| Subject: |
|
Inattentional Blindness: It's About More than Just Conspicuity |
| Name: |
|
Bruce Arnold |
| Date Posted: |
|
Apr 12, 06 - 8:28 AM |
| Email: |
|
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com |
| Message: |
|
Fellow Freedom Fighters,
This is a long but worthwhile read that provides some important insights into why cagers can't/don't/won't see bikers, why they turn and pull out in front of us, and why they are killing us. NHTSA says that if we all dress up in neon-colored clown suits and cover our bikes with disco flicker lights, that will solve the problem. I say NOT SO ... and so does the research linked below.
The issue here is "inattentional blindess", and that is about much more than just "conspicuity". Irish Paul Reid first introduced me to the concepts when he posted this link:
http://jeff.dean.home.att.net/blind.htm
Now, "Madd Ray" Henke offers this piece of research that is begging to be applied to our situation:
http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/inattentionalblindness.html
I encourage you to take the time to click these two links, read the articles, and then read Ray's commentary below. As we keep saying, it's time for bikers' rights activists everywhere to get off the defensive, go on the offensive, and take the fight to the cagers. IT IS TIME TO STOP WHINING ABOUT WHY THE PRESS AND PUBLIC IGNORE OUR ISSUES, AND INSTEAD GIVE THEM ISSUES THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED. And as we rally the troops and prepare for the charge, "Inattentional Blindness" might very well be part of our new battle cry...
Ride Long, Ride Free!
Bruce 
Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
http://www.ldrlongdistancerider.com/
***
From: RARELYL84AD8@aol.com [mailto:RARELYL84AD8@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 6:09 PM
To: Bruce@LdrLongDistanceRider.com
Subject: Inattentional Blindness, the Problem. Now on to the Solution.
Dear Bruce,
I am coming to a more clear understanding of the aspect of the "problem" defined as "inattentional blindness," and it appears to me to make abundant sense that the previous emphasis of NHTSA and others on "conspicuity" to the exclusion of all the other factors involved in inattentional blindness is a major policy error.
What I've seen so far is good theoretical discussion of the phenomenon, but much less on what strategies might be employed to modify inattentional blindness. There is a very good discussion of the various aspects of inattentional blindness at:
http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/inattentionalblindness.html
I've written to the authors of this article to attempt to obtain their insights on the application of inattentional blindness specifically as it relates to multi-vehicle intersection motorcycle accidents. And I've asked them specifically, to suggest what might be the solution now to modifying auto driver inattention to motorcycles specifically in this most common of accident scenarios in which auto drivers claim that they didn't "see" the oncoming motorcycle.
Below you will find my e-inquiry. If you or your colleagues have any additional input in terms of literature which has suggested effective ways to modify inattentional blindness, please let me know.
Ray Henke
***
Below Is My Letter to the Authors of the Above Referenced Article on Inattentional Blindness.
Dear Dr's, Sirs and Madams,
I am the founder of Motorcyclists-Against-Dumb-Drivers, and am endeavoring to understand more clearly what may be the factors contributing to auto driver inattentional blindness, specifically as it impairs their ability to "see" motorcycles.
I read your article on "'Intentional Blindness' and Conspicuity," and feel that it is a very important contribution to our understanding of the statistically most common cause of multi-vehicle motorcycle accidents. The statistics have commonly shown that 2/3 of multi-vehicle motorcycle accidents are the result of auto drivers pulling out from side streets into the motorcyclist's right of way or turning left at an intersection into the motorcyclist's right of way.
Traditionally, from the Harry Hurt study forward, through the most recent proposed Amendments to the NHTSA Guidelines, the explanation has been cited as the lack of "conspicuity" of the motorcycle. This conclusion has always troubled me because motorcycles are not invisible. Indeed, at the distance at which a car can pose a hazard to a motorcycle, I have always felt that cars and motorcycles are equally "visible." And since motorcycles now come with standard headlights which come on at ignition and remain on day and night, I've wondered whether motorcycles might now be even more "visible" than cars.
In my own mind, over the years, I've struggled with what other factors might contribute to the auto driver's failure to "see" the motorcycle, and one hypothesis I've considered is that auto drivers don't recognize the motorcycle as a threat to them. Another hypothesis was that auto drivers don't "look" for motorcycles in the same way that they "look" for oncoming cars.
I think that what has perplexed me, and what has led to the emphasis on "conspicuity" is the frequency by which auto drivers will say after an accident, "I'm sorry, I just didn't 'see' the motorcycle."
What I think your article makes plain is that "conspicuity" may be just one, and perhaps even the least of the pertinent factors resulting in the auto driver's failure to "see" the oncoming motorcycle. One aspect may be "cognitive conspicuity factors," possibly because auto drivers may see oncoming cars, trucks and busses as more "relevant," possibly because they pose a threat to them. Also, as you point out, there is the effect of the mental workload and task interference which the auto driver faces as he goes through his decision making while entering an intersection or turning left at an intersection. Entering an intersection and turning left at an intersection the auto driver must look left and right, look for oncoming vehicles from each side, anticipate the distances of the oncoming vehicles; consder their speeds, anticipate what pedestrians might do (along with everything else they must do immediately, like turning the radio from a song the driver really hates, and dialing their kids cell telephone number's to try to find out why they didn't go to school.)
Judging from your article, I also think that perhaps "expectation" may indeed play an important role in auto v. motorcycle accidents. Indeed, you use the example of the individual who hits the bicyclist pulling out from his driveway, and it may very well be that since cars are so much more common than motorcycles that the auto driver may not enter an intersection or turn left at an intersection expecting to "see" a motorcycle, or with a lessened expectation, and hence lessened ability to attend to it.
I also wonder whether capacity and the effect of "muscle memory" may contribute to the cause of these statistically most common motorcycle accident scenarios, as auto drivers used to entering the same intersection or turning left at the same intersection may see what they expect to see, rather than what is actually in their visual field.
I appreciate that your article is principally designed to identify the factors which are involved in this phenomenon, but I wonder if you have considered how inattentional blindness might be modified in particular circumstances. If we take the example of the auto driver's failure to "see" the oncoming motorcyclist, entering or turning left at intersections, how can we alter these factors contributing to his inattention. Could an educational process, such as might be imposed by mandatory auto driver education, specifically additions to the auto driver booklets which auto drivers must study in preparation for the written tests, be used to redirect the auto driver's attention to the motorcyclist, e.g., by pointing out that the most common cause of multi-vehicle motorcycle accidents is the result of auto driver's failing to attend to them while entering intersections; by pointing out that cars pose a huge danger to motorcyclists, and their decisions at intersections are life and death decisions if they fail to specifically look for the oncoming motorcyclists; by pointing out to the auto driver that it may be more difficult to distinguish the speed of the motorcycle, and hence the need for them to focus carefully on the oncoming motorcycle to judge its speed and the err in favor of caution. The Departments of Motor Vehicles could also stress the importance of this information by placing motorcycle safety questions on the tests that auto drivers must take to obtain their drivers licenses, and let them know in advance that if they fail to answer correctly any motorcycle safety question that they will be denied their driving privileges. Perhaps another means of making the auto driver take motorcycle safety seriously might be to enact legislation that drivers licenses will be suspended for a year or two where negligent auto driving results in death or catastrophic injury.
My emphasis on education has been largely influenced by my own experience. I have ridden motorcycles since I was 11, and I continue to ride today, at 52. So I am an experienced rider. But a few years ago I took a beginers course in motorcylce safety, and what I found was that I had much to learn, and what I found useful was the information about keeping my eyes constantly moving, specifically looking for and anticipating "potential hazards," mostly the hazards that auto drivers commonly cause, and then separating the hazzards so that I can deal with them one at a time if they both become real hazards. I won't go through all that is involved. If you are interested I can provide you a more comprehensive list of examples. These are now, I think, generally standardized for state approved motorcycle courses nationally. But my point is that I do feel that I learned alot, I apply what I learned every time I ride, and I believe that it had the beneficial effect of reducing the likelihood that I will be involved in a motorcycle accident.
So, from my own experience I believe that at least some aspects of this problem can be solved by education. Again, I appreciate your analysis of the problem. Now what I would hope that you could do is provide "solutions" to the problem. I appreciate that for some of the aspects of inattentional blindness it will be difficult to modify them or completely modify them, but even partial solutions or imperfect solutions or solutions which would contribute even moderately to lessen the incidence of multi-vehicle intersection motorcycle accidents could save hundreds of lives each year. So I would appreciate any direction you might provide that could contribute to the solution to this problem of auto driver inattentional blindness.
Very truly yours,
Ray Henke
RarelyL84ad8@aol.com
http://www.Motorcyclists-Against-Dumb-Drivers.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
Home
bravenet.com