Centre for Automotive Safety Research, The University of Adelaide , Adelaide , South Australia , Australia.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2019;20(7):696-701. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2019.1644627. Epub 2019 Aug 13.
This study investigated the contribution of driver distraction and inattention within fatal and injury crashes using recent in-depth road crash investigation data. To assist in developing system-based solutions, this study also examined the wider context in which inattention-related crashes occurred and the characteristics of inattentive drivers. The sample included in-depth crash data from 186 fatal and injury crashes in South Australia investigated from 2014 to 2018. Crash case notes were reviewed to determine whether there was evidence that attentional failures contributed to the crash. Using an adapted taxonomy of inattention, 5 subtypes of driver inattention were defined: Misprioritized attention, neglected attention, cursory attention, diverted attention (distraction), and unspecified inattention. The characteristics of inattention crashes were also compared with those for non-inattention-related crashes. Of the 160 crashes for which there was sufficient information to determine whether inattention was a factor, 31.3% showed evidence of driver inattention contributing to the crash. The most common subtypes of inattention were distraction (13.8% of all crashes) and driver misprioritized attention (8.1%). The distraction-related crashes included a variety of different distractions, the majority of which were not technology based (e.g., passenger interaction, searching for/adjusting objects, emotional stress, other road users), with those located in-vehicle the most prevalent. Distraction from mobile phone use was identified in 2.5% of all crashes. The majority of distractions were cognitive (64%) and voluntary (77%) in nature. Inattention crashes were most likely to involve right turn/angle or rear-end crash types and occur at intersections, in metropolitan areas, and in lower speed zones. The findings established that almost a third of fatal and injury crashes involved driver inattention and distraction and many of these could have been prevented. System-wide solutions that could mitigate or prevent distraction crashes include intervening vehicle safety technologies, infrastructure solutions to promote a forgiving road environment, blocking capabilities within technologies to prevent communications while driving, and interventions communicating the risks associated with inattention. Of significance, this study also demonstrated the importance of in-depth data for understanding the contribution of distraction and inattention errors in crash causation.
本研究利用最近深入的道路碰撞调查数据，调查了驾驶员分心和不注意在致命和伤害性碰撞中的作用。为了协助开发基于系统的解决方案，本研究还研究了与不注意相关的碰撞发生的更广泛背景以及不注意驾驶员的特征。该样本包括 2014 年至 2018 年在南澳大利亚进行的 186 起深入碰撞数据。审查了碰撞案例记录，以确定注意力失败是否导致了碰撞。使用改编的不注意分类法，定义了 5 种驾驶员不注意的亚型：优先级错误的注意、被忽视的注意、草率的注意、转移的注意（分心）和未指定的不注意。不注意碰撞的特征也与非不注意相关碰撞进行了比较。在有足够信息确定不注意是否为碰撞因素的 160 起碰撞中，31.3%的碰撞显示驾驶员不注意对碰撞有影响。最常见的不注意亚型是分心（所有碰撞的 13.8%）和驾驶员优先级错误的注意（8.1%）。与分心相关的碰撞包括各种不同的分心，其中大多数与技术无关（例如，乘客互动、寻找/调整物品、情绪压力、其他道路使用者），车内最常见。在所有碰撞中，识别出 2.5%的碰撞与手机使用分心有关。大多数分心是认知（64%）和自愿（77%）性质。不注意碰撞最有可能涉及右转/角度或追尾碰撞类型，并发生在交叉路口、大都市区和低速区。调查结果表明，近三分之一的致命和伤害性碰撞涉及驾驶员不注意和分心，其中许多碰撞是可以预防的。可以减轻或预防分心碰撞的全系统解决方案包括干预车辆安全技术、促进宽容道路环境的基础设施解决方案、在技术中阻止通信的能力，以及传达与不注意相关的风险的干预措施。值得注意的是，本研究还证明了深入数据对于理解分心和不注意错误在碰撞致因中的作用的重要性。
