[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Daytime running lights



I was asked to repost the following info concerning Daytime Running Lights.
Last time I posted this it resulted in a thread of over 100 articles, most of
them trying to dispute the research results thru the recitation of antecdotal
reports.  MY reading of these summarys leaves me with little doubt that the
supposed benefits of DRLs are not borne out in practice and in fact DRLS may
cuase more accidents then they prevent.  Of the studies cited below (from a
literature search of anything within about the last 7 years) the most
compelling would seem to be the one from the country having had madatory DRLS
for the longest time (Norway) and as you can see, they did NOT find the
expected benefits.  The studies that did turn up some benefit were, for
example, from Canada, where DRLs are still in the novelty stage as far as the
number of cars so equiped.  It's not suprising that when only a very few cars
have DRLS that  such cars get noticed and don't get hit.  That effect can be
expected to disappear in future years as DRLs appear on all cars and my
expectatin would be that they will wind up with the same results as Norway.



642646  DA
TITLE: DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS: A REVIEW OF THEORETICAL ISSUES AND EVALUATION
STUDIES
AUTHOR(S): Theeuwes, J; Riemersma, JBJ
CORPORATE SOURCE: Institute for Perception RVO-TNO; Kampweg 5, Postbus 23;
Soesterberg ; ID; 83401; Netherlands
REPORT NUMBER: IZF-1990-A-28;TD-90-1621
JOURNAL: NTIS ALERT   Pag: 46p
PUBLICATION DATE: 901210    PUBLICATION YEAR: 1990
LANGUAGE: English      SUBFILE: HRIS
ISSN: 01631527
AVAILABILITY: National Technical Information Service; 5285 Port Royal Road
; Springfield; VA  ; 22161
ORDER NUMBER: PB93-188084/WTS
ABSTRACT: The study provides a review of the literature on the use of daytime
running lights (DRL) as a vehicle collision countermeasure. It assists in the
design of an accident study for military vehicles, once DRL has become
obligatory nationwide. In the first part of the study, possible theoretical
reasons for the supposed effectiveness of DRL are discussed. The suggested
influences of DRL on perception are primarily based on theoretical
considerations, and the relation between effects on perception and driving are
still hypothetical. In addition, the section reviews some experimental results
revealing relationships between the use of DRL and some aspects of traffic
behavior. The second part of the study examines the available evidence for the
effectiveness of DRL as a measure to reduce accidents. Studies evaluating
changes in accident rates after the introduction of DRL at a nationwide scale
as well as studies evaluating changes in accident rates after the introduction
of DRL for specific groups are discussed. The results of a study evaluating
the effects of DRL implementation in Sweden are examined in detail since the
study was conducted at a fairly large scale using a variety of accident data
and applied new statistical methods. The present review indicates that there
is no clear-cut account for the perceptual and behavioral processes underlying
DRL. In addition, the available evidence in terms of accident rates seems
equivocal as well.

639985  DA
TITLE: EFFECT OF AMBIENT LIGHTING AND DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHT (DRL) INTENSITY ON
PERIPHERAL DETECTION OF DRL
AUTHOR(S): Ziedman, K; Burger, W
CORPORATE SOURCE: Transportation Research Board; 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW
; Washington; DC; 20418;
JOURNAL: Transportation Research Record   Issue Number: 1403   Pag: pp 28-35
PUBLICATION DATE: 930000    PUBLICATION YEAR: 1993
LANGUAGE: English      SUBFILE: HRIS
ISSN: 03611981    ISBN: 0309055512
AVAILABILITY: Transportation Research Board Business Office; 2101
Constitution Avenue, NW; Washington; DC  ; 20418
ORDER NUMBER: N/A
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES: This paper appears in Transportation Research Record No.
1403, Driver Performance: Measurement and Modeling, IVHS, Information Systems,
and Simulation.
FIGURES: 7 Fig.
REFERENCES: 29 Ref.
ABSTRACT: Daytime running lights (DRLs) have been proposed to reduce the
frequency and severity of traffic accidents by enhancing the conspicuity of
vehicles to other drivers. DRL regulations have been enacted in several
countries and are being considered in the United States. Although various
studies of DRL effectiveness have been conducted, only one has included the
range of ambient illumination conditions encountered in the United States. The
project reviewed methodologies appropriate for the study of DRL effectiveness
and conducted a study of DRL effectiveness under a wide range of ambient
illumination. A peripheral detection experiment was conducted in which
subjects responded to a DRL test vehicle approaching at a 20-deg peripheral
angle while the subjects were performing a central attention task. DRL
intensities were 0, 200, 400, 800, and 1,600 cd. Ambient illumination levels
varied from about 11,000 to more than 110,000 lx (1,000 to 10,000 fc). Only
the 1,600-cd intensity resulted in a statistically significant increased
peripheral detection distance. Improved peripheral detection distance was
limited to ambient illumination levels below 43,040 lx (4,000 fc). The mean
improvement in detection distance for 1,600-cd intensity and ambients less
than 43,040 lx (4,000 fc) was about 75 m (247 ft), or about 3 sec of driving
time at 88 km/hr (55 mph).
DESCRIPTORS: DAYTIME HEADLIGHT USE; EFFECTIVENESS; AMBIENT LIGHTING; HUMAN
SUBJECT TESTING; PERIPHERAL DETECTION DISTANCE; LUMINOUS INTENSITY
SUBJECT HEADING: H53 VEHICLE CHARACTERISTICS; H52 HUMAN FACTORS; I91
VEHICLE DESIGN AND SAFETY; I83 ACCIDENTS AND THE HUMAN FACTOR


639222  DA
TITLE: THE EFFECT OF DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS ON CRASHES BETWEEN TWO VEHICLES IN
SASKATCHEWAN: A STUDY OF A GOVERNMENT FLEET
AUTHOR(S): Sparks, GA; Neudorf, RD; Smith, AE; Wapman, KR; Zador, PL
CORPORATE SOURCE: Pergamon Press plc; Headington Hill Hall; Oxford OX3 0BW;
England
JOURNAL: Accident Analysis and Prevention  Vol: 25   Issue Number: 5
Pag: pp 619-625
PUBLICATION DATE: 931000    PUBLICATION YEAR: 1993
LANGUAGE: English      SUBFILE: HRIS
ISSN: 00014575
BIBLIOGRAPHIC/DATA APPENDICES: 1 App.
AVAILABILITY: Pergamon Press, Incorporated; Maxwell House, Fairview Park;
Elmsford ; NY  ; 10523
ORDER NUMBER: N/A
FIGURES: 1 Fig.   TABLES: 1 Tab.
REFERENCES: 16 Ref.
ABSTRACT: Keeping vehicle lights on to increase vehicle conspicuity during
daytime hours has been found to reduce crashes in Scandinavia and the United
States. Crashes of vehicles with and without daytime running lights owned by
the Central Vehicle Agency of the Province of Saskatchewan were compared to a
random selection of crashes drawn from provincial crash files involving
vehicles without daytime running lights for the years 1982 through 1989.
Daytime two-vehicle crashes involving vehicles approaching from the front or
side were reduced by about 28% for the daytime running-light equipped
vehicles. A 28% reduction in daytime running-light relevant daytime
two-vehicle crashes corresponds to a 15% reduction in all daytime two-vehicle
crashes.
DESCRIPTORS: MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS; RUNNING LIGHTS; DAYTIME HEADLIGHT USE ;
SASKATCHEWAN; SCANDINAVIA; UNITED STATES
SUBJECT HEADING: H51 SAFETY

639173  DA
TITLE: THE EFFECTS ON ACCIDENTS OF COMPULSORY USE OF DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
FOR CARS IN NORWAY
AUTHOR(S): Elvik, R
CORPORATE SOURCE: Pergamon Press plc; Headington Hill Hall; Oxford OX3 0BW;
England
JOURNAL: Accident Analysis and Prevention  Vol: 25   Issue Number: 4
Pag: pp 383-398
PUBLICATION DATE: 930800    PUBLICATION YEAR: 1993
LANGUAGE: English      SUBFILE: HRIS
ISSN: 00014575
BIBLIOGRAPHIC/DATA APPENDICES: 2 App.
AVAILABILITY: Pergamon Press, Incorporated; Maxwell House, Fairview Park;
Elmsford ; NY  ; 10523
ORDER NUMBER: N/A
FIGURES: 1 Fig.   TABLES: 17 Tab.
REFERENCES: Refs.
ABSTRACT: The use of daytime running lights was made mandatory for new cars in
Norway in 1985 and for all cars in 1988. This paper examines the effectiveness
of this regulation as an accident countermeasure. The paper relies on the same
study design and method of analysis as previous studies of similar laws in
Finland and Sweden. Four hypotheses concerning the effects of daytime running
lights are tested. None of them was supported. The total number of multiparty
accidents in daylight was not reduced. Pedestrian accidents and accidents
during twiligt were not reduced. The number of rear-end collisions increased
by about 20%. Daytime running lights appear to reduce daytime multiparty
accidents only during summer (by about 15%) and only for multivehicle
accidents, excluding rear-end collisions. The possibility that confounding
factors may have influenced study results is examined. It is concluded that
such an influence can not be ruled out. The discussion of the results
highlights the difficulties of reaching clear and defensible conclusions in
nonexperimental accident research of the kind reported in this paper.
DESCRIPTORS: DAYTIME HEADLIGHT USE; RUNNING LIGHTS; NORWAY; REGULATIONS;
ACCIDENT REDUCTION; EFFECTIVENESS
SUBJECT HEADING: H51 SAFETY


TITLE: HOW TO EXPLAIN THE LARGE REDUCTION OF ACCIDENTS IN WHICH UNPROTECTED
ROAD USERS WERE INVOLVED AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
(DRL)? A HYPOTHESIS RELATED TO ROAD USER BEHAVIOUR
AUTHOR(S): HELMERS, G
CORPORATE SOURCE: STATENS VAEG- OCH TRAFIKINSTITUT; LINKOEPING; S-58101;
SWEDEN
JOURNAL: VTI RAPPORT   Issue Number: 366A   Pag: 91-94
PUBLICATION DATE: 910000    PUBLICATION YEAR: 1991
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH      SUBFILE: IRRD
SOURCE ACCESSION NUMBER: 9203VT018E
IRRD DOCUMENT NUMBER: 847944
ISSN: 0347-6030
REFERENCES: 5
DATA SOURCE: Transport Research Laboratory (TRL)
ABSTRACT: daytime running lights were introduced in finland and sweden in the
70s. it was found that daylight accidents involving more than one vehicle were
reduced by 10% while daylight accidents between motor vehicles and unprotected
road users were reduced by 15-20%. this was unexpected since it had been
feared that greater visibility of vehicles to each other might make
unprotected road users less visible. although the detection distance of a dark
object, when driving at night on low beam, is 50 m and stopping distance about
100 m, vehicles drive at 90-100 kph because obstacles on the road are so rare
that drivers feel in full control. drivers are taught to regard children in
traffic as unreliable. it is found however that drivers do not reduce speed
when children at present, but that the 'unreliable' children take evasive
action to keep out of the way of the 'reliable' drivers. since unprotected
road users cannot rely for their safety on drivers, they must ensure that they
keep out of the way of vehicles. daytime running lights make this much easier.
for the covering abstract of the conference see irrd 847927. for comments on
this paper, see irrd 847945.
DESCRIPTORS: ACCIDENT RATE; DECREASE; DAYLIGHT; DIPPED HEADLIGHT; ROAD USER ;
BEHAVIOUR; BEFORE AND AFTER STUDY; CHILD; DETECTION; CONFERENCE; FINLAND;
SWEDEN







Follow-Ups: