Citation

Crundall D, Crundall E, Clarke D, Shahar A. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2012; 44: 88-96.

Affiliation

Accident Research Unit, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.aap.2010.10.017

PMID

22062341

Abstract

Studies of accident statistics suggest that motorcyclists are particularly vulnerable to collisions with other vehicles which pull out of side roads onto a main carriageway, failing to give way to the approaching motorcycle. Why might this happen? The typical response of the car driver is that they looked in the appropriate direction but simply failed to see the motorcycle. To assess the visual skills of drivers in such scenarios we compared the behaviour of novice and experienced drivers to a group of dual drivers (with both car and motorcycle experience). Participants watched a series of video clips, displayed across three screens, depicting the approach to various t-junctions. On reaching the junction, participants had to decide when it was safe to pull out. Responses and eye movements were measured. The results confirmed that dual drivers had the safest responses at junctions, especially in the presence of conflicting motorcycles. On a range of visual measures both novice and experienced drivers appeared inferior to dual drivers, though for potentially different reasons. There were however no differences in the time it took all drivers to first fixate approaching motorcycles. Instead the differences appeared to be due to the amount of time spent looking at the approaching motorcycle. The experienced drivers had shorter gazes on motorcycles than cars, suggesting that they either process less salient motorcycles faster than cars, or that they terminated the gaze prematurely perhaps because they did not realise they were fixating a motorcycle. We argue that this is potential evidence for an oculomotor basis for Look But Fail To See errors.

Language: en