Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error
Collisions at intersections, which involve a car driver pulling out into the path of another road user (often a motorcycle), have generally been attributed to a failure in the driver’s visual search. These incidents have thus been described as being the result of ‘look but fail to see’ (LBFTS) error...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis (University of Nottingham only) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/59234/ |
| _version_ | 1848799598506672128 |
|---|---|
| author | Robbins, Chloe J. |
| author_facet | Robbins, Chloe J. |
| author_sort | Robbins, Chloe J. |
| building | Nottingham Research Data Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Collisions at intersections, which involve a car driver pulling out into the path of another road user (often a motorcycle), have generally been attributed to a failure in the driver’s visual search. These incidents have thus been described as being the result of ‘look but fail to see’ (LBFTS) errors. This explanation suggests that although the car driver directs their attention towards the approaching vehicle, they do not form a representation of this vehicle, indicating a perceptual error. Previous theoretical frameworks used to understand these crashes have focussed on attentional and perceptual explanations, as well as the possible influence of top-down and bottom-up factors on drivers’ behaviour. While the investigation of the influence of top-down factors, such as experience and attitudes, has been continued in the current thesis by examining how these factors may affect drivers’ behaviour at junctions, the thesis also considers other potential explanations for the LBFTS error, by breaking down the previous framework into specific testable stages. The structure of the thesis and the theoretical basis for it is described in an extended introduction which is followed by six specific papers presented in the format in which they have been published or submitted for publication.
The first paper in the thesis describes an online survey completed by 579 motorcyclists and 102 car drivers exploring their opinions about junction crashes. The second paper describes a systematic review exploring the role of experience in drivers’ visual search strategies. After this there are a series of four papers describing seven different studies conducted in a high-fidelity driving simulator and a validation of one of these studies with drivers in an instrumented car driving real roads in Nottingham. These papers describe the development of a methodology for exploring junction crossing behaviour in a simulator and revealed that drivers are prepared to accept risker gaps in front of approaching motorcycles compared to cars. One critical finding was that drivers’ representations for approaching vehicles were often surprisingly poor. There were occasions when drivers failed to report critical approaching vehicles, with these significantly more likely to be motorcycles than cars. These report failures were not predicted by how long the driver fixated on the approaching vehicle, but by drivers’ subsequent visual search after fixating on the vehicle. One possible interpretation of these findings is that working memory may play a critical role in understanding junction crashes, with new information interfering with the retention of other safety critical information. A new framework for understanding the role of working memory in such situations is presented, along with proposals for practical interventions to prevent this crash. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T20:38:13Z |
| format | Thesis (University of Nottingham only) |
| id | nottingham-59234 |
| institution | University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus |
| institution_category | Local University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T20:38:13Z |
| publishDate | 2019 |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | nottingham-592342025-02-28T14:40:13Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/59234/ Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error Robbins, Chloe J. Collisions at intersections, which involve a car driver pulling out into the path of another road user (often a motorcycle), have generally been attributed to a failure in the driver’s visual search. These incidents have thus been described as being the result of ‘look but fail to see’ (LBFTS) errors. This explanation suggests that although the car driver directs their attention towards the approaching vehicle, they do not form a representation of this vehicle, indicating a perceptual error. Previous theoretical frameworks used to understand these crashes have focussed on attentional and perceptual explanations, as well as the possible influence of top-down and bottom-up factors on drivers’ behaviour. While the investigation of the influence of top-down factors, such as experience and attitudes, has been continued in the current thesis by examining how these factors may affect drivers’ behaviour at junctions, the thesis also considers other potential explanations for the LBFTS error, by breaking down the previous framework into specific testable stages. The structure of the thesis and the theoretical basis for it is described in an extended introduction which is followed by six specific papers presented in the format in which they have been published or submitted for publication. The first paper in the thesis describes an online survey completed by 579 motorcyclists and 102 car drivers exploring their opinions about junction crashes. The second paper describes a systematic review exploring the role of experience in drivers’ visual search strategies. After this there are a series of four papers describing seven different studies conducted in a high-fidelity driving simulator and a validation of one of these studies with drivers in an instrumented car driving real roads in Nottingham. These papers describe the development of a methodology for exploring junction crossing behaviour in a simulator and revealed that drivers are prepared to accept risker gaps in front of approaching motorcycles compared to cars. One critical finding was that drivers’ representations for approaching vehicles were often surprisingly poor. There were occasions when drivers failed to report critical approaching vehicles, with these significantly more likely to be motorcycles than cars. These report failures were not predicted by how long the driver fixated on the approaching vehicle, but by drivers’ subsequent visual search after fixating on the vehicle. One possible interpretation of these findings is that working memory may play a critical role in understanding junction crashes, with new information interfering with the retention of other safety critical information. A new framework for understanding the role of working memory in such situations is presented, along with proposals for practical interventions to prevent this crash. 2019-12-13 Thesis (University of Nottingham only) NonPeerReviewed application/pdf en arr https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/59234/1/4264575-ChloeRobbinsFinal%20with%20corrections.pdf Robbins, Chloe J. (2019) Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error. PhD thesis, University of Nottingham. driving; motorcycles; junctions; eye movements; driving simulation |
| spellingShingle | driving; motorcycles; junctions; eye movements; driving simulation Robbins, Chloe J. Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error |
| title | Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error |
| title_full | Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error |
| title_fullStr | Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error |
| title_full_unstemmed | Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error |
| title_short | Understanding the ‘Look but Fail to See’ Error |
| title_sort | understanding the ‘look but fail to see’ error |
| topic | driving; motorcycles; junctions; eye movements; driving simulation |
| url | https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/59234/ |