Using the decision ladder to understand road user decision making at actively controlled rail level crossings
Using the decision ladder to understand road user decision making at actively controlled rail level crossings
Rail level crossings (RLXs) represent a key strategic risk for railways worldwide. Despite enforcement and engineering countermeasures, user behaviour at RLXs can often confound expectations and erode safety. Research in this area is limited by a relative absence of insights into actual decision making processes and a focus on only a subset of road user types. One-hundred and sixty-six road users (drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians) completed a diary entry for each of 457 naturalistic encounters with RLXs when a train was approaching. The final eligible sample comprised 94 participants and 248 encounters at actively controlled crossings where a violation of the active warnings was possible. The diary incorporated Critical Decision Method probe questions, which enabled user responses to be mapped onto Rasmussen's decision ladder. Twelve percent of crossing events were non-compliant. The underlying decision making was compared to compliant events and a reference decision model to reveal important differences in the structure and type of decision making within and between road user groups. The findings show that engineering countermeasures intended to improve decision making (e.g. flashing lights), may have the opposite effect for some users because the system permits a high level of flexibility for circumvention. Non-motorised users were more likely to access information outside of the warning signals because of their ability to achieve greater proximity to the train tracks and the train itself. The major conundrum in resolving these issues is whether to restrict the amount of time and information available to users so that it cannot be used for circumventing the system or provide more information to help users make safe decisions.
1-10
Mulvihill, C.M.
50a9bf96-cf7b-4652-9f60-7003e8dd37ff
Salmon, P.M.
e96abc65-12e8-4c75-8c1c-1cb986e0492f
Beanland, V.
db90a568-d5cd-4a45-9fc7-1d73ca66f0e2
Lenne, M.G.
885d4396-ec78-4bf9-aac3-c7fb4eb414ae
Read, G.J.M
e09c4c15-a189-4448-8c5d-862cb17625e2
Walker, G.H.
79e57e9e-7e21-4d38-8267-5fb68fa3469b
Stanton, N.A.
351a44ab-09a0-422a-a738-01df1fe0fadd
September 2016
Mulvihill, C.M.
50a9bf96-cf7b-4652-9f60-7003e8dd37ff
Salmon, P.M.
e96abc65-12e8-4c75-8c1c-1cb986e0492f
Beanland, V.
db90a568-d5cd-4a45-9fc7-1d73ca66f0e2
Lenne, M.G.
885d4396-ec78-4bf9-aac3-c7fb4eb414ae
Read, G.J.M
e09c4c15-a189-4448-8c5d-862cb17625e2
Walker, G.H.
79e57e9e-7e21-4d38-8267-5fb68fa3469b
Stanton, N.A.
351a44ab-09a0-422a-a738-01df1fe0fadd
Mulvihill, C.M., Salmon, P.M., Beanland, V., Lenne, M.G., Read, G.J.M, Walker, G.H. and Stanton, N.A.
(2016)
Using the decision ladder to understand road user decision making at actively controlled rail level crossings.
Applied Ergonomics, 56, .
(doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2016.02.013).
Abstract
Rail level crossings (RLXs) represent a key strategic risk for railways worldwide. Despite enforcement and engineering countermeasures, user behaviour at RLXs can often confound expectations and erode safety. Research in this area is limited by a relative absence of insights into actual decision making processes and a focus on only a subset of road user types. One-hundred and sixty-six road users (drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians) completed a diary entry for each of 457 naturalistic encounters with RLXs when a train was approaching. The final eligible sample comprised 94 participants and 248 encounters at actively controlled crossings where a violation of the active warnings was possible. The diary incorporated Critical Decision Method probe questions, which enabled user responses to be mapped onto Rasmussen's decision ladder. Twelve percent of crossing events were non-compliant. The underlying decision making was compared to compliant events and a reference decision model to reveal important differences in the structure and type of decision making within and between road user groups. The findings show that engineering countermeasures intended to improve decision making (e.g. flashing lights), may have the opposite effect for some users because the system permits a high level of flexibility for circumvention. Non-motorised users were more likely to access information outside of the warning signals because of their ability to achieve greater proximity to the train tracks and the train itself. The major conundrum in resolving these issues is whether to restrict the amount of time and information available to users so that it cannot be used for circumventing the system or provide more information to help users make safe decisions.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 26 February 2016
e-pub ahead of print date: 17 March 2016
Published date: September 2016
Organisations:
Transportation Group
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 397805
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/397805
ISSN: 0003-6870
PURE UUID: 9a3cb9bc-0a7b-4f96-ac27-2cbd1b11f87b
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 07 Jul 2016 10:38
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:33
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
C.M. Mulvihill
Author:
P.M. Salmon
Author:
V. Beanland
Author:
M.G. Lenne
Author:
G.J.M Read
Author:
G.H. Walker
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics