Citation

Reinhardt-Rutland AH. IATSS Res. 1992; 16(1): 9-14.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1992, International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences, Publisher Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Generally, object motion perception could be explained by a comparison theory relating to the observer's own motion to the image movement at the retina. However, this may have limited applicability on the road since registration of the driver's own motion is incomplete. Recent theory and research stressed the importance of relative movement within the pattern of image movements at the retina. Relevant evidence concerns physiological and psychophysical phenomena by which relative visual movement is enhanced at the expense of perceiving absolute motion. The purpose of this paper is to show how much such findings might explain certain roadway problems. For example: 1) the relative ineffectiveness of retro-reflective material could be explained by its inability to enhance relative visual movement for the driver; and 2) close-following reported in the number of circumstances might be explained by simultaneous motion contrast or relative area of the drivers visual field occupied by other vehicles.