Citation

Méndez AG, Izquierdo FA. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2010; 42(2): 582-588.

Affiliation

Automobile Research Institute (INSIA), Campus Sur de la UPM, Carretera de Valencia km. 7, 28031-Madrid, Spain.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2010, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.aap.2009.10.003

PMID

20159082

Abstract

The quasi-induced exposure method is widely used to estimate exposure and risks of different groups of drivers and vehicles. Essentially, this method assumes that non-at-fault or passive parties in two-vehicle collisions represent a random sample of the populations on the road. Most previous works have used the whole sample of collisions to estimate exposure. There has been some concern about possible biases in quasi-induced estimates. In this paper, we argue that (1) biases are mainly due to differences in accident avoidance abilities, speeds and injury risks, and (2) because the influence of these three factors on the probability of being non-at-fault is not the same for every crash type, differences may arise among non-at-fault populations, in which case some crash types would provide a more accurate estimate of exposure than others. We explore the direction of biases due to speed, accident avoidance ability and injury risk in four accident types: accidents between vehicles travelling on different lanes in two-way, two-lane undivided roads; accidents between vehicles travelling on different lanes on multilane roads; intersection accidents; and accidents between vehicles travelling on the same lane. Our analysis shows that more research would be needed concerning the effect of speed on head-on crashes on undivided roads, and crashes on multilane roads.

Language: en