4.5 Article

Low Conspicuity of Motorcycles for Car Drivers: Dominant Role of Bottom-Up Control of Visual Attention or Deficit of Top-Down Control?

期刊

HUMAN FACTORS
卷 54, 期 1, 页码 14-25

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0018720811427033

关键词

sensory conspicuity; cognitive conspicuity; color contrast; car-driving simulator

资金

  1. European Community [218703]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the low visibility of motorcycles is the result of their low cognitive conspicuity and/or their low sensory conspicuity for car drivers. Background: In several cases of collision between a car and a motorcycle, the car driver failed to detect the motorcyclist in time to avoid the collision. Method: To test the low cognitive conspicuity hypothesis, 42 car drivers (32.02 years old) including 21 motorcyclist motorists and 21 non-motorcyclist motorists carried out a motorcycle detection task in a car-driving simulator. To test the low sensory conspicuity hypothesis, the authors studied the effect of the color contrast between motorcycles and the road surface on the ability of car drivers to detect motorcycles when they appear from different parts of the road. Results: A high level of color contrast enhanced the visibility of motorcycles when they appeared in front of the participants. Moreover, when motorcyclists appeared from behind the participants, the motorcyclist motorists detected oncoming motorcycles at a greater distance than did the non-motorcyclist motorists. Motorcyclist motorists carry out more saccades and rapidly capture information (on their rearview mirrors and on the road in front of them). Conclusion: The results related to the sensory conspicuity and cognitive conspicuity of motorcycles for car drivers are discussed from the viewpoint of visual attention theories. Application: The practical implications of these results and future lines of research related to training methods for car drivers are considered.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据