How does left lane width in motorway work zones affect driver behaviour and perception?
T. Petzoldt, P. Rossner, C. Mair, A.C. Bullinger, J.F. Krems
Pages: 51-58
Abstract:
Most drivers have come to accept the regular and frequent maintenance and construction activity on motorways as a necessary nuisance, as the strain on this type of infrastructure is considerable, and damage frequent. However, aside of being just inconvenient, it has been repeatedly suggested that such motorway work zones might be associated with an increased crash risk. One of the factors that has the potential to contribute to work zone crashes is lane width. Goal of the present study was to investigate the effect of left lane width on driver behaviour in motorway work zones. Seventy two participants in two age groups (20-45 and 55-80 years) took part in a driving simulator experiment, in which they drove on the motorway and passed through multiple work zones with a left lane width of either 2.50 m, 2.75 m or 3.00 m. Once participants entered the work zone, they approached two platoons of vehicles, which they were allowed to overtake if they felt it was necessary and possible. Our results show that left lane width did not influence the participants’ willingness to overtake. At the same time, their reported ratings of stress and their assessment of work zone features clearly indicate that they perceived the differences in lane width. A narrower lane width was accompanied by a lower mean speed when travelling on the left lane. In addition, the recorded values indicate that the narrower the left lane, the further right of that lane’s centre the participants travelled (often crossing into the adjacent right lane). The findings suggest that differences in lane width are perceived by drivers, that they increase the drivers perceived stress level, and that some behavioural adaptation occurs. However, the fact that driver still opted to overtake most of the time is somewhat worrisome.
Keywords: autobahn; construction; crashes; overtaking; speed
2025 ISSUES
2024 ISSUES
LXII - April 2024LXIII - July 2024LXIV - November 2024Special 2024 Vol1Special 2024 Vol2Special 2024 Vol3Special 2024 Vol4
2023 ISSUES
LIX - April 2023LX - July 2023LXI - November 2023Special Issue 2023 Vol1Special Issue 2023 Vol2Special Issue 2023 Vol3
2022 ISSUES
LVI - April 2022LVII - July 2022LVIII - November 2022Special Issue 2022 Vol1Special Issue 2022 Vol2Special Issue 2022 Vol3Special Issue 2022 Vol4
2021 ISSUES
LIII - April 2021LIV - July 2021LV - November 2021Special Issue 2021 Vol1Special Issue 2021 Vol2Special Issue 2021 Vol3
2020 ISSUES
2019 ISSUES
Special Issue 2019 Vol1Special Issue 2019 Vol2Special Issue 2019 Vol3XLIX - November 2019XLVII - April 2019XLVIII - July 2019
2018 ISSUES
Special Issue 2018 Vol1Special Issue 2018 Vol2Special Issue 2018 Vol3XLIV - April 2018XLV - July 2018XLVI - November 2018
2017 ISSUES
Special Issue 2017 Vol1Special Issue 2017 Vol2Special Issue 2017 Vol3XLI - April 2017XLII - July 2017XLIII - November 2017
2016 ISSUES
Special Issue 2016 Vol1Special Issue 2016 Vol2Special Issue 2016 Vol3XL - November 2016XXXIX - July 2016XXXVIII - April 2016
2015 ISSUES
Special Issue 2015 Vol1Special Issue 2015 Vol2XXXV - April 2015XXXVI - July 2015XXXVII - November 2015
2014 ISSUES
Special Issue 2014 Vol1Special Issue 2014 Vol2Special Issue 2014 Vol3XXXII - April 2014XXXIII - July 2014XXXIV - November 2014
2013 ISSUES
2012 ISSUES
2011 ISSUES
2010 ISSUES
2009 ISSUES
2008 ISSUES
2007 ISSUES
2006 ISSUES
2005 ISSUES
2004 ISSUES
2003 ISSUES