LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Lightburn, Angela D.C. (1984)
Languages: English
Types: Unknown
Subjects:
A practical and reliable alternative or supplement to injury accident data is necessary to diagnose dangerous sites and evaluate remedial measures because available accident data is scarce, is lacking in detail about the events preceding the accident and it takes a long time to accumulate statistically reliable data. The most favoured alternative is the Traffic Conflicts Technique which satisfies most of the requirements of a supplementary measure, but has so far only been successfully validated for rural dual carriageway intersections (Spicer, 1973). To establish the technique it is necessary a) to ensure that the subjective judgements on which it is based are reliable, b) to develop the best methods of recording conflicts, and of training and selecting observers, and then c) to test the validity of the best available technique. The main part of this thesis reports three studies aimed at each one of these issues. In the first study intra observer reliability tested on filmed material varied between rs = 0.30 and 0.91 (0.65 overall for N = 42), but poor observers could be identified. By selecting the best observers an overall reliability figure of up to 0.88 could be obtained. Reliable observers remained reliable or even improved slightly on the second testing. These reliable observers also showed good agreement with expert judges who had viewed the film many times, and by selection a correlation with the criterion value of up to 0.83 could be obtained. In the second study a new recording method was developed, incorporating factors that experienced observers used to differentiate the grades of severity currently in use. This helped observers by defining the criteria for detection and grading of a conflict more objectively. This increased the overall intra observer reliability from 0.73 to 0.80, and agreement with the criterion values from 0.66 to 0.76. Transfer from laboratory to field led to a drop in the numbers of conflicts reported. From these studies and a survey of the requirements of local authority accident investigation units, a manual and training package was developed giving guidance on training and selecting observers for the purpose of obtaining reliable conflict data, such as that required for validating the technique. In the third study this package was validated in a study of a sample of eight urban T-junctions. Again the best observers were selected and found to have an overall reliability of 0.88. It was found that, when rear end conflicts were excluded (on the grounds that they led to so few reported injury accidents while occurring in large numbers), there was a high correlation between accidents per vehicle and conflicts per vehicle (rs = 0.79, p<0.025), accounting for 62% of the variance. This compares very favourably with the maximum possible percentage (77%) which could be expected given the relaibility (rs = 0.88) of the observers. Although a validity correlation of 0.79 is very satisfactory and the method of obtaining the data is reasonably economical, an attempt was made to find a still more economical alternative to accident statistics. The most obvious of these are subjective judgements or a combination of these with traffic flow. Traffic flow data for different manoeuvres at each of the eight T-junction sites were obtained and various groups of people were asked to judge the subjective risk of these sites from scale maps and photographs or directly on-site. Judgements from maps and photographs tended to be negatively correlated with accidents. The best subjective estimate (driving instructors judging on-site) correlated 0.44. An attempt to improve on these by combining the traffic flows and judged risk of the different manoeuvres at each site failed to produce a higher correlation. None of these correlations were significant, but the failure of any one of several different corrrelations to be higher than 0.46 suggests very strongly that these simpler methods are very unlikely to have the validity of the full conflicts technique. However, the present study has validated the Traffic Conflicts Technique only for urban T-junctions (the commonest of all accident sites). It could, therefore, only be used for evaluating the effects of small changes in the layout of such junctions. It could be used to evaluate more radical changes eg. T-junction converted to a mini roundabout, provided the conflict to accident ratios of the different layouts were known. In this study the conflict to accident ratio was 125:1 for vehicles turning right out of the minor road. For the T-junctions as a whole it was 275:1 while Older and Spicer(1976) found a ratio of 2000:1 for rural dual carriageway intersections. By obtaining more information of this kind, the utility of the Traffic Conflicts Technique could be greatly extended.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • ALLEN, B.L., SHIN, B.T. and COOPER, P.J. (1978) Analysis of traff ic conflicts and cOllisions. Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University, Canada.
    • AMUNDSEN, F.H. and LARSEN, O.E. (1977) Traffic Conflicts Technique Status in Norway. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • BAGULEY, C.J. (1982) The British traffic conflicts technique: state of the art report·. Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Traffic Conflicts Techniques, Leidschendam, The Netherlands.
    • BAKER, W.T. (1972) An evaluation of the traffic conflict technique. ·High~ay Research Record No. 384, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • BAKER, W.T. and GLAUZ, W.D. (1977) The traffic conflicts experience in the United States. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • BENNETT, G.T. (1966) Accidents at heavily-trafficked rural 3-way junctions. Journal of the Institute of Highway Engineers, 13 (2).
    • BOTTOM, C.G. and ASHWORTH, R. (1973) Driver behaviour at priority type intersections. Paper SM7a. First International Conference on Driver Behaviour, Zurich.
    • BREUNIG, S.M. and BONE, A.J. (1959) Interchange accident exposure. Bulletin 240, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • BROADBENT, D.E. (1958) Perception and communication. Pergamon Press.
    • BROADBENT, D.E. (1963) Possibilities and difficulties in the concept of arousal. In: D. N. Buckner and J. J. McGrath (Eds). Vigilance: A Symposium. McGraw-Hill.
    • BULL, J.P. and ROBERTS, B.J. (1973) Road accident statistics a comparison of police and hospital information. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 5, Report 1, 45 - 53
    • CAMPBELL, R.E. and KING, L.E. (1970) The traffic conflict technique applied to rural intersections. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2 (3),209 - 221.
    • CHAPMAN, R. (1973) The concept of exposure. Accident Analysis and Prevention,S.
    • COHEN, J. and PRESTON, B. (1968) Causes and prevention of road accidents. Faber-and Faber, London.
    • COLBOURNE, H.V. (1973) Factors affecting the safety of young children as pedestrians. TRRL Technical Note TN7 94, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • COLGATE, M. and TANNER, J.C. (1967) Accidents at rural three-way junctions. RRL Laboratory Report LR87, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • COOPER, P.J. (1973) A method of predicting high accident locations. Road Systems, Countermeasures Development, Ministry of Transport, Ottawa.
    • COOPER, P.J. (1974) Effectiveness of traffic law enforcement. Traffic Canada, Road Safety.
    • COOPER, D.F. and FERGUSON, N. (1976) Traffic studies at T-junctions: 2. A conflict simulator model. Traffic Engineering and Control. Vol. 17, No.7.
    • COOPER, D.F., SMITH, W. and BROADIE, V. (1976) Traffic studies at T-junctions: 1. The effect of approach speed on merging gap acceptance. Traffic Engineering and Control, 17 (6), June, 256 - 257.
    • CORNELL AERONAUTICAL LABORATORY (1969) Filming real-life auto accidents. Research Trends, 24 - 26, Spring.
    • DARZENTAS, J., McDowell, M.R.C. and COOPER, D.F. (1980) Minimum acceptable gaps and conflict involvement in a simple crossing manoeuvre. Traffic Engineering and Control, February.
    • DAVIES, D.R. and TUNE, G.S. (1970) Human vigilance performance. Staples Press.
    • DAWSON, R.F.F. (1967) Costs of road accidents in Great Britain. RRL Laboratory Report LR79, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (1974) Accident investigation and prevention manual.
    • DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (1975) Duty of local authorities to promote road safety. Circular Roads, 12/75.
    • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT (1983) Road Accidents in Great Britain, 1982. HMSO: London.
    • ERKE, H., GABNER, J., GSTALTER, H. and ZIMOLONG, B. (1980) Training manual for the traffic conflicts technique at traffic light regulated junctions. Technische Universitat Braunschweig.
    • FAULKNER, C.R. (1968) Accident debris and reported accidents at roundabouts • RRL Report LR202, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • FISHER, R.A. and YATES, F. (1963) Statistical tables for biological, agricultural and medical research. Olwen and Boyd Ltd., Edinburgh.
    • FORBES, T. W. (1957) Analysis of "near accident" reports. Bulletin 152, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • GARWOOD, F. (1956) Some applications of statistics in road safety research. Paper presented to Manchester Statistical Society.
    • GLAUZ, W.D. (1977) Application of traffic conflict analysis at intersections. Unpublished work plan prepared for the Transportation Research Board.
    • GLAUZ, D.W. and MIGLETZ, D.J. (1980) Traffic conflicts techniques for use at intersections. Summary of work carried out under NCHRP Project 17-3 at the Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, U.S.A., and presented at the Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
    • GLENNON, J.C., GLAUZ, W.D., SHARP, M.C. and THORSON, B.A. (1977) Critique of the Traffic-Conflict Technique. Paper presented at the 56th. Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board.
    • GOELLER, B.F. (1969) Modelling the traffic safety system. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1(2), 167 ­ 204.
    • GRAYSON, G. (1979) Methodological issues in the study of pedestrian behaviour. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Nottingham.
    • GRAYSON, G.B. and HOWARTH, C.I. (1981) Evaluating pedestr ian safety programmes. In: Pedestr ian accidents. Eds. Chapman, A.J. Wade, F.M. and Foot, H.C. Wiley, Chichester.
    • GREENSHIELDS, B.D., SCHAPIRO, D. and ERIKSEN, E.L. (1947) Traff ic performance at urban street intersections. Technical Report No.1, Yale Bureau of Highway Traffic, Yale University.
    • GUTTINGER, V.A. (1977) Conflict observation techniques in traffic situations. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • GUTTINGER, V.A. and KRAAY, J.H. (1976) Development of a conflict observation technique. Contributed to OECD Special Research Group on Pedestrian Safety.
    • HAKKERT, A.S. and MAHALEL, D. (1978a) Estimating the number of accidents at intersections from a knowledge of the traff ic flows on the approaches. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 10.
    • HAKKERT, A.S. and MAHALEL, D. (1978b) The effect of traffic signals on road accidents with special reference to the introduction of a blinking green phase. Traffic Engineering and Control, 19(5).
    • HARRIS, J.I. and PERKINS, S.R. (1968) Traffic conflict character istics. Proceedings: General Motor s Corporation Automotive Safety Seminar, Milford, Michigan, II-12th July. Warren: General Motors Corporation.
    • HAUER, E. (1977) Indirect measurement of safety - the "conflic·t method". Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto.
    • HAUER, E. (1978) Traffic conflict surveys: some study design considerations. TRRL suppl~mentary Report SR352, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • HAUER, E. (1979) Methodological assessment of the techniques. Proceedings: Second Interna tronal Traff ic Conflicts Technique Workshop, Paris. Subsequently published as TRRL Supplementary Report SR557, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • HEANY, J.J. (1969) How to identify dangerous intersections. City of Philadelphia Traffic Department.
    • HEANY, J.J. (1970) 4 - way stop - a highly effective safety device. City of Philadelphia Traffic Department.
    • HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL (1979) Before and after accident studies at black si tes. Report No. HCC/T270/2.
    • HOBBS, C.A., GRATTAN, E. and HOBBS, J.A. (1979) Classification of injury severity by length of stay in hospital. TRRL Laboratory Report LR871, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • HOCH, I. (1960) Chicago's accident experience on arterials and highways. Traffic Quarterly, 14 (3).
    • HOMBERGER, W.S. (1951) The behaviour of drivers at uncont roll ed inte r se ct ions Tr af f i c Eng i ne e ring, 22 (3), 105 - 108, December.
    • HOWARTH, C.I. and LIGHTBURN, A. (1980) How drivers respond to pedestrians and vice versa. In Human Factor s in Transport Research, Vol ume 2. User factors: Comfort, the Environment and Behaviour. (Ed.) Oborne, D.J. and Levis, J.A. London: Academic Press.
    • HYDEN, C. (1976) A traffic-conflicts technique and its practical use in pedestrian safety research. Department of Traffic Planning and Engineering, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden.
    • HYDEN, C. (1977) A traffic-conflicts technique for examining urban intersection problems. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • JOHNSON, N.L. and GARWOOD, F. (1957) An analysis of the claim records of a motor insurance company. Journal of the Institute of Actuaries, Vol.83,.Part III, No. 365, December.
    • JORGENSEN, N.O. (1977) Danish "traffic conflict" definition. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • KANAYA, 0., SAKAI, H. and INOKUCHI, N. (1973) A VTR system which records on-the-spot accident scenes. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Biokinetics of Impacts, Amsterdam, June 26 - 27.
    • LALANI, N. and WALKER, D. (1981) Correlating accidents and volumes at intersections and on urban arterial street segments. Traffic Engineering and Control, 22 (6).
    • LIGHTBURN, A. (1981) The Traffic Conflicts Technique Training Package (Manual and 16 nun. film). Unpublished report, University of Nottingham.
    • LIGHTBURN, A. and HOWARTH, C. I. (1980) The development of the Traffic Conflicts Technique. Proceedings: World Conference on Transport Research, London.
    • LIGHTBURN, A., ROUTLEDGE, D.A. and HOWARTH, C.I. (1977) The Local Authority Survey. Unpublished report, University of Nottingham.
    • MCDONALD, J .W. (1953) Relation between number of accidents and traffic volumes at divided highway intersections. Bulletin 74, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • MACKWORTH, N.H. (1950) Researches in the measurement of human performance •. MRC Special Report Seriers, No. 268, HMSO.
    • McFARLAND, R.A. and MOSELEY, A.L. (1954) Human factors in highway transport safety. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health.
    • McKAY, G.M. (1966) A report on the accident research project. Dept. Transp. Environmental Planning, University of Birmingham. Report No.4, December.
    • MALATERRE, G. and MUHLRAD, N. (1977) A conflict technique. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • MATHEWSON, J.H. and BRENNER, R. (1957) Indexes of motor vehicle accident likelihood. Bulletin, 161, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • MERILINNA, M.J. (1977) Use of the traffic conflicts technique in Finnish road conditions. Proceedings: First Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • MICHAELS, R.M. (1966) Two simple techniques for determining the significance of accident reducing measures. Traffic Engineering, 36 (12), 45 - 48, September. (Also published in Public Roads, 238 - 240, October, 1959)
    • MUNDEN, J.M. (1962) Some analyses of car insurance claim rates. Astin Bulletin, Vol. II, Part II, September.
    • NEWSOME, L. R. (1974) Risk taking as a decision process in driving. TRRL Supplementary Report SR8lUC, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL (1980) Accident Investig a ti on Uni t pe rf ormance appr ai sal, Repor t No. 02701.
    • OLDER, S.J. (1979) Notes on revision of conflict severity classification. Proceedings: Second International Traffic Conflicts Workshop, Paris.
    • OLDER, S.J. and SHIPPEY, J. (1977a) Traffic conflict st udies in the Uni ted Kingdom. Proceedings: Fir st Workshop on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • OLDER, S.J. and SHIPPEY, J. (1977b) Notes on the First International Seminar on Traffic Conflicts, Oslo.
    • OLDER, S.J. and SPICER, B.R. (1976) Traffic conflicts ­ a development in accident research. Human Factors, 18 (4) 335 - 350.
    • PERKINS, S.R. and HARRIS, J.I. (1967) Traff ic conflict characteristics: accident potential at intersections. Research publication GMR - 718. General Motors Corporation, Warren, Michigan.
    • PERKINS, S.R. and HARRIS, J.I. (1968) Traffic conflict character istics accident potential at intersections. Highway Research Record No. 225, Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • PHILLIPS, G. (1979) Accuracy of annual traffic flow estimates from short period counts. TRRL Supplementary Report SR5l4, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • QUENAULT, s.w. (1966) Some methods of obtaining information on driver behaviour. RRL Report No.25, Ministry of Transport (Road Research Laboratory), Harmonsworth.
    • QUENAULT, S.W. (1967a) Driver behaviour safe and unsafe drivers. RRL Report LR70, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • QUENAULT, S.W. (1967b) The driving behaviour of certain professional drivers. RRL Report LR93, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • QUENAULT, s.w. (1968) Driver behaviour - safe, and unsafe drivers II. RRL Report LR146, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • QUENAULT, S.W., GOLBY, C.W. and PRYER, P.M. (1968) Age group and accident rate - driving behaviour and a tti tUdes. RRL Report LR167, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • QUENAULT, S.W. and HARVEY, C.P. (1971) Convicted and non-convicted drivers - values of driver indices. RRL Report LR395, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • QUENAULT, s.w. and PARKER, P.M. (1973) Driver behaviour - newly qualified drivers. TRRL Report LR567, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • RUSSAM, K. and SABEY, B.E. (1972) Accidents and traffic conflicts at junctions. TRRL Report LR5l4, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • SABEY, B.E. (1980) Road safety and value for money. TRRL Supplementary Report SR58l, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • SATTERTHWAITE, S.P. (1981) A survey of research into the relationships between traffic accidents and traffic volumes. TRRL Supplementary Report SR692, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
    • SHIPPEY, J. (1979) An assessment of the automatic detection of vehicle conflicts. Unpublished paper presented at the Second International Traff ic Conflicts Technique Workshop, Paris.
    • SPICER, B.R. (1971) A pilot study of traffic conflicts at a rural dual carriageway. RRL Report LR4l0, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article