Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, United Kingdom; Division of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Brunel University London, United Kingdom.
Division of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Brunel University London, United Kingdom.
Accid Anal Prev. 2024 Mar;197:107418. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2023.107418. Epub 2024 Jan 5.
The optimal cycle light configuration for maximizing cyclists' conspicuity to drivers is not clear. Advances in sensor technology has led to the development of 'reactive' cycle lights that detect changes in the environment and consequently increase their flashing speed and brightness in risky situations - for example, when a rearward car is approaching - but no research has examined the effect of such lights on driver perception. The aim of the present study is to compare different cycle light configurations, including 'reactive' light technology, on drivers' ability to detect cyclists and estimate their proximity. We recruited 32 drivers to participate in two experiments, in which they viewed life-size real-world stimuli filmed from a driver's perspective in daytime and at dusk. The footage showed a cyclist on a bicycle with a rear light mounted on the seat post, in various configurations: static light, steady flashing, reactive flashing and no light. In Experiment 1, the drivers were required to detect the presence or absence of a cyclist on the road ahead as quickly as possible. In Experiment 2, they were required to estimate the distance of the cyclist from their vehicle, and to rate their confidence in their estimates. Experiment 1 revealed that drivers were quicker to detect the cyclist's presence in all rear cycle light conditions relative to the no light condition, but there were no differences in speed or accuracy across rear light conditions. Experiment 2 showed that drivers were more accurate in estimating the cyclist's proximity in the steady flashing and reactive flashing conditions, compared to static and no light conditions. Drivers were also more confident in their judgements in all rear light conditions compared to the no light condition. In conclusion, flashing rear cycle lights, regardless of reactive technology, enhanced drivers' perception of a cyclist ahead, notably in terms of their judgements of distance to that cyclist. Further investigation is needed to fully understand the impact of cycle light technology on driver perception, as well as the use of drivers' distance-to-cyclist estimates as an index of cyclists' cognitive conspicuity.
优化自行车骑行者对驾驶员可见度的最佳循环灯配置尚不清楚。传感器技术的进步导致了“反应式”自行车灯的发展，这种灯可以检测环境变化，并在危险情况下（例如，当后面有车靠近时）相应地增加闪烁速度和亮度，但没有研究检验过这种灯对驾驶员感知的影响。本研究旨在比较不同的自行车灯配置，包括“反应式”灯技术，以评估它们对驾驶员检测自行车和估计其距离的能力的影响。我们招募了 32 名驾驶员参与两项实验，在实验中，他们从驾驶员的视角观看了白天和黄昏时分拍摄的现实生活中的实景刺激物。视频中，一名骑自行车的人骑着自行车，座管上安装了一个后灯，配置如下：静态灯、稳定闪烁、反应式闪烁和无灯。在实验 1 中，驾驶员需要尽快检测到前方道路上是否有骑自行车的人。在实验 2 中，他们需要估计骑自行车者与他们车辆的距离，并对他们的估计的置信度进行评分。实验 1 表明，与无灯条件相比，驾驶员在所有后自行车灯条件下更快地检测到自行车的存在，但在后自行车灯条件之间的速度或准确性没有差异。实验 2 表明，与静态和无灯条件相比，驾驶员在稳定闪烁和反应式闪烁条件下更准确地估计自行车的距离。与无灯条件相比，驾驶员在所有后灯条件下对自己的判断也更有信心。总之，闪烁的后自行车灯，无论是否具有反应式技术，都增强了驾驶员对前方自行车的感知，特别是在对与自行车距离的判断方面。需要进一步的研究来全面了解自行车灯技术对驾驶员感知的影响，以及将驾驶员对与自行车距离的估计用作自行车认知可见度的指标。
