Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Serious Conflicts: A Safety Performance Measure at Signalized Intersections

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Proceedings of AICCE'19 (AICCE 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering ((LNCE,volume 53))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

There is a challenge to identify potential sites for safety improvement in case of shortage in crash data. This study explores alternative method based on traffic conflicts as a surrogate safety measure instead of crash data. The study demonstrates two family major safety assessment streams; three of crash-based methods proposed by Highway Safety Manual and two conflict-based methods. For crash-based methods, Empirical Bayes (EB-method), crash frequency and crash rate measures are used. Conflicts frequency and conflicts rate for two surrogate safety indicators are used in the conflict-based methods, in this study, EB-method is used as a benchmark for comparison. The safety evaluation was performed separately for 9 signalized intersections, the safety measures are estimated and compared through Pearson correlation analysis while hazard location identification results through the use of rank-based mean absolute. Results showed that the serious conflicts frequency as a conflict-based method had a high correlation and a coefficient of 0.986 with the EB-method in the resulting outcomes and performed better than crash frequency method in identifying hazard location when compared with EB-method. Therefore, the serious conflicts frequency can serve as a viable option for safety performance evaluation and hazard locations identification, especially when sufficient crash data are not obtainable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Lord D, Persaud BN (2004) Estimating the safety performance of urban road transportation networks. Accid Anal Prev 36(4):609–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Leur P, Sayed T (2002) Development of a road safety risk index. J Transp Res Board 1784(1):33–42. https://doi.org/10.3141/1784-05

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. AASHTO (2010) Highway safety manual, 1st edn. Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  4. Tarko A, Davis G, Saunier N, Sayed T, Washington S (2009) Surrogate measures of safety white paper. Subcommittee on Surrogate Measures of Safety and Committee on Safety Data Evaluation and Analysis

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gettman D, Head L (2003) Surrogate safety measures from traffic simulation models. J Transp Res Board 1840:104–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gettman D, Pu L, Sayed T, Shelby S (2008) Surrogate safety assessment model and validation: final report FHWA-HRT-08-051

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sayed T, Zaki MH, Autey J (2013) Automated safety diagnosis of vehicle-bicycle interactions using computer vision analysis. Saf Sci 59:163–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zheng L, Ismail K, Meng X (2014) Traffic conflict techniques for road safety analysis: open questions and some insights. Can J Civ Eng 41(7):633–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Elvik R (1988) Some difficulties in defining populations of “entities” for estimating the expected number of accidents. Accid Anal Prev 20(4):261–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Elvik R, Mysen A (1999) Incomplete accident reporting: meta-analysis of studies made in 13 countries. J Transp Res Board 1665:133–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hauer E, Hakkert AS (1988) Extent and some implications of incomplete accident reporting. Transp Res Rec 1185:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  12. Persaud B, Lyon C, Nguyen T (1999) Empirical Bayes procedure for ranking sites for safety investigation by potential for improvement. Transp Res Rec 1665:7–9. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  13. Montella A (2010) A comparative analysis of hotspot identification methods. Accid Anal Prev 42(2):571–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lim L, Kweon Y (2013) Identifying high-crash-risk intersections: comparison of traditional methods with the empirical Bayes-safety performance function method. Transp Res Board Nat Acad, Washington, D.C., pp 44–50

    Google Scholar 

  15. So J, Lim I, Kweon Y (2015) Exploring traffic conflict-based surrogate approach for safety assessment of highway facilities. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., pp 56–62

    Google Scholar 

  16. FHWA (2013) Signalized intersections informational guide, 2nd edn. Publication no. FHWA-SA-13-027

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sayed T, Vahidi H, Rodriguez F (1999) Advance warning flashers: do they improve safety? Transp Res Rec 1692. TRB, NRC, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  18. Maskooni E, Haghighi F (2018) Evaluation and statistical validation of black-spots identification methods. Int J Transp Eng 6(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Laureshyn A, Varhelyi A (2018) The Swedish traffic conflict technique-observer’s manual. Lund University

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tageldin A, Sayed T (2016) Developing evasive action-based indicators for identifying pedestrian conflicts in less organized traffic environments. J Adv Transp 50:1193–1208. https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.1397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Parker MR, Zegeer CV (1989) Traffic conflict techniques for safety and operation. Report no. FHWA-IP-88-027

    Google Scholar 

  22. Amundsen FN, Hydén C (1977) Proceedings of the first international traffic conflicts technique workshop. Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  23. Laureshyn A, Johnsson C, De Ceunynck T, Svensson A, de Goede M, Saunier N, Daniels S (2016) Review of current study methods for VRU safety. Report no. Deliverable 2.1—part 4

    Google Scholar 

  24. El-Basyouny K, Sayed T (2013) Safety performance functions using traffic conflicts. Saf Sci 51(1):160–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Williams M (1981) Validity of the traffic conflicts technique. Accid Anal Prev 13(2):133–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Johnsson C, Laureshyn A, De Ceunynck T (2018) In search of surrogate safety indicators for vulnerable road users: a review of surrogate safety indicators. Transp Rev 38:765–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Grayson GB, Hyden C, Kraay JH, Muhlrad N, Oppe S (1984) The Malmo study: a calibration of traffic conflict techniques. Report no. R-84-12, Institute for Road Safety Research, Leidschendam

    Google Scholar 

  28. Chin HC, Quek ST (1997) Measurement of traffic conflicts. Saf Sci 26(3):169–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hauer E (1978) Traffic conflict surveys: some study design considerations. TRRL supp report 352, Transport and Road Research Laboratory. Berkshire, England

    Google Scholar 

  30. Baker WT (1972) An evaluation of the traffic conflicts technique. Highway Res Rec 384:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sayed T, Zein S (1999) Traffic conflict standards for intersections’. Transp Plann Technol 22(4):309–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hauer E, Garder P (1986) Research into the validity of the traffic conflict technique. Accid Anal Prev 18(6):471–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pietrzyk M. (1996). Development of expected value conflict tables for florida-based traffic crashes. USDOT WPI No. 0510721, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  34. Songchitruksa P, Tarko A (2006) The extreme value theory approach to safety estimation. Accid Anal Prev 38:811–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sacchi E, Sayed T, Leur P (2013) A comparison of collision-based and conflict-based safety evaluations: the case of right-turn smart channels. Accid Anal Prev 59:260–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Svensson A (1998) A method for analysing the traffic process in a safety perspective. Doctoral thesis, University of Lund, Lund Institute of Technology

    Google Scholar 

  37. Glauz W, Migletz D (1980) Application of traffic conflict analysis at intersections. NCHRP Report, Washington, DC, p 219

    Google Scholar 

  38. Dean S, Illowsky B (2009) Principles of business statistics. Rice University, Houston, Texas

    Google Scholar 

  39. Chee J (2013) Pearson’s product moment correlation: sample analysis. University of Hawaii at Manoa School of Nursing, Honolulu, United States

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Highway and Transportation Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Al-Mustansiriayah University, Baghdad, Iraq

    Raghad Zeki Abdul-Majeed

  2. Road and Traffic Engineering Civil Engineering Departments, College of Engineering, University of Babylon, Babylon, Iraq

    Hussein A. Ewadh

Authors
  1. Raghad Zeki Abdul-Majeed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hussein A. Ewadh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raghad Zeki Abdul-Majeed .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Nibong Tebal, Malaysia

    Fadzli Mohamed Nazri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Abdul-Majeed, R.Z., Ewadh, H.A. (2020). Serious Conflicts: A Safety Performance Measure at Signalized Intersections. In: Mohamed Nazri, F. (eds) Proceedings of AICCE'19. AICCE 2019. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering, vol 53. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32816-0_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32816-0_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32815-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32816-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation