U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590

Skip to content
Facebook iconYouTube iconTwitter iconFlickr iconLinkedInInstagram

Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology
Coordinating, Developing, and Delivering Highway Transportation Innovations

This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-08-051
Date: June 2008

Surrogate Safety Assessment Model and Validation: Final Report

PDF Version (3.39 MB)

PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®


  1. NHTSA, Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes as a Leading Cause of Death in the U.S., 2002—A Demographic Perspective. DOT HS 809 843. National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), 2005.
  2. Evans, L., Traffic Safety and the Driver. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. p. 92–93, 1991.
  3. NHTSA, Traffic Safety Facts 2005. DOT HS 810 631. National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), 2006.
  4. Vogt, A., Crash Models for Rural Intersections: Four-Lane by Two-Lane Stop Controlled and Two-Lane by Tow-Lane Signalized. Report No. FHWA-RD-99-128. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Washington, D.C., 182 pp., 1999.
  5. Hauer, E. and Persaud, B., A Common Bias in Before-and-After Accident Comparisons and Its Elimination. Transportation Research Record 905, pp. 164–174, 1983.
  6. Gettman, D. and Head, L., Surrogate Measures of Safety from Traffic Simulation Models. Report No. FHWA-RD-03-050. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Washington, D.C., 2003.
  7. Amundsen, F. and Hyden, C. Proceedings of first workshop on traffic conflicts. 1977. Oslo: Institute of Transport Economics,
  8. Parker, M.R. and Zegeer, C.V., Traffic Conflict Techniques for Safety and Operations--Observers Manual. Report No. FHWA-IP-88-027. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Washington D.C., 40 pp., 1989.
  9. erkins, S.R., GMR Traffic Conflicts Technique—Procedures Manual. General Motors Research Laboratories: Warren, Michigan, 1969.
  10. Sayed, T., Brown, G., and Navis, F., Simulation of Traffic Conflicts at Unsignalized Intersections with TSC-Sim. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 593–607, 1994.
  11. Hayward, J.C., Near-Miss Determination Through Use of a Scale of Danger. Report No. HRR 384. Highway Research Board, pp. 24–35, 1972.
  12. Hyden, C., The development of a method for traffic safety evaluation: The Swedish Conflicts Technique. Department of Traffic Planning and Engineering, Lund University: Sweden, 1987.
  13. Hardwood, D.W. and Council, F.M., Prediction of the Expected Safety Performance of Rural Two-Lane Highways. Report No. FHWA-RD-99-207. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Washington, D.C., 2000.
  14. Bared, J.G. and Kaiser, E.I. Advantages of Offset T-Intersections with Guidelines. in Road Safety on Three Continents. 2001. Moscow, Russia: Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute,
  15. Wolshon, B., Chapter 1, in Toolbox on Intersection Safety and Design. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE): Washington, D.C., 2004.
  16. Robinson, B.W., Rodegerdts, L., and Scarborough, W., Roundabouts: An Informational Guide. Report No. FHWA-RD-00-067. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Washington, D.C., 2000.
  17. Highway Capacity Manual 2000. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2000.
  18. Engelbrecht, R. and Barnes, K. Advanced Traffic Signal Control for Diamond Interchanges. in Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. 2003. Washington, D.C.,
  19. Martin, D., Single Point Urban Interchanges. URL: http://www.donovanmartin.com/roads/spui.html, accessed 2007.
  20. Bared, J., Powell, A., Kaisar, E., and Jagannathan, R., Crash Comparison of Single Point and Tight Diamond Interchanges. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 131, Issue 5, pp. 379-381, May 2005.
  21. Vogt, A. and Bared, J.G., Crash Models for Two-Lane Rural Roads: Segments and Intersections. Report No. FHWA-RD-98-133. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Washington, D.C., 1998.
  22. Jacquemart, G., Modern Roundabout Practice in the United States. NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice No. 264. Transportation Research Board: Washinton, D.C., 1998.
  23. Hummer, J.E., Chapter 14: Intersection and Interchange Design, in Handbook of Transportation Engineer. p. pp. 14.1–14.27, 2004.
  24. Hauer, E., Observational Before-After Studies in Road Safety. Pergamon Press, 1997.
  25. Sayed, T. and Rodriguez, F., Accident Prediction Models for Urban Unsignalized Intersections in British Columbia. Transportation Research Record 1665, pp. 93–99, 1999.
  26. Miaou, S.P., Measuring the Goodness-of-Fit of Accident Prediction Models. Report No. FHWA-RD-96-040. Federal Highway Adminstration (FHWA): McLean, VA, 1996.
  27. Hauer, E., Bias-by-Selection. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 12, pp. 113–117, 1980.
  28. DeLeur, P. and Sayed, T., Using claims prediction model for road safety evaluation. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 28, Issue 5, pp. 804–812, 2001.
  29. VISSIM 4.10 User Manual. Karlsruhe, Germany: PTV Planung Transport Verker AG, 2005.
  30. Bauer, K.M. and Harwood, D.W., Statistical Models of At-Grade Intersection Accidents—Addendum. Federal Highway Adminstration: McLean, VA, pp. 46–47, 1998.
  31. Zegeer, C.V. and Deen, R.C., Traffic conflict as a diagnostic tool in highway safety. Transportation Research Record 667, pp. 48–55, 1978.
  32. McDowell, M.R.C., Wennell, J., Storr, P.A., and Darzentas, J., Gap acceptance and traffic conflict simulation as a measure of risk. Special Report 776. Transport and Road Research Laboratory (TRRL), pp. 1–27, 1983.
  33. Special Service Vehicles. Michigan State Police, https://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/VehicleEvaluation2007_MSP-SpecialDesigned_182664_7.pdf, accessed 2007.

Previous | Table of Contents

Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000
Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center | 6300 Georgetown Pike | McLean, VA | 22101