to pedestrian clothing that contains retroreflective elements. BACKGROUND: Researchers have repeatedly documented that pedestrians are too often not sufficiently conspicuous to drivers at night and that retroreflective materials can enhance the conspicuity of pedestrians. However, because retroreflective elements in clothing are effective only when they are illuminated by the headlamps of an approaching driver, they are not useful for pedestrians who are positioned outside the beam pattern of an approaching vehicle's headlamps. Electroluminescent materials-flexible luminous panels that can be attached to clothing-have the potential to be well suited for these conditions. METHOD: Using an open-road course at night, we compared the distances at which observers responded to pedestrians who were positioned at one of three lateral positions (relative to the vehicle's path) wearing one of two high-visibility garments. RESULTS: The garment that included both EL and retroreflective materials yielded longer response distances than the retroreflective-only garment. This effect was particularly strong when the test pedestrian was positioned farthest outside of the area illuminated by headlamps. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that EL materials can further enhance the conspicuity of pedestrians who are wearing retroreflective materials. APPLICATION: EL materials can be applied to garments. They may be especially valuable to enhance the conspicuity of roadway workers, emergency responders, and traffic control officers.

Observers' Judgments of the Effects of Glare on Their Visual Acuity for High and Low Contrast Stimuli.

Disability glare refers to a reduction in the ability to discern a stimulus that is positioned near another stimulus that has a much higher luminance. While it is common for drivers to report that they have been "blinded" by oncoming headlights, it is unclear whether observers can accurately judge when they are visually disabled by glare. This experiment sought to quantify the accuracy with which observers can judge when a glare source reduces their visual acuity. Seventeen observers estimated their disability glare threshold (DGT)-the luminance of a glare source that would be just sufficient to impair their ability to discern the orientation of a Landolt C that was surrounded by the glare source. These estimated DGTs were compared to the participant's actual DGTs. Participants consistently underestimated the intensity of glare that was required to impair their acuity. On average, estimates of glare threshold were 88% lower than actual glare threshold intensities. Participants' judgments were affected by stimulus size but not stimulus contrast. These results suggest that observers can exaggerate the debilitating effects of glare and that they can fail to appreciate that high contrast stimuli are more robust to glare. A driver who believes that even the lowest intensities of headlight glare can visually impair an oncoming driver may be reluctant to use high beam headlamps, despite their significant visibility advantages.

Drivers' judgments of the effect of headlight glare on their ability to see pedestrians at night.

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have concluded that pedestrians typically overestimate their own conspicuity to approaching drivers at night. The present experiments extended this research by exploring the accuracy of drivers' judgments of pedestrian conspicuity while facing varying degrees of headlight glare. METHOD: In Experiment 1, participants on an open road estimated their ability to see a roadside pedestrian in each of two clothing configurations and with each of three different glare intensities present. In Experiment 2, participants responded to a roadside pedestrian under the same open road conditions; the participants were naïve with regard to both the position of the pedestrian and to the clothing and glare manipulations. RESULTS: Consistent with earlier research, estimates of response distance were, on the average, over three times greater than actual recognition distance. The extent to which participants overestimated conspicuity was greater when the pedestrian wore a retroreflective vest, and participants incorrectly judged that headlight glare would not degrade drivers' ability to see a pedestrian wearing a retroreflective vest. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: These results confirm that road users' understanding of issues involving drivers' night vision is limited. These misunderstandings may result in road users behaving in ways that increase the risk of nighttime collisions with pedestrians.

Seeing pedestrians at night: effect of driver age and visual abilities.

PURPOSE: To quantify the effects of driver age on night-time pedestrian conspicuity, and to determine whether individual differences in visual performance can predict drivers' ability to recognise pedestrians at night. METHODS: Participants were 32 visually normal drivers (20 younger: M = 24.4 years ± 6.4 years; 12 older: M = 72.0 years ± 5.0 years). Visual performance was measured in a laboratory-based testing session including visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, motion sensitivity and the useful field of view. Night-time pedestrian recognition distances were recorded while participants drove an instrumented vehicle along a closed road course at night; to increase the workload of drivers, auditory and visual distracter tasks were presented for some of the laps. Pedestrians walked in place, sideways to the oncoming vehicles, and wore either a standard high visibility reflective vest or reflective tape positioned on the movable joints (biological motion). RESULTS: Driver age and pedestrian clothing significantly (p < 0.05) affected the distance at which the drivers first responded to the pedestrians. Older drivers recognised pedestrians at approximately half the distance of the younger drivers and pedestrians were recognised more often and at longer distances when they wore a biological motion reflective clothing configuration than when they wore a reflective vest. Motion sensitivity was an independent predictor of pedestrian recognition distance, even when controlling for driver age. CONCLUSIONS: The night-time pedestrian recognition capacity of older drivers was significantly worse than that of younger drivers. The distance at which drivers first recognised pedestrians at night was best predicted by a test of motion sensitivity.

Configuring retroreflective markings to enhance the night-time conspicuity of road workers.

This study investigated whether the night-time conspicuity of road workers can be enhanced by positioning retroreflective strips on the moveable joints in patterns that convey varying degrees of biological motion. Participants were 24 visually normal adults (12 young M=26.8 years; 12 older M=72.9 years). Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and glare sensitivity were recorded for each participant. Experimenters acting as road workers walked in place on a closed road circuit within simulated road work sites, facing either the oncoming driver or the roadway (presenting sideways to the driver) and wearing one of four clothing conditions: (i) standard road worker vest; (ii) standard vest plus thigh-mounted retroreflective strips; (iii) standard vest plus retroreflective strips on ankles and knees; (iv) standard vest plus retroreflective strips positioned on the extremities in a configuration that conveyed biological motion ("biomotion"). As they drove along the closed road participants were instructed to press a button to indicate when they first recognized that a road worker was present. The results demonstrated that regardless of the direction of walking, road workers wearing biomotion clothing were recognized at significantly (p<0.05) longer distances (3×), relative to the standard vest alone. Response distances were significantly shorter for the older drivers. Contrast sensitivity was a better predictor of the ability to recognize road workers than was visual acuity or glare sensitivity. We conclude that adding retroreflective strips in the biomotion configuration can significantly improve road worker conspicuity regardless of the road worker's orientation and the age of the driver.

The accuracy of drivers' judgments of the effects of headlight glare on their own visual acuity.

Drivers' judgments of the magnitude of disability glare caused by high-beam headlights may not match actual declines in visual performance. This study investigated younger and older drivers' beliefs about their own visual performance in the presence of headlight glare. Eleven older drivers and seventeen younger drivers judged the distance at which they would just be able to recognize the orientation of a white Landolt C if it were present adjacent to the headlamps of a stationary opposing vehicle at night. The younger participants were generally accurate in their estimates of the recognition distance of the stimulus, while older participants significantly overestimated both their own acuity and the effect of glare on their vision. From this study, we see that older drivers' judgments about the disabling effects of oncoming headlights may be systematically inaccurate. These misperceptions about headlight glare may help explain why drivers tend to underuse high beams.

Pedestrians' estimates of their own nighttime conspicuity are unaffected by severe reductions in headlight illumination.

INTRODUCTION: At night pedestrians tend to overestimate their conspicuity to oncoming drivers, but little is known about factors affecting pedestrians' conspicuity estimates. This study examines how headlamp intensity and pedestrians' clothing influence judgments of their own conspicuity. METHOD: Forty-eight undergraduate students estimated their own conspicuity on an unilluminated closed road by walking in front of a stationary vehicle to the point at which they judged that they were just recognizable to the driver. Unknown to the participants, high beam intensity was manipulated between subjects by placing neutral density filters on the headlamps. RESULTS: Estimated conspicuity distances did not significantly vary with changes in headlamp intensity even when only 3% of the illumination from the headlamps was present. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: These findings underscore the need to educate pedestrians about the visual challenges that drivers face at night and the need to minimize pedestrians' exposure to traffic flow at night.

Bicyclists overestimate their own night-time conspicuity and underestimate the benefits of retroreflective markers on the moveable joints.

Conspicuity limitations make bicycling at night dangerous. This experiment quantified bicyclists' estimates of the distance at which approaching drivers would first recognize them. Twenty five participants (including 13 bicyclists who rode at least once per week, and 12 who rode once per month or less) cycled in place on a closed-road circuit at night-time and indicated when they were confident that an approaching driver would first recognize that a bicyclist was present. Participants wore black clothing alone or together with a fluorescent bicycling vest, a fluorescent bicycling vest with additional retroreflective tape, or the fluorescent retroreflective vest plus ankle and knee reflectors in a modified 'biomotion' configuration. The bicycle had a light mounted on the handlebars which was either static, flashing or off. Participants judged that black clothing made them least visible, retroreflective strips on the legs in addition to a retroreflective vest made them most visible and that adding retroreflective materials to a fluorescent vest provides no conspicuity benefits. Flashing bicycle lights were associated with higher conspicuity than static lights. Additionally, occasional bicyclists judged themselves to be more visible than did frequent bicyclists. Overall, bicyclists overestimated their conspicuity compared to previously collected recognition distances and underestimated the conspicuity benefits of retroreflective markings on their ankles and knees. Participants mistakenly judged that a fluorescent vest that did not include retroreflective material would enhance their night-time conspicuity. These findings suggest that bicyclists have dangerous misconceptions concerning the magnitude of the night-time conspicuity problem and the potential value of conspicuity treatments.

Even moderate visual impairments degrade drivers' ability to see pedestrians at night.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of moderate levels of refractive blur and simulated cataracts on nighttime pedestrian conspicuity in the presence and absence of headlamp glare. METHODS: The ability to recognize pedestrians at night was measured in 28 young adults (M = 27.6 years) under three visual conditions: normal vision, refractive blur, and simulated cataracts; mean acuity was 20/40 or better in all conditions. Pedestrian recognition distances were recorded while participants drove an instrumented vehicle along a closed road course at night. Pedestrians wore one of three clothing conditions and oncoming headlamps were present for 16 participants and absent for 12 participants. RESULTS: Simulated visual impairment and glare significantly reduced the frequency with which drivers recognized pedestrians and the distance at which the drivers first recognized them. Simulated cataracts were significantly more disruptive than blur even though photopic visual acuity levels were matched. With normal vision, drivers responded to pedestrians at 3.6- and 5.5-fold longer distances on average than for the blur or cataract conditions, respectively. Even in the presence of visual impairment and glare, pedestrians were recognized more often and at longer distances when they wore a "biological motion" reflective clothing configuration than when they wore a reflective vest or black clothing. CONCLUSIONS: Drivers' ability to recognize pedestrians at night is degraded by common visual impairments, even when the drivers' mean visual acuity meets licensing requirements. To maximize drivers' ability to see pedestrians, drivers should wear their optimum optical correction, and cataract surgery should be performed early enough to avoid potentially dangerous reductions in visual performance.

Using reflective clothing to enhance the conspicuity of bicyclists at night.

Bicycling at night is more dangerous than in the daytime and poor conspicuity is likely to be a contributing factor. The use of reflective markings on a pedestrian's major joints to facilitate the perception of biological motion has been shown to greatly enhance pedestrian conspicuity at night, but few corresponding data exist for bicyclists. Twelve younger and twelve older participants drove around a closed-road circuit at night and indicated when they first recognized a bicyclist who wore black clothing either alone, or together with a reflective bicycling vest, or a vest plus ankle and knee reflectors. The bicyclist pedalled in place on a bicycle that had either a static or flashing light, or no light on the handlebars. Bicyclist clothing significantly affected conspicuity; drivers responded to bicyclists wearing the vest plus ankle and knee reflectors at significantly longer distances than when the bicyclist wore the vest alone or black clothing without a vest. Older drivers responded to bicyclists less often and at shorter distances than younger drivers. The presence of a bicycle light, whether static or flashing, did not enhance the conspicuity of the bicyclist; this may result in bicyclists who use a bicycle light being overconfident of their own conspicuity at night. The implications of our findings are that ankle and knee markings are a simple and very effective approach for enhancing bicyclist conspicuity at night.

Using biological motion to enhance the conspicuity of roadway workers.

This study examined whether the conspicuity of road workers at night can be enhanced by distributing retroreflective strips across the body to present a pattern of biological motion (biomotion). Twenty visually normal drivers (mean age = 40.3 years) participated in an experiment conducted at two open-road work sites (one suburban and one freeway) at night-time. At each site, four road workers walked in place wearing a standard road worker night vest either (a) alone, (b) with additional retroreflective strips on thighs, (c) with additional retroreflective strips on ankles and knees, or (d) with additional retroreflective strips on eight moveable joints (full biomotion). Participants, seated in stationary vehicles at three different distances (80 m, 160 m, 240 m), rated the relative conspicuity of the four road workers. Road worker conspicuity was maximized by the full biomotion configuration at all distances and at both sites. The addition of ankle and knee markings also provided significant benefits relative to the standard vest alone. The effects of clothing configuration were more evident at the freeway site and at shorter distances. Overall, the full biomotion configuration was ranked to be most conspicuous and the vest least conspicuous. These data provide the first evidence that biomotion effectively enhances conspicuity of road workers at open-road work sites.

Simulator sickness during driving simulation studies.

While driving simulators are a valuable tool for assessing multiple dimensions of driving performance under relatively safe conditions, researchers and practitioners must be prepared for participants that suffer from simulator sickness. This paper describes multiple theories of motion sickness and presents a method for assessing and reacting to simulator sickness symptoms. Results showed that this method identified individuals who were unable to complete a driving simulator study due to simulator sickness with greater than 90% accuracy and that older participants had a greater likelihood of simulator sickness than younger participants. Possible explanations for increased symptoms experienced by older participants are discussed as well as implications for research ethics and simulator sickness prevention.

Seeing pedestrians at night: visual clutter does not mask biological motion.

Although placing reflective markers on pedestrians' major joints can make pedestrians more conspicuous to drivers at night, it has been suggested that this "biological motion" effect may be reduced when visual clutter is present. We tested whether extraneous points of light affected the ability of 12 younger and 12 older drivers to see pedestrians as they drove on a closed road at night. Pedestrians wore black clothing alone or with retroreflective markings in four different configurations. One pedestrian walked in place and was surrounded by clutter on half of the trials. Another was always surrounded by visual clutter but either walked in place or stood still. Clothing configuration, pedestrian motion, and driver age influenced conspicuity but clutter did not. The results confirm that even in the presence of visual clutter pedestrians wearing biological motion configurations are recognized more often and at greater distances than when they wear a reflective vest.

Highlighting human form and motion information enhances the conspicuity of pedestrians at night.

Exploring how biological motion can make pedestrians more conspicuous to drivers at night, one-hundred-and-twenty participants were driven along an open-road route at night and pressed a button whenever they recognized that a pedestrian was present. A test pedestrian wearing black clothing alone or with 302 cm2 of retroreflective markings in one of four configurations either stood still or walked in place on an unilluminated sidewalk. Participants' response distances were maximal for the full biological-motion configuration and remained surprisingly long when convenient subsets of reflective markers were positioned on the pedestrian's ankles and wrists. When the pedestrian wore a reflective vest, the responses were no better than when he wore no reflective markings. The biological-motion advantage actually results from interacting form-perception and motion-perception mechanisms. These results confirm that basic perceptual phenomena-observers' sensitivity to human form and motion can be harnessed to reduce an important problem of traffic safety.

The effects of severe visual challenges on steering performance in visually healthy young drivers.

PURPOSE: Two experiments explored the extent to which induced blur, reduced luminance, and reduced visual fields affect drivers' steering performance in a driving simulator. METHODS: In experiment 1, ten young participants (M = 21.2 years) drove at approximately 89 km/h (55 mph) along a curvy roadway while being exposed to blur (0 to + 10 D), luminance (0.003 to 16.7 cd/m), and visual field (1.7 and 150 degrees) manipulations. In experiment 2, a new group of ten young participants (M = 18.5 years) drove while exposed to seven visual field sizes (1.7 to 150 degrees). RESULTS: Steering was sensitive to a reduced field size but not to the blur and luminance challenges. Acuity, on the other hand, was sensitive to the blur and luminance challenges but not to reduced field size. DISCUSSION: In healthy young drivers, steering performance is remarkably robust to severe blur and to extremely low luminances. These results support a key element of the selective degradation hypothesis advanced by Leibowitz and colleagues--that steering abilities are preserved at night even when the ability to recognize objects and hazards is not. Additional research should address the other element of this hypothesis--that drivers fail to appreciate the extent to which their visual abilities are degraded at night.

Limitations in drivers' ability to recognize pedestrians at night.

This study quantified drivers' ability to recognize pedestrians at night. Ten young and 10 older participants drove around a closed road circuit and responded when they first recognized a pedestrian. Four pedestrian clothing and two beam conditions were tested. Results demonstrate that driver age, clothing configuration, headlamp beam, and glare all significantly affect performance. Drivers recognized only 5% of pedestrians in the most challenging condition (low beams, black clothing, glare), whereas drivers recognized 100% of the pedestrians who wore retroreflective clothing configured to depict biological motion (no glare). In the absence of glare, mean recognition distances varied from 0.0 m (older drivers, low beam, black clothing) to 220 m (722 feet; younger drivers, high beam, retroreflective biomotion). These data provide new motivation to minimize interactions between vehicular and pedestrian traffic at night and suggest garment designs to maximize pedestrian conspicuity when these interactions are unavoidable.