Interdependence of driver and pedestrian behavior in naturalistic roadway negotiations

References

• American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 2001. A policy on geometric design of highways and streets, 2001. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
   Google Scholar
• Camara F, Romano R, Markkula G, Madigan R, Merat N, Fox C. 2018. Empirical game theory of pedestrian interaction for autonomous vehicles. Proc Measuring Behav. 2018:238–244.
   Google Scholar
• Cook WL, Kenny DA. 2005. The Actor–Partner Interdependence Model: a model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. Int J Behav Dev. 29(2):101–109. doi:10.1080/01650250444000405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domeyer JE, Lee JD, Toyoda H. 2020. Vehicle automation–other road user communication and coordination: theory and mechanisms. IEEE Access. 8:19860–19872. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2969233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domeyer JE, Lee JD, Toyoda H, Mehler B, Reimer B. 2022. Interdependence in vehicle-pedestrian encounters and its implications for vehicle automation. IEEE Trans Intell Transport Syst. 23(5):4122–4113. doi:10.1109/TITS.2020.3041562
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick J, Gareau A, Lafontaine M-F, Gaudreau P. 2016. How to use the actor-partner interdependence model (APIM) to estimate different dyadic patterns in MPLUS: a step-by-step tutorial. Quant Methods Psychol. 12(1):74–86. doi:10.20982/tqmp.12.1.p074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox C, Camara F, Markkula G, Romano R, Madigan R, Merat N. 2018 Jan 26. When should the chicken cross the road? - Game theory for autonomous vehicle - human interactions. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems. 4th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems. doi:10.5220/0006765404310439
   Google Scholar
• Fridman L, Brown DE, Glazer M, Angell W, Dodd S, Jenik B, Terwilliger J, Patsekin A, Kindelsberger J, Ding L, et al. 2019. MIT advanced vehicle technology study: large-scale naturalistic driving study of driver behavior and interaction with automation. IEEE Access. 7(1):102021–102038. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2926040
   Google Scholar
• Fu T, Miranda-Moreno L, Saunier N. 2018. A novel framework to evaluate pedestrian safety at non-signalized locations. Accid Anal Prev. 111:23–33. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2017.11.015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habibovic A, Tivesten E, Uchida N, Bärgman J, Ljung Aust M. 2013. Driver behavior in car-to-pedestrian incidents: An application of the Driving Reliability and Error Analysis Method (DREAM). Accid Anal Prev. 50:554–565. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2012.05.034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatfield J, Murphy S. 2007. The effects of mobile phone use on pedestrian crossing behaviour at signalised and unsignalised intersections. Accid Anal Prev. 39(1):197–205. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2006.07.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollnagel E, Woods DD. 2005. Joint cognitive systems: Foundations of cognitive systems engineering. 1st ed. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. doi:10.1201/9781420038194.
   Google Scholar
• Katz A, Zaidel D, Elgrishi A. 1975. An experimental study of driver and pedestrian interaction during the crossing conflict. Hum Factors. 17(5):514–527. doi:10.1177/001872087501700510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenny DA, Cook W. 1999. Partner effects in relationship research: conceptual issues, analytic difficulties, and illustrations. Pers Relat. 6(4):433–448. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00202.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee YM, Madigan R, Giles O, Garach-Morcillo L, Markkula G, Fox C, Camara F, Rothmueller M, Vendelbo-Larsen SA, Rasmussen PH, et al. 2021. Road users rarely use explicit communication when interacting in today’s traffic: Implications for automated vehicles. Cogn Tech Work. 23(2):367–380. doi:10.1007/s10111-020-00635-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markkula G, Madigan R, Nathanael D, Portouli E, Lee YM, Dietrich A, Billington J, Schieben A, Merat N. 2020. Defining interactions: a conceptual framework for understanding interactive behaviour in human and automated road traffic. Theor Issues Ergon Sci. 21(6):728–752. doi:10.1080/1463922X.2020.1736686
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NHTSA. 2021. Traffic safety facts annual report. https://cdan.nhtsa.gov/tsftables/tsfar.htm#.
   Google Scholar
• Redmon J, Divvala S, Girshick R, Farhadi A. 2016. You only look once: unified, real-time object detection. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1506.02640
   Google Scholar
• Rosseel Y. 2012. lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Soft. 48(2):1–36. doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwilliger J, Glazer M, Schmidt H, Domeyer J, Toyoda H, Mehler B, Reimer B, Fridman L. 2019. Dynamics of pedestrian crossing decisions based on vehicle trajectories in large-scale simulated and real-world data. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design (pp. 64–70). Santa Fe, NM.
   Google Scholar
• Yoo JH, Langari R. 2013. Stackelberg game based model of highway driving. In: ASME 2012 5th Annual Dynamic Systems and Control Conference Joint with the JSME 2012 11th Motion and Vibration Conference. p. 499–508. doi:10.1115/DSCC2012-MOVIC2012-8703
   Google Scholar