U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology
Coordinating, Developing, and Delivering Highway Transportation Innovations
|This summary report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information|
|Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-14-077 Date: July 2014|
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-14-077
Date: July 2014
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document.
The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
Quality Assurance Statement
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
Technical Report Documentation Page
|1. Report No.
|2. Government Accession No.||3 Recipient's Catalog No.|
|4. Title and Subtitle
Utilizing Various Data Sources for Surface Transportation Human Factors Research
5. Report Date
|6. Performing Organization Code|
Alicia Romo, Bianka Mejia, and C.Y. David Yang
8. Performing Organization Report No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
VOLPE National Transportation Center
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
|11. Contract or Grant No.
|12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
Office of Operations Research and Development and Office of
|13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Workshop Summary Report, November 2013
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
|15. Supplementary Notes
FHWA's Contracting Officer's Task Manager (COTM): Zachary Ellis, HRTM-30
This report summarizes a 2-day workshop held on November 6-7, 2013, to discuss data sources for surface transportation human factors research. The workshop was designed to assess the increasing number of different datasets and multiple ways of collecting data that can be used to increase understanding of human errors. Participants discussed how to resolve the controversies among different datasets and how to choose the best datasets for particular applications. Expert speakers shared their research experience of using various datasets from sources such as driving simulators, field studies and field operational tests, and naturalistic driving studies. The expert panel identified several potential research topics to address the challenges that must be overcome to integrate data from multiple sources.
|17. Key Words
Surface transportation, human factors research, data sources, human errors, datasets, data integration, driving simulators, field studies, field operational tests, naturalistic driving studies.
|18. Distribution Statement
No restriction. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.
19. Security Classification
20. Security Classification
21. No. of Pages
|Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)||Reproduction of completed page authorized|
On November 6–7, 2013, at the Turner–Fairbank Highway Research Center in McLean, VA, the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Office of Safety Research and Development, with support from the Exploratory Advanced Research (EAR) Program, convened the workshop, ”Utilizing Various Data Sources for Surface Transportation Human Factors Research.” The workshop addressed the increasing number of different datasets and multiple ways of collecting data—from naturalistic driving and simulator studies to eye trackers and surveys—that can be used to increase an understanding of human errors.
Human errors are still a major cause of injuries and fatalities; however, a number of different datasets have recently become available to analyze human errors. These datasets point in different directions within different areas of interaction. Experts in human factors research, transportation safety, and driver behavior and performance analysis, met to discuss and determine which datasets were best and how one might resolve the differences. The information provided by the different datasets is sometimes complementary, sometimes competing, and sometimes confirmatory. The workshop brought together a panel of experts to share their research experience of using multiple methods to gain insights about different aspects of driver and traveler behavior and performance.
During day one of this workshop, participants heard seven presentations on using various datasets from sources such as driving simulators, field studies and field operational tests, and naturalistic driving studies. The experts discussed various methods to study behaviors that lead to errors and shared strategies they have deployed to gain insightful information about what datasets to use to target one or more human factors or behavior issues. The workshop also presented the idea of using multiple data collection methods to “cross-reference” analysis results, validate conclusions, and enhance the understanding of behaviors.
On day two of the workshop, an expert panel discussed issues related to consolidating data from multiple types of collection methods. The experts discussed how datasets must be carefully examined when combined from different sources. For example, some data sources are contradictory, leaving researchers with the need to conduct additional research to resolve the controversies. Alternatively, other data sources can be complementary and provide information in the field and in the laboratory on driver behaviors that point in a similar direction. How best to create complementary datasets also needs to be carefully considered. In addition, very few data sources are comprehensive, and they do not provide information on both driver behavior and crashes. The ability to develop models that can link behavioral datasets with crash datasets, leading to comprehensive datasets, is still in its infancy. The expert panel went on to identify several potential research topics to address the challenges that must be overcome to integrate data from multiple sources.
At the end of day two, the workshop sponsor divided the participants into three groups so that detailed discussion could be held to identify research gaps related to the following interactions of drivers: (1) with other road users, (2) with changing elements of the roadway and infrastructure, and (3) with their own vehicle. All three groups presented summaries of their discussion and recommendations to conclude this workshop.
Workshop panelists and participants noted two different ways of seeing how best to deal with multiple contradictory datasets, as follows:
Panelists were unanimous in recommending that there should be an attempt to understand how to use the different types of data in a study that includes the following components:
As part of the final workshop recommendations, participants identified many areas of priority for human factors research that could make use of the expanding datasets now available and soon to be available. These included modeling, safety, roadway departure, urban intersections, vehicle, pedestrian and bicyclist interaction, and data analysis. Participants suggested a number of specific items for further research, as follows:
To further understanding and use of multiple data types, participants recommended a study, possibly focused at intersections, which includes multiple sites, multiple data types gathered at each site, multiple user types, and multiple methods of analysis. This study could provide critical information on how to resolve contradictions among datasets, how to put together complementary datasets that describe risky behaviors, and how to generate comprehensive datasets that link behaviors and crashes.
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
|ACC||adaptive cruise control|
|ASV-3||Advanced Safety Vehicle-3|
|CICAS-SSA||cooperative intersection collision avoidance system–stop sign assist|
|DOT||Department of Transportation|
|DSRC||dedicated short-range communications|
|EAR||Exploratory Advanced Research|
|FHWA||Federal Highway Administration|
|FOT||field operational test|
|GPS||Global Positioning System|
|HAWK||High-intensity Activated crossWalK|
|IEEE||Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers|
|IMU||inertial measurement units|
|ITS||Intelligent Transportation System|
|IV-DSRC||inter-vehicle dedicated short-range communications|
|LIDAR||light detection and ranging|
|MUTCD||Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices|
|NADS||National Advanced Driving Simulator|
|NHTSA||National Highway Traffic Safety Administration|
|NSF||National Science Foundation|
|OTL||observed time lag|
|PTL||predicted time lag|
|PV-DSRC||pedestrian–vehicle dedicated short-range communications|
|SHRP 2||second Strategic Highway Research Program|
|STRADA||Swedish Traffic Accident Data Acquisition|
|TCD||traffic control devices|
|TMC||traffic management center|
|TxDOT||Texas Department of Transportation|
|UMTRI||University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute|
|USDOT||U.S. Department of Transportation|
|VehDAQ||vehicle data acquisition|
|VOQ||vehicle operator questionnaire|
|WTI||Western Transportation Institute|
Transportation safety is the top priority at the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). A high percentage of transportation incidents and vehicle crashes are caused by human errors. As a result, it is important to continue investing in research resources to gain a comprehensive understanding of human errors and to try to answer the question, “Why do drivers and travelers do what they do?”
The motivation for this workshop was in large part a function of the increasing number of different datasets and multiple ways of collecting data—from naturalistic driving and simulator studies to eye trackers and surveys—that can be used to increase our understanding of human errors. Now is an ideal time to begin a discussion about how to resolve the differences and how to choose the best datasets for particular applications.
To initiate this discussion, FHWA's Office of Safety Research and Development, with support from the Exploratory Advanced Research (EAR) Program, convened the workshop, “Utilizing Various Data Sources for Surface Transportation Human Factors Research,” on November 6–7, 2013. Experts in transportation safety analysis and driver behavior and performance, were invited to the Turner–Fairbank Highway Research Center in McLean, VA, to share their research experience of using multiple methods to gain insights into different aspects of driver and traveler behavior and performance.
A primary question posed to researchers was how best to select the particular datasets most helpful for analyzing one of the following three major research topics: (1) the interaction between drivers and other road users, such as pedestrians and bicyclists; (2) the interaction between drivers and roadway and other transportation infrastructure; and (3) the interaction between drivers and their vehicles. This report captures highlights from the workshop and summarizes the discussions that took place.