School of Management Engineering, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China.
Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China.
Accid Anal Prev. 2024 Sep;205:107637. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2024.107637. Epub 2024 Jun 8.
A two-factor experiment was devised to assess the appropriateness of the quantity and arrangement of information on multi-information guide signs at unique, spacious exits on elevated expressway sections. This experiment investigated 77 signs containing varying amounts of road name information and different placements of destination road names. The research entailed an indoor experiment that incorporated eye-tracking technology and involved the analysis of a total of twenty-eight indicators. A comprehensive index system was developed, identifying three key aspects: visual recognition efficiency, visual recognition difficulty, and visual fatigue. Utilizing repeated measure analysis of variances, the impact of these two factors was examined to identify significant indicators and establish a comprehensive assessment indicator system. The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution method, in conjunction with the coefficient of entropy weight, was employed to assess the effectiveness of these two factors. The findings demonstrated that the 28 eye-movement indicators utilized in this study effectively constitute a valuable indicator system for evaluating drivers' visual recognition characteristics. These indicators capture the subtle psychophysical traits inherent in the process of recognizing signs, including visual recognition efficiency, difficulty, and fatigue. Regarding the first experimental factor, the number of sign road names significantly influences drivers' visual recognition characteristics (Sig < 0.05). Specifically, an increase in the number of sign road names leads to diminished visual recognition efficiency and heightened visual recognition difficulty and fatigue. Consequently, it is advisable to restrict the number of sign road names to a maximum of six per sign under typical circumstances, with nine being the limit under special conditions. As for the second experimental factor, the placement of the destination road name within the sign layout exerts a significant impact on visual recognition characteristics (Sig < 0.05). Each type of multi-information sign exhibits a distinct visual recognition pattern. Generally, the upper portion of the sign is more easily recognized, while the lower part poses greater recognition challenges. Therefore, to mitigate visual recognition risks, it is recommended that road information placement be prioritized based on actual usage conditions.
设计了一个两因素实验来评估在高速公路特殊、宽敞出口处的多信息导向标志上的信息量和信息排列是否合适。该实验研究了 77 个标志，其中包含不同数量的道路名称信息和不同位置的目的地道路名称。研究采用了包含眼动追踪技术的室内实验，共分析了 28 个指标。建立了一个综合指标体系，确定了三个关键方面：视觉识别效率、视觉识别难度和视觉疲劳。利用方差重复测量分析，研究了这两个因素的影响，确定了显著指标，并建立了一个全面的评估指标体系。理想解排序技术结合熵权系数被用来评估这两个因素的有效性。结果表明，本研究中使用的 28 个眼动指标有效地构成了评估驾驶员视觉识别特征的有价值的指标体系。这些指标捕捉到了在识别标志过程中固有的细微心理物理特征，包括视觉识别效率、难度和疲劳。关于第一个实验因素，标志道路名称的数量显著影响驾驶员的视觉识别特征（Sig < 0.05）。具体来说，标志道路名称数量的增加会降低视觉识别效率，增加视觉识别难度和疲劳。因此，在典型情况下，建议每个标志的道路名称数量限制在最多六个，特殊情况下限制在九个。至于第二个实验因素，标志布局内目的地道路名称的位置对视觉识别特征有显著影响（Sig < 0.05）。每种类型的多信息标志都表现出独特的视觉识别模式。一般来说，标志的上部更容易识别，而下部则更具挑战性。因此，为了降低视觉识别风险，建议根据实际使用条件优先考虑道路信息的位置。
