Details:

Creators:
Boot, Walter ; Charness, Neil ; Roque, Nelson ; Barajas, Kimberly ; Dirghalli, Jared ; ... More +
Boot, Walter ; Charness, Neil ; Roque, Nelson ; Barajas, Kimberly ; Dirghalli, Jared ; Mitchum, Ainsley Less -
Corporate Creators:
Florida State University. Dept. of Psychology
Subject/TRT Terms:
[+]
Age Groups Behavior Drivers Flashing Traffic Signals Human Factors Pedestrian Actuated Controllers Pedestrian Safety Right Turns Signalized Intersections Yielding
Publication/ Report Number:
BDV30-977-13
Resource Type:
Tech Report
Geographical Coverage:
Florida
Corporate Publisher:
Florida. Dept. of Transportation
Abstract:
The flashing pedestrian indicator (FPI) is intended to alert turning drivers to the potential presence of

pedestrians in the roadway, facilitate scanning in the likely direction of pedestrians, and encourage caution and

yielding behavior in response to pedestrians. Task 1.1 assessed younger (21-35 years), middle-aged (50-64

years), and older (65+) drivers’ ability to comprehend the intended message of this new signal. Participants were

presented with static driving scenes, containing the FPI (as well as other signal states), and were asked to report

the meaning of the FPI in open-ended and multiple choice formats. Task 1.2 presented a separate group of

participants with similar scenes and participants were asked to imagine they were a right-turning driver. In this

task, participants were asked to report the correct action (go, stop, yield to pedestrian). Pedestrian presence was

manipulated, as well as whether the intersection featured an FPI. Results of Task 1.1 indicated that drivers quickly

picked up on the meaning of the FPI. However, there was some confusion regarding the meaning of the FPI for

drivers proceeding straight through the intersection rather than turning right (participants often thought that that the

signal meant that drivers proceeding straight through the intersection should expect pedestrians as well). Task 1.2

indicated that, compared to a standard signal that did not feature an FPI, the FPI encouraged significantly more

decisions to yield to pedestrians within a crosswalk both in timed and untimed responses. Participants were more

likely to make a response to yield when the FPI was active even when no visible pedestrian was present.

Furthermore, participants were slower in making their decision when no pedestrian was present. We interpret this

pattern as indicating greater caution and search for pedestrians in the presence of the FPI. In general, few age

differences were observed. Results suggested that the FPI is a promising signal with respect to comprehension,

but additional research is needed to 1) further explore the source of, and potential solutions to, driver confusion

uncovered in these studies, 2) evaluate driving behavior in response to the FPI, and 3) understand pedestrian

response to the FPI. Additional laboratory and simulator studies are required before final recommendations can be

made regarding implementation. Reported results provide insight into the design of these studies and the

questions they should address.


Format:
PDF
Collection(s):
US Transportation Collection
Main Document Checksum:
[+]
urn:sha256:0cb7ec18f7f17466cb1434d1cbc217aa2efbf825b9773699050e77cdd25c435c
Download URL:
https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/29644/dot_29644_DS1.pdf
File Type:

Supporting Files

• No Additional Files

More +