Differences in frequency of occurrence, event characteristics, and pre-impact vehicle kinematics between crashes, near-crashes, and single vehicle conflicts in a large-scale naturalistic driving study

Abstract

Objective: Motor vehicle crashes result in egregious personal injury, mortality, and economic cost but are relatively rare in naturalistic observations. There is, however, evidence of strong relationships between crashes and less severe (but more common) “surrogate” events (e.g., near-crashes). Despite this strong relationship, there can still be some important differences in findings when these surrogate events are investigated in lieu of, or combined with, crashes. Therefore, it is relevant to describe and quantify differences between crashes and crash-surrogate events. Consequently, the focus of this investigation was to establish how crashes and crash surrogate events in a large-scale naturalistic driving study compare in terms of frequency of occurrence, event characteristics, and pre-impact vehicle kinematics.

Methods: Crashes, near-crashes, and single-vehicle conflicts (SVCs) derived from the Second Strategic Highway Research Program Naturalistic Driving Study were coded to summarize the environmental and contributing variables involved. The original coding for these events was downsized to the variables of interest, and those variables underwent recoding to simplify the coded options. Additional variables based on the kinematic characteristics for each event were also derived and analyzed. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the contributions of these different variables toward classification of an event as a crash, near-crash, or SVC.

Results: The regression model comparing crashes with near-crashes and SVCs identified several variables that allowed differentiation between crashes and these surrogates, primarily the pre-incident maneuver of the subject vehicle and the evasive maneuver that was executed by the driver. Kinematic variables prior to event onset, however, were not predictive of event outcome.

Conclusions: The results suggest that important differences exist between crashes and their near-crash surrogates, and between crashes and SVCs. These results, however, should not discourage the analysis of surrogate events, which still provide useful information in prevention and mitigation of crash circumstances. This investigation highlights how crashes are different from two types of surrogate events and provides information that may allow for more precise analysis of these surrogate events in the future.

Keywords:

• Crash
• crash surrogate
• naturalistic driving
• near-crash
• single vehicle conflict
• traffic safety

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Data availability statement

The dataset used for this investigation is documented and can be requested at https://doi.org/10.15787/VTT1/AQD0BJ.