4.4 Article

Using the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork (EAST) to explore conflicts between different road user groups when making right hand turns at urban intersections

Journal

ERGONOMICS
Volume 57, Issue 11, Pages 1628-1642

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2014.945491

Keywords

pedestrians; intersections; road safety; EAST; drivers; cyclists; motorcyclists; systems analysis

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [DP120100199]
  2. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [FT140100681]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Collisions between different types of road users at intersections form a substantial component of the road toll. This paper presents an analysis of driver, cyclist, motorcyclist and pedestrian behaviour at intersections that involved the application of an integrated suite of ergonomics methods, the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork (EAST) framework, to on-road study data. EAST was used to analyse behaviour at three intersections using data derived from an on-road study of driver, cyclist, motorcyclist and pedestrian behaviour. The analysis shows the differences in behaviour and cognition across the different road user groups and pinpoints instances where this may be creating conflicts between different road users. The role of intersection design in creating these differences in behaviour and resulting conflicts is discussed. It is concluded that currently intersections are not designed in a way that supports behaviour across the four forms of road user studied. Interventions designed to improve intersection safety are discussed. Practitioner Summary: Intersection safety currently represents a key road safety issue worldwide. This paper presents a novel application of a framework of ergonomics methods for studying differences in road user behaviour at intersections. The findings support development of interventions that consider all road users as opposed to one group in isolation.

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