The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Vision, Visibility, and Perception in Driving
Abstract
Recent research is reviewed and its implications discussed. ‘On-the-Spot’ accident investigations have confirmed that errors of perception by the driver are a major contributory factor to accidents. However, the available evidence suggests that few of these are attributable to reduced or defective vision, since at best only a weak relationship has been found between a driver's level of vision (or visual performance) and his accident rate. A number of reasons for this general finding are considered, including driver compensation. For all drivers, the rapid fall in visual acuity with angular distance from the centre of vision presents particular problems, giving special significance to eye-movement patterns and the problems of visual search. Numerous physical and psychophysical restrictions on visibility could lead to the ‘looked, but failed to see’ type of accident, but their relative importance requires evaluation. There is now much evidence that the driver is quite often operating beyond his visual or perceptual capabilities in a number of key driving situations, including overtaking, joining or crossing a high-speed road, and a number of nighttime situations. It is concluded that ‘expectancy’, based on experience in both the long and the short term, has a profound influence on driver perception and assessment of risk. For all drivers, serious errors of judgement from time to time would seem inevitable. In general, these do not lead to accidents because of, among other things, the safety margins added by the driver and adjustments made by other road users. Thus, despite his limitations and fallibilities, the average driver is involved in surprisingly few serious incidents, particularly in view of the rapid rate of decisionmaking that is required. However, the present accident rate should not be accepted as inevitable and various countermeasures are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Using mobile telephones: cognitive workload and attention resource allocation
Patten, C. J. D., Kircher, A., Östlund, J., & Nilsson, L. (2004) · Accident Analysis & Prevention · doi:10.1016/s0001-4575(03)00014-9 · Cited by 455
Vision, Aging, and Driving: The Problems of Older Drivers
Kline, D. W., Kline, T. J. B., Fozard, J. L., Kosnik, W., Schieber, F., & Sekuler, R. (1992) · Journal of Gerontology · doi:10.1093/geronj/47.1.p27 · Cited by 182
Effect of lighting on frequency and severity of road accidents
Yannis, G., Kondyli, A., & Mitzalis, N. (2013) · Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport · doi:10.1680/tran.11.00047 · Cited by 51
Normal blindness: when we look but fail to see
Wolfe, J. M., Kosovicheva, A., & Wolfe, B. (2022) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2022.06.006 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Hills, B. L.
- Venue
- Perception
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1980-04
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 183-216
- ISSN
- 0301-0066 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4233
- OpenAlex
- W2097951186
- Cited by
- 439
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Vision, Visibility, and Perception in Driving. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1068/p090183
- The paper
- Hills, B. L. (1980). Vision, Visibility, and Perception in Driving. Perception. https://doi.org/10.1068/p090183
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.