The impact of red light running camera flashes on younger and older drivers’ attention and oculomotor control.

Abstract

Recent empirical evidence suggests that the flashes associated with red light running cameras (RLRCs) distract younger drivers, pulling attention away from the roadway and delaying processing of safety-relevant events. Considering the perceptual and attentional declines that occur with age, older drivers may be especially susceptible to the distracting effects of RLRC flashes, particularly in situations in which the flash is more salient (a bright flash at night compared to the day). The current study examined how age and situational factors potentially influence attention capture by RLRC flashes using covert (cuing effects) and overt (eye movement) indices of capture. We manipulated the salience of the flash by varying its luminance and contrast with respect to the background of the driving scene (either day or night scenes). Results of two experiments suggest that simulated RLRC flashes capture observers' attention, but, surprisingly, no age differences in capture were observed. However, an analysis examining early and late eye movements revealed that older adults may have been strategically delaying their eye movements in order to avoid capture. Additionally, older adults took longer to disengage attention following capture, suggesting at least one age-related disadvantage in capture situations. Findings have theoretical implications for understanding age differences in attention capture, especially with respect to capture in real-world scenes, and inform future work that should examine how the distracting effects of RLRC flashes influence driver behavior.

A Preliminary Examination of Age-Related Differences in Perceived Complexity at Fatal-Crash Intersections

“…This potential strategy of older drivers is consistent with the declines in visual acuity and contrast sensitivity that occur with age. Moreover, the potential strategy is consistent with findings suggesting older adults utilize distinct strategies from younger adults in the driving context (Wright et al, 2015), and more specifically, is consistent with prior work showing experienced drivers are more likely to anticipate hazards than younger drivers (Pradhan et al, 2005;Wright et al, 2016). The hazards that older drivers differentially anticipated are often less obvious in rural or residential streets.…”

Stroboscopic lighting with intensity synchronized to rotation velocity alleviates motion sickness gastrointestinal symptoms and motor disorders in rats

“…We argue that stroboscopic light that provides no virtual motion cues could not produce vection which was the main trigger of visually induced MS during visual oscillation exposure. As flashes have been reported to distract observer's attention (Wright et al, 2015 ), the impact of stroboscopic light on working performance should be addressed especially for the application in personnel with important duty.…”

Bright-light distractions and visual performance

“…It has been shown that single or multiple low intensity flashes increase saccadic latency (the time between stimulus presentation and saccade onset), increase target acquisition times, and introduce an error to the initial saccade toward a target (Alvarez et al, 2008). Such results are explained primarily by two concepts: saccadic inhibition, where there is a reduction in the frequency of saccades immediately following a transient visual distraction (Reingold and Stampe, 2002;Buonocore et al, 2016), and inhibition of return, where locations of recent saccades or visual distractions are less likely to be revisited (Abrams and Dobkin, 1994;Wright et al, 2015).…”