4.5 Article

25 Years of road safety: The journey from thinking humans to systems-thinking

Journal

APPLIED ERGONOMICS
Volume 98, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103592

Keywords

Road safety; Human factors methods; Sociotechnical systems; Risk management framework

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research into road safety has evolved from individual level component analysis to a much broader, systemic approach that acknowledges the fusion of 'socio' and 'technical' system elements. Over the years, Professor Neville Stanton's research activities have shifted towards holistic analysis of broader systems, paving the way for fundamental changes and improvements to be made to road safety systems worldwide.
Research into road safety has evolved from individual level component analysis to a much broader, systemic approach that acknowledges the fusion of 'socio' and 'technical' system elements. Over the past four decades, Professor Neville Stanton has contributed to over 179 journal articles, book chapters and conference papers in the field of road safety. The journey from 'thinking humans' to 'systems thinking' is demonstrated in this paper through the novel application of the Risk Management Framework (RMF) to the categorisation of research activities. A systematic review of Neville's contributions to the field of road safety demonstrates that over the years, his research activities have evolved from investigating single technological or human performance aspects in isolation (e.g., in-vehicle information design and workload) through to the holistic analysis of much broader systems (e.g., investigating road safety as a whole). Importantly, this evolution goes hand in hand with a change in the focus and emphasis of recommendations for improvements to safety. Going forward, Neville has helped pave the way for fundamental changes and improvements to be made to road safety systems around the world.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available