Accident Analysis and Prevention 40 (2008) 1513–1523 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Accident Analysis and Prevention journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aap Impact of perceptual treatments on lateral control during driving on crest vertical curves: A driving simulator study Florence Rosey a,∗ , Jean-Michel Auberlet a , Jean Bertrand b , Patrick Plainchault c a INRETS, MSIS, 2 avenue du G´ en´ eral Malleret-Joinville, F-94114 Arcueil cedex, France b CETE de l’Ouest, LRPC Angers, 23 Avenue de l’Amiral Chauvin, BP 69, F-49136 Les ponts – de – C´ e Cedex, France c CER-ESEO, 4 rue Merlet de la Boulaye, BP30926, F-49009 Angers Cedex 01, France article info Article history: Received 12 November 2007 Received in revised form 26 February 2008 Accepted 27 March 2008 Keywords: Driving simulator Lane keeping Uphill Perception Countermeasures Road safety abstract Approximately 48% of all fatal collisions in Europe are classified as single-vehicle run-off-road or head-on collisions. These crashes relate to trajectory control (road departure) and represent a safety challenge. In France, single-vehicle run-off-road crashes represent 21% of all crashes and head-on collisions represent 11%. This study evaluated the effectiveness of four perceptual treatments (i.e., a painted center line, post- delineators, rumble strips on both sides of the center line and sealed shoulders) in supporting the driver to maintain lateral control; that is, to support the driver to keep in the center of his/her lane. Forty-three participants drove a fixed-base driving simulator, on a simulated straight 3km rural road with two crest vertical curves (CVC). Four sections were chosen for analysis: a reference section (i.e., the first CVC), a test section (i.e., the second CVC), a pre-test section (i.e., immediately before the second CVC) and a post-test section (i.e., immediately after the second CVC). The results showed that drivers drive more at the center of their lane with the rumble strips on both sides of the center line and with the sealed shoulders than with the actual marking (here center line) or other treatments. © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction In Europe, more than 80% of all fatal collision crashes occur- ring on rural roads, out of the urban context, are represented by three accident types: single-vehicle (e.g., run-off-road and head- on collision with culverts and utility poles); head-on collisions; and collisions at intersections. Single-vehicle run-off the road and head- on collisions (which relate to trajectory control), represent 48% of all crash types (OECD, 1999) and inappropriate lateral positioning is one of the primary factors leading to crashes (RISER, 2006). Nev- ertheless, the topic of trajectory control, and more specifically the “lateral position” dimension and general vehicle path, has received little attention per se. Indeed, in very few studies has lateral position been used as a central variable (e.g., Rasanen, 2005). The majority of studies use lateral position variability as an indicator to evaluate countermeasures concerning workload problems (e.g., Dukic et al., 2006; Reynaud et al., 2002; Rosenbloom, 2006; Sivak et al., 2006). While human error is estimated to contribute to around 90% of crashes (Dewar and Olson, 2002; Wegman, 2007), road lay- ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 1 4043 6568; fax: +33 1 45 47 56 06. E-mail addresses: florence.rosey@wanadoo.fr (F. Rosey), auberlet@inrets.fr (J.-M. Auberlet), jean.bertrand@equipement.gouv.fr (J. Bertrand), patrick.plainchault@eseo.fr (P. Plainchault). out has been identified as a contributing factor in about 30% (O’Cinneide, 1998; Rumar, 1985). Furthermore, a Road Federation Belgium report (2002) has shown that 20% of crashes are related to the road layout and 15% to road shoulders. Thus, it is often the situation which is primarily responsible for drivers’ failures, not drivers’ response to it. These failures could result from misleading perception of the environment induced by the road design. Indeed, studies have highlighted drivers’ difficulty in understanding road markings (e.g., Mutabazi et al., 1998; Watts and Quimby, 1980) that can lead to incorrectly perceived situations (e.g., Watts and Quimby, 1980). Furthermore, psychological research on perceptual processes have shown that, for the same road geometry, changes of surroundings influence driver’s perception (e.g., Bidulka et al., 2002; Bressan et al., 2003; Smith and Lamm, 1994; Vaniotou, 1990). In short, adequate roadway delineation both supports foremost the driver’s immediate needs for continuous lane tracking and pro- vides for the long-range visual needs of the driver (Schieber, 2000). With respect to delineation, McKnight et al. (1998) found that lane lines with low contrast coincide with reduced lane-keeping perfor- mance. Furthermore, in a study with a driving simulator, De Waard et al. (2004) have shown that adding painted material to the road surface affected position on the road. While participants drove at a fairly central position on the non-delineated road, adding a center line and dividing the asphalt into two lanes immediately resulted in drivers driving in their lane, and accordingly driving more towards 0001-4575/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2008.03.019