4.4 Article

Gap Acceptance Behavior of Mobile Phone-Distracted Drivers at Roundabouts

Journal

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD
Volume -, Issue 2602, Pages 43-51

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.3141/2602-06

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The use of mobile phones while driving is increasing at an alarming rate despite the associated crash risks. A significant safety concern is that driving while distracted by a mobile phone is more prevalent among young drivers, a less experienced driving cohort with elevated crash risk. The objective of this study was to examine the gap acceptance behavior of distracted young drivers at roundabouts. The Center for Accident Research and Road Safety Queensland Advanced Driving Simulator was used to test participants on a simulated gap acceptance scenario at roundabouts. Conflicting traffic approaching from the right of a four-legged roundabout was programmed to show a series of vehicles with the gaps between them proportionately increased from 2 s to 6 s. Thirty-two licensed young drivers drove the simulator under three phone conditions: baseline (no phone conversation), a hands-free phone conversation, and a handheld phone conversation. Results show that distracted drivers started responding to the gap acceptance scenario when they were closer to the roundabout and they approached the roundabout at slower speeds. These drivers also decelerated at faster rates to reduce their speeds before gap acceptance compared with nondistracted drivers. Although accepted gap sizes were not significantly different across phone conditions, differences in the safety margin at various gap sizes measured by postencroachment time (PET) between the driven vehicle and the conflicting vehicle were statistically significant across phone conditions. PETs for distracted drivers were smaller across different gap sizes and suggest that a smaller safety margin was accepted by distracted drivers compared with nondistracted drivers.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available