Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The basic driver error: late detection

Open access
RUMAR, KÂRE·1990·Ergonomics

Abstract

Over the past two or three decades we have been quite successful in reducing injuries of car occupants by the use of energy-absorbing techniques; but we have not been as successful in reducing the risks of having collisions. When drivers are asked why an accident occurred very often they claim that they saw the other road user too late to avoid collision. This paper discusses the basic road user error of failing to see another road user in time, why such errors happen, and how they can be reduced. A detection error is basic, because without detection no processing of information, no decision process including that road user, takes place. Among the many causes of detection error two of the more important are: a lapse of cognitive expectation, illustrated by the failure to scan for a particular class of road user, or to look in the appropriate direction; a difficulty with perceptual thresholds, illustrated by the failure to discern the relevant stimuli in lower levels of ambient illumination or in situations where vehicles approach in the peripheral visual field of road users.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00140139008925332

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Metadata

Authors
RUMAR, K.
Venue
Ergonomics
Published
1990-10
Volume
33
Issue
10-11
Pages
1281-1290
ISSN
  • 0014-0139 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-5847
OpenAlex
W2077439736
Cited by
264
References
0
FWCI
10.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.