Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

access icon free Methodological development of a specific tool for assessing acceptability of assistive systems of powered two-wheeler-riders

Research on the acceptability of assistive systems for improving the safety of powered two-wheelers (PTWs) is a pressing issue. The use of safety-enhancing assistive systems for motorised vehicles, including advanced driver assistance systems and in-vehicle information systems is widespread in many countries. Yet, there is only a limited number of equivalent intelligent transport systems (ITS) for PTWs, namely advanced rider assistance systems and on-bike information systems. This study describes the methodological development of a specific tool for assessing motorcyclists’ acceptability of ITS, as part of the motorcyclists’ profiling questionnaire (MOPROQ). There were three stages of development. First, a literature review was undertaken to assess the current state of the art regarding ITS for PTWs and to determine the most relevant facets of acceptability that should be measured. Second, a series of focus group interviews were conducted to explore riders’ attitudes towards ITS. Finally, the focus group results were used to develop a large-scale survey (MOPROQ), which was administered to an initial sample of over 6000 riders internationally. The designed tool can be used as a basis for the determination of rider acceptability of ITS systems in the future.

References

    1. 1)
      • 9. Simpkin, B., Lai, F., Chorlton, K., Fowkes, M.: ‘ISA-UK, Intelligent Speed Adaptation. Results of motorcycle trial’ (University of Leeds, Leeds, UK, 2007).
    2. 2)
      • 34. Schade, J., Schlag, B.: ‘Acceptability of urban transport pricing’. VATT Research Report 72, VATT, Helsinki, Finland, 2000.
    3. 3)
    4. 4)
      • 22. Nilsson, G.: ‘The effects of speed limits on traffic accidents in Sweden’. Proc. of Int. Symp. on the Effects of Speed Limits on Traffic Accidents and Transport Energy use, Ireland, Dublin, October 1982, pp. 18.
    5. 5)
      • 21. Haworth, N.L., Rowden, P.J.: ‘Challenges in improving the safety of learner motorcyclists’. Proc. 20th Canadian Multidisciplinary Road Safety Conf., Ontario, Niagara Falls, June 2010.
    6. 6)
      • 38. Arndt, S.: ‘Evaluierung der Akzeptanz von Fahrerassistenzsystemen – Prüfung eines Modells zur Vorhersage des Kaufverhaltens von Endkunden’ (University of Technology, Dresden, Germany, 2010).
    7. 7)
    8. 8)
    9. 9)
      • 16. ACEM (Association des Constructeurs Européens de Motocycles): ‘In-depth investigations of accidents involving powered two-wheelers (MAIDS)’ (Brussels, Belgium, 2009), pp. 1179.
    10. 10)
    11. 11)
      • 44. Joshi, S., Bellet, T., Banet, A., et al: ‘Understanding risk taking behaviour within the context of PTW riders: A report on rider diversity with regard to attitudes, perceptions and behavioural choices’, 2 BESAFE Proj. Deliv. 7 Work Package, 2011, 3, pp. 2728.
    12. 12)
      • 35. Schade, J.: ‘European research results on transport pricing acceptability’, in Schade, J., Schlag, B. (Eds.): ‘Acceptability of transport pricing strategies’ (Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2003), pp. 109123.
    13. 13)
      • 33. Schlag, B., et al: ‘Public acceptability of transport pricing’, IATTS Res., 1997, 21, (2), pp. 134142.
    14. 14)
    15. 15)
    16. 16)
      • 40. Mayerhofer, W.: ‘Das Fokusgruppeninterview’, in Buber, R., Holzmüller, H. (Eds.): ‘Qualitative Marktforschung. Konzepte. Methoden. Analysen’ (Gabler, S., Wiesbaden, 2007), pp. 479488.
    17. 17)
    18. 18)
    19. 19)
      • 36. Schade, J., Schlag, B.: ‘Kognitive Bedingungen der öffentlichen Akzeptanz von Straßenbenutzungsgebühren’, Umweltpsychologie, 2004, 8, (1), pp. 210224.
    20. 20)
    21. 21)
      • 43. Bayly, M., Regan, M., Hosking, S.: ‘Intelligent transport systems and motorcycle safety’. Report No. 260, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia, 2006, pp. 176.
    22. 22)
      • 2. Spyropoulou, I., Yannis, G., Winkelbauer, M., Golias, J.: ‘Powered Two Wheelers safety measures: recommendations and priorities’. Proc. of the 12th WCTR Conf., Portugal, Lisbon, 2010.
    23. 23)
    24. 24)
      • 5. Rakotonirainy, A., Haworth, N.: ‘Institutional challenges to ITS deployment and adoption’. 29th Australasian Transport Research Forum, Australia, Gold Coast, September 2006.
    25. 25)
    26. 26)
      • 20. ETSC (European Transport Safety Council): ‘Vulnerable riders: Implications of motorcycling in the European Union’ (ETSC, Brussels, Belgium, 2008), http://www.etsc.eu/documents/ETSC_Vulnerable_riders.pdf, December 2013.
    27. 27)
      • 24. Cook, S., Frampton, R., Grant, R., et al: ‘Powered two wheeler Integrated Safety (PISa): Review of current PTW accident dataVehicle Safety Research Centre, Loughborough University, D2, 2007.
    28. 28)
      • 47. Bellet, T., Banet, A., Paris, J., et al: ‘Motorcyclists’ Risk Awareness’ (2 BE SAFE User Forum, Paris, France, 2011).
    29. 29)
      • 28. Lenné, M., Beanland, V., Füssl, E., et al: ‘Relationships between rider profiles and acceptance of Advanced Rider Assistance Systems’, 2 BESAFE Project Deliv. 9 Work Package, 2011, 3.3, pp. 9196.
    30. 30)
      • 17. Elliot, M., Baughan, J., Broughton, C., et al: ‘Motorcycle safety: a scoping studyPrepared for Road Safety Division, Department for Transport’. TRL Report TRL581, 2003.
    31. 31)
      • 39. Regan, M., Mitsopoulus, E., Haworth, N., Young, K.: ‘Acceptability of in-vehicle intelligent transport systems to Victorian car drivers’. RACV Public Policy, Report No 02/02, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Melbourne, Australia, 2002.
    32. 32)
    33. 33)
    34. 34)
    35. 35)
      • 1. European Commission-Press release: Improved safety for motorcycles: European Commission welcomes Council approval, Brussels, 2012, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1348_en.htm, December 2013.
    36. 36)
      • 50. Cairney, P., Ritzinger, A.: ‘Industry and rider views of ITS for safe motorcycling’. 23rd ARRB Conf. – Research Partnering with Practitioners, Adelaide, Australia, 2006.
    37. 37)
    38. 38)
      • 41. Mayring, P.: ‘Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken’ (Beltz, 2003), pp. 1135.
    39. 39)
    40. 40)
      • 29. Schade, J.: ‘Individuelle Akzeptanz von Straßenbenutzungsentgelten’, in Schlag, B. (Ed.): ‘Empirische Verkehrspsychologie’ (Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich, 1999), pp. 227244.
    41. 41)
      • 8. Nordqvist, M., Gregersen, N.: ‘Study on motorcyclist's behaviour and attitude towards road safety 2010’ (SMC, Borlänge, Sweden, 2011).
    42. 42)
    43. 43)
    44. 44)
      • 3. Regan, M., Triggs, T., Young, K., et al: ‘On-road evaluation of intelligent speed adaptation, following distance warning and seat belt reminder systems’. Final Results of the Australian TAC Safecar Project, Report No. 253, Monash University Accident Research Centre, Australia, Melbourne, 2006.
    45. 45)
      • 7. Brenac, T., Clabaux, N., Perrin, C., et al: ‘Motorcyclist conspicuity-related accidents in urban areas: A speed problem?’, Adv. Transp. Stud., 2006, 8, pp. 2329.
    46. 46)
    47. 47)
      • 26. Doğan, A., et al: ‘Evaluation of intersection collision warning system using an inter-vehicle communication simulator’. Proc. of the Seventh Int. IEEE Conf. on Intelligent Transport Systems, Washington, USA, 2004, pp. 11031108.
    48. 48)
    49. 49)
      • 32. Nielsen, J.: ‘Usability Engineering’ (Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA, 1993).
    50. 50)
      • 13. Valtolina, S., Vanzi, S., Montanari, R., Minin, L., Marzani, S.: ‘Design of warning delivery strategies in advanced rider assistance systems’. ASME 2011 World Conf. on Innovative Virtual Reality, Italy, Milan, June 2011, pp. 4150.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-its.2014.0026
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-its.2014.0026
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address