Effect of Road Lighting On Night Driving

Effect of Road Lighting on Night Driving
of Older Adults
March, 2009
Prepared by
Maureen Reed,1 Said Easa,2 and Frank Russo1
Departments of Psychology1 and Civil Engineering2
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St.

Toronto, Ontario
M5B 2K3
Published without
prejudice as to the
application of the
findings
Technical Report Documentation Page
The main objective of this study was to determine if minimal increases in road lighting could lead to
improved driving performance in older adults. Since little is known about night driving in older
adults, a further objective of this project was to learn about the night driving experiences of older
adults and relate these experiences to age-related changes in vision and cognition. To meet these
objectives we designed a three phase study that included a night driving survey of older adults, a
comparison of vision and cognitive responses to self-reported night driving experiences and a
comparison of simulated night driving performance under two roadway lighting conditions (0.6
cd/m2 and 2.5 cd/m2). At each light level we also examined influences of self reported night driving
behaviours and vision/cognitive performance. We found that increasing road lighting from 0.6 cd/m2
to 2.5 cd/m2 impacted on night driving performance. However, the impact depended on the type of
driving maneuver, driver age, driver vision and cognitive performance and driver self-perception
(i.e. driver confidence). We conclude that while increases in road lighting may be helpful to older
adults during sign recognition, it may also result in increased driving confidence and thus reductions
in attention in some driving situations.
Effect of Road Lighting on Night Driving of Older
Adults
March, 2009
Prepared by
Maureen Reed,1 Said Easa,2 and Frank Russo1
Departments of Psychology1 and Civil Engineering2
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St.

Toronto, Ontario
M5B 2K3
Published without
prejudice as to the
application of the findings
-ii-
Table of Contents
Executive Summary iv
1. Literature Review 10
2. Methodology 13
2.1 Older Adult Night Driving Survey 13
2.1.1 Survey Description
2.1.2 Distribution and Response rate
2.2 Age/Vision/Cognition Experiment 14
2.2.1 Sample Characteristics
2.2.2 Vision/Cognitive Measures
2.3 Driving Simulator Experiment 15
2.3.1 Subject Characteristics
2.3.2 Design of driving Scenario
3. Analysis and Results 19
3.1 Data Analysis 19
3.2 Results of Older Adult Night Driving Survey 20
3.2.1 Self Reported Night Driving Behaviours 20
3.2.2 Difficult Night Driving Situations 22
3.2.3 Driving Errors and Compensation 24
3.2.4 Discussion 25
3.3 Results of Age/Vision/Cognition Effects on Self-Reported Night Driving Performance 26
3.3.1 Vision Variables 26
3.3.2 Cognitive Variables 28
3.3.3 Self Reported Night Driving Behaviours 30
3.3.4 Difficult Night Driving Conditions 31
3.3.5 Vision/Cognition and Self Report Comparisons 33
3.3.6 Discussion 36
3.4 Results of Effect of Lighting on Night Driving Performance 37
3.4.1 Effect of Road Light Levels on Driving Performance 37
3.4.2 Road Lighting and Self Reported Night Driving Behaviours 43
3.4.3 Road Lighting and Vision and Cognitive Variables 47
3.4.4 Discussion 48
4. Conclusions and Recommendations 50
4.1 Conclusions 50
4.2 Recommendations 51
_______________________________________________________________________
Effect of Road Lighting on Night Driving of Older Adults
-iii-
References 53
Acknowledgements 60
Appendix 1 61
Appendix 2 109
Appendix 3 161
Appendix 4 204
_______________________________________________________________________
-iv-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Older drivers have concerns about night diving, resulting in reduced driver confidence and night
driving avoidance. Some research shows that a mild increase in road lighting reduces collision rates
for all drivers. Yet, the effect of increases in road luminance changes on older drivers is not known.
At night older drivers have difficulties with visual searches, sign searches, object recognition and
steering accuracy. In addition, age-related losses in acuity, dynamic acuity, contrast perception,
depth perception, visual attention and processing speed are often exacerbated in lower light levels.
Little research has been conducted in the area of age-related vision and cognitive losses and
nighttime driving performance for older adults. These nighttime losses alone may put senior drivers
at risk. It is therefore possible that increases in road lighting could benefit older drivers. It is,
however, necessary to determine which driving behaviours would be impacted by road light
increases. The main objective of this study is to determine if minimal increases in road lighting
could lead to improved driving performance in older adults. Since little is known about night
driving in older adults, a further objective of this project was to learn about the night driving
experiences of older adults and relate these experiences to age-related changes in vision and
cognition.
To meet these objectives we designed a three phase project. In the first phase 219 older adults were
queried about their night driving experiences. In the second phase, 97 younger, middle aged and
older adults were screened with visual and cognitive tests prior to answering a short survey about
their night driving experiences. Vision and cognitive responses were then related to self-reported
night driving behaviours and difficulties. In the third phase, these same younger, middle aged and
older adults were asked to drive in a driving simulator in one of two conditions. In the first
condition, roadway lighting was set at 0.6 cd/m2 (typical roadway lighting on Ontario highways) and
in the second condition, roadway lighting was increased to 2.5 cd/m2. Driving performance was
compared between the two settings. In addition, driving performance was related to vision and
cognitive performance and to self-reported nighttime driving experiences.
Older Adult Survey of Night Driving
Older adults report that they avoid driving at night and they are infrequent nighttime drivers. These
drivers claim that driving is more difficult with age and this is in part due to vision issues, traffic
increases, and other issues related to aging (e.g. reaction time). Older drivers identified a number of
driving conditions that were difficult for them. These most frequently included driving on roads with
low light, undivided roads, driving on rural roads, freeways, narrow roads, high traffic volume roads
and reading static signs. The majority of these drivers believe that increased road light could help
them with these reported difficulties. Some participants identified errors that they make in night
driving. These were often associated with missing signage and making judgment errors for driving
maneuvers (e.g. misjudge distance). To help with these errors and difficult driving conditions, these
drivers reported that they reduce speed, attempt to concentrate more and avoid distractions. Notably,
those that avoid driving at night, report more nighttime driving difficulties and they more frequently
try to compensate for driving errors. In contrast, those who more frequently drive at night report
_______________________________________________________________________
-v-
fewer difficult driving conditions and thus compensate less often for driving errors as a group.
Overall, older drivers appear cognizant of aging issues that may affect driving, as well as, methods
to compensate for driving difficulties.
Impact of Visual Aging and Cognition on Self Reported Night Driving Performance
Older drivers have more difficulties with acuity, contrast acuity, and dynamic acuity than do younger
or middle aged drivers. We also find reductions in all types of acuity and for all age groups under
highway night driving light levels (0.6 cd/m2) and that these losses are more exacerbated for older
adults than for other age groups. We confirmed that older adults showed reductions in cognitive
performance on all tests relative to younger counterparts.
Older adults frequently avoid driving at night because they are concerned about poor visibility.
Those that avoid night driving, have difficulties with more night driving situations than do those that
do not avoid driving at night. The majority of older adults who believe age has impacted on night
driving, state that this is due to increased traffic, poorer reaction times and poorer eyesight. Older
drivers believe that they have the most difficulties at night with driving on roads with little light and
driving on freeways. Night driving avoidance is of concern because those that drive most frequently
at night have the fewest difficulties in driving at night. Although it is difficult to say whether night
driving difficulties lead to reduced driving frequency or whether reduced driving frequency leads to
night time difficulties, Hakemies-Blomquist et al. (2002) found that individuals who drive
infrequently have increased crash risks. It may be that night driving practice is essential for good
night driving performance
When we compare visual and cognitive performance to self-reported difficulties, we find that
divided visual attention, processing speed for scanning and the frequency of reported night driving
best predict the number of self-reported night driving difficulties. Further, older adults with the
poorest contrast acuity and poorest divided attention most strongly agree that night driving has
become more difficult with age. In addition, less frequent night drivers are slower to process during
scanning behaviours than are higher frequency night drivers. Finally, older adults who avoid night
driving have slower visual attention processing speeds, scanning processing speeds and task
completion speeds than those who do not avoid night driving.
Overall, we find that visual and cognitive abilities are affected by age and that large proportions of
older adults do not perform at the levels of their younger counterparts. We also find that all forms of
visual acuity are adversly affected at highway light levels and that the effect on acuity is greatest in
the older adults. Finally, we do find a relationship between some vision and cognitive performance
and self-reported night driving performance, with cognitive variables being a stronger predictor.
Effects of Road Lighting on Older Adult Driving Performance
One of the main findings in this study is that light has differential effects on driving behaviours
depending on the type of behaviour and the age of the participant. Increases in road luminance were
helpful for older adults when reacting to posted signs. They were able to identify the road signs from
a further distance and reacted to the road signs sooner in higher road lighting conditions. However,
increases in light levels also resulted in some changes in driving maneuvers that appear to be related
to driver caution and attention. In higher light levels, drivers of all age groups made more road edge
excursions and all drivers exceeded posted speed limits more often than in lower light conditions.
_______________________________________________________________________
-vi-
Further, older adults were less accurate and precise in following road curvature during curved
segments of the road in higher light conditions. These results suggest that while light is helpful in
improving sign recognition, during higher light segments drivers also drive with less caution.
These results echo our previous survey findings that indicate that older drivers consciously attempt
to increase attention in driving situations they perceive to be higher risk, such as lower light
situations. These results are also well explained by the theoretical notion of target risk; that is,
humans have a relatively stable level of risk tolerance and will modify behaviour in different settings
in order to maximize benefits without compromising risk homeostasis [Wilde, 2001]. Decreased
attention may be thought of as a kind of cognitive benefit that is afforded by a less demanding
driving scenario.
In addition, with exception of speed excursions both vision and cognitive performance was
predictive of driving performance. In contrast, our survey work showed that self reported driving
performance was best predicted by cognitive variables such as processing speed, even though older
adults complained of vision difficulties during driving. Our results suggest that both cognitive and
vision losses do impact on some driving performance. We theorize that in higher light conditions
different types of acuity would be advantaged leading to better sign identification. On the other
hand, in low light conditions, where acuity is not well advantaged, increases in attention may
compensate for acuity losses.
We examined this theory by comparing older drivers with poor acuity, visual attention and
processing speed to those with better acuity, visual attention and processing speed. We found that
those with the poorest contrast acuity were most benefited by increases in road lighting and those
with stronger acuities did not benefit from increases in road lighting. In addition, those with poor
visual attention drove much slower than those with better visual attention, suggesting an attempt to
compensate for their attention losses. Finally, those with poorer processing speeds are generally less
accurate in following the curvature of the road in higher light conditions but in lower light conditions
faster and slower processors are equally accurate (showing an improvement in accuracy), suggesting
that both groups may be attempting to compensate when light levels are reduced. All these results
suggest a change in driving strategy with changes in light. We believe the difference is due to driver
confidence and thus driver attention.
Driver confidence was further examined by comparing their self-reported driving with their actual
driving performance. Here we compared driving performance between those who do/do not avoid
night driving, those who frequently/infrequently drive at night, those who report many/few night
driving difficulties and those who believe/do not believe age has affected their night driving
performance. Overall, it was found that those who do not avoid night driving are unaffected by light
levels. However, those who do avoid night driving showed poorer accuracy and precision in driving
in high light than low light, suggesting that they are attempting to compensate for the light
conditions. In addition, those who avoid driving at night show faster brake times, suggesting that
they do not anticipate speed changes well. Further, older drivers who infrequently drive at night
made fewer road edge excursions in lower light than higher light conditions, suggesting that in low
confidence situations they are driving with more caution.
Finally, older adults who believe age does not affect their driving showed less accuracy in driving in
some situations. If confidence level is an issue in increasing driving caution, this result suggest those
with more confidence are less likely to compensate because they do not view caution as necessary.
_______________________________________________________________________
-vii-
This is further supported by the fact that older adults who report many night driving difficulties show
more accuracy in driving at lower road lighting and drive slower than individuals who state that they
have fewer night driving difficulties. Decreased confidence in their abilities appears to increase
caution.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Increasing road lighting from 0.6 cd/m2 to 2.5 cd/m2 impacted on night driving performance.
However the impact depended on the type of driving maneuver, driver age, driver vision and
cognitive performance and driver self-perception (i.e. driver confidence). In other words, the
relationship between roadway light levels and driver performance is a complex one.
Increases in road lighting were helpful to older adults in recognizing posted signs. Older adults can
react sooner. As shown in our survey of night driving, older adults explain that they often miss
signage and believe that increased lighting would be helpful to them. Here we find that in some
driving situations road lighting does improve sign recognition. Many older adults suffer from both
visual and processing speed losses. Increases in lighting may be helping to compensate for such
losses.
In contrast, increased lighting appears to affect driver performance in some less desirable ways. All
drivers made more road edge excursions and exceed posted speed limits more often in the higher
road light condition, than in the lower road light condition. In addition, older drivers are less
accurate and precise in following curved sections of the highway in higher than lower light. It
appears that when roadway light is increased drivers increase driving confidence and thus decrease
attention. This is consistent with self-reports of our participants who state that when they perceive
situations are more difficult, they try to compensate by reducing speed and increasing attention. This
is also consistent with some research that suggested that when light levels on roads are increased
drivers reduce attention [Assum et al., 1999].
We also find that vision and cognitive performance impacts driving differently at different light
levels. For example, those with the poorest acuity benefit the most from increased road lighting but
those with strong acuity do not benefit from increases in road lighting. Further, those who show
cognitive performance losses (i.e. visual attention losses) attempt to compensate for their losses but
in some situations compensation is different at different light levels.
Finally driver self-perception impacts on road lighting. Those who avoid driving or who drive
infrequently showed more errors in driving in the higher light condition than the lower light
condition and those that do not avoid night driving are not impacted by light level. These results, we
believe, are related to driver confidence. Situations that are perceived as less difficult have less
compensation; and compensation in older adults is to increase attention and concentration. Those
who avoid night driving compensate more in the lower luminance condition. Those that do not avoid
night driving do not perceive either situation as needing compensation.
Based on this study the following recommendations are made:
1. Overall we recommend that light levels could be increased around important signage and this
would help older adults with way finding (direction signs) and driving rules (e.g. posted speed).
Higher roadway lighting around signage would be especially advantageous for those older
_______________________________________________________________________
-viii-
adults with cognitive or vision losses, giving them extra time to react to posted signage. Recall
that even those with normal acuity levels often suffer from losses in contrast perception.
2. We do not recommend that road light levels be increased on parts of the road where some extra
caution is needed. Our results showed that drivers (including older drivers) do increase attention
to driving with the road light levels currently used on Ontario highways (0.6 cd/m2) and
increased lighting did not lead to better accuracy and precision in driving maneuvers. It is
possible that driver attention to driving is compromised with higher road light levels, but this is
situation specific. We do recommend examining road lighting effects in any specific driving
situations where the Ministry is considering raising light levels. Ideally, the effect of increasing
road lighting should be looked at along a continuum so as to provide prescriptive levels leading
to optimal performance for a given situation.
3. We recommend that driving self-restriction not be adopted as a general way to deal with older
drivers. Our data suggest that in some situations drivers who avoid driving at night do exercise
more caution. However, those that avoid night driving report many difficulties in night driving.
In addition, those that avoid night driving seem to have some difficulties anticipating required
behaviour changes at night. For example, they brake quickly, rather than smoothly reducing
speed. Some researchers have suggested that infrequent driving practice can lead to increased
crash risk [Hakemies-Blomquist et al., 2002]. Increasing older adult’s night time driving
practice could lead to general benefits in night time driving and should be the focus of further
study.
4. Cognitive performance was related to self-reported driving performance and also to simulator
performance. Many studies today show that cognitive performance can be improved through
training [see, for example, Yang et al, 2009]. What is not clear is the impact of cognitive
training on every day skills such as driving performance. This is an area of research that could
lead to important intervention measures. In addition, given the relative success of cognitive
variables in predicting driver performance in older adults, it would be worthwhile to expand the
scope of cognitive variables assessed. Doing so may reveal critical cognitive variables that
might eventually be taken into consideration in the senior driver renewal program.
5. We tested a number of driving situations that might be impacted by increasing light levels.
However, little is known about night driving performance in older adults in general and this
should be a focus of future research. For example, given the increases in the number of drivers
over the age of 75, night driving performance in younger olds (60-75) and older olds (75+)
should be examined. A second area that could be consider is the relationship between driving
confidence and the ability to maneuver around highway road hazards at night (e.g. work zones,
slow vehicles). Some of our data suggest that those with less confidence make some maneuvers,
such as sharp braking, that could be hazardous to other drivers. Third, here we found that older
adults had particular difficulties on curved sections of highway. Further research about this
difficulty (e.g. what angle of curvature is difficult) may be warranted.
Potential Impacts
The results of this study could have impact on the way in which road lighting is varied on Ontario’s
highways. Night driving behaviour and road lighting is a complex relationship involving driver age,
confidence, light levels, driving situations, and cognitive/vision performance. Better understanding
of these relationships, as presented in this report, could promote increased safety on Ontario
highways.
_______________________________________________________________________
1. LITERATURE REVIEW
The majority of older adults continue to drive after the age of sixty-five and they account
for thirteen percent of all drivers [Auditor General’s Report, 2005, Ontario Safety Report,
2004, Statistics Canada, 2002; 2006; Transport Canada, 2001; 2006, Turcotte, 2006].
Most drive irregularly and for short distances [Canada Safety Council, 2000]. When older
drivers are involved in collisions they tend to be multi-vehicle crashes, and often on level
roads in good environmental conditions [Canada Safety Council, 2006, Transport
Canada, 2001]. Seventeen percent of collisions involving older drivers occur between six
pm and midnight [Nicoletta, 2000].
Some studies have shown that seniors’ crash involvement may be influenced by cognitive
factors. Associations between crash involvement and lower attention, slower cognitive
processing, slower motor skills, poor driving confidence, and some medical conditions
have been found [Caird 2002; 2005, Oxley et al., 2007]. In addition, seniors tend to
concentrate on some available information to the exclusion of other information sources
[Caird; 2002, 2005]. Seniors may have reduced confidence in some driving situations.
For example, seniors express concerns about left turns and merging [Caird, 2005] and
twenty-five percent of seniors restrict their night driving [Baldock et al., 2006, Charlton
et al., 2006, Reuters, 2007]. While self-restriction may seem beneficial, loss of practice in
night driving situations may further reduce confidence and driving ability [Hakemies-
Blomquist et al., 2002].
Increases in road lighting levels have been shown to reduce accident rates and mild
decreases in road lighting (< 1.5 cd/m2) are associated with increases in collision rates
[Assum et al., 1999, Green et al., 2003, Raven and Loveless, 1999, Sullivan, and
Flannagan, 2007, US Department of Transportation (USDOT) , 2001]. At night, all
drivers have difficulty with dual tasking, visual search, contrast vision, acuity, reaction
time and steering accuracy [Alferdinck, 2006, Arumi et al., 1997, Eloholma et al.,2006,
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2005, Kline et al., 1999,McPhee et al., 2004,
Owens et al., 2007, Varady and Bodrogi, 2006, Walkey et al., 2006, Wood et al., 2005]..
In addition, older drivers have difficulty with sign and object recognition and staying
within their lane [FHWA, 2005, Ho et al., 2001, McPhee et al., 2004, Owens et al., 2007,
Schnell et al., 2004, USDOT, 1994, Wood et al., 2005]. Older drivers seem to recognize
these difficulties and often choose to avoid night driving. They cite their own driving
performance and vision as their reason for restricting [Bell et al., 1998, Owsley et al.,
2003, West et al., 2003, Zur & Shinar, 1998]. Given that older drivers cite visual reasons
for their night driving difficulties, changes in roadway lighting could indeed impact
driving performance.
Older adults do show visual and cognitive losses with age (for a detailed review see
Appendix 1). However, there is considerable variability in losses between adults.
Research shows that a substantial proportion of older adults suffer losses in acuity,
dynamic acuity (acuity losses during motion), depth perception, visual attention
processing speed [see Table 1] and vision losses are exacerbated by low luminance
-11-
[FHWA, 2005, Varady and Bodrogi, 2006]. The impact of these losses on driving has
been the focus of a number of studies. Acuity has been associated with some night
driving activities such as sign reading, hazard identification and driving self restriction
[Ball et al., 1993, 1998, Higgins et al., 1998, McGwin et al., 2000, Owsley et al., 1999,
USDOT, 1997, West et al, 2003, Wood et al. 2002, Zur & Shinar, 1998), while dynamic
acuity losses associate with sign reading and hazard identification [Freeman et al, 2006,
USDOT, 2001, Wood et al. 2002]. Contrast vision losses are correlated with boundary
crossings, slow driving and longer response times [Szlyk et al, 2002] and these contrast
losses have also been associated with some night driving difficulties, sign recognition and
night driving avoidance [Ball et al., 1998, McQuin et al., 2000, Rubin et al, 1994, West et
al., 2003, Wood et al., 2002, Zur and Shinar, 1998]. Losses in depth perception may be
related to gap execution errors [USDOT, 1997] and losses in visual attention predict
some simulator driving performance [Hoffman et al., 2005]. While there is little data
relating nighttime driving performance to speed of processing, some studies do show that
speed of processing is predictive of general driving performance and driving avoidance
[Kantor et al, 2004, USDOT, 1997]. Given that little research on night-time driving
performance and vision/cognitive variables has been conducted, it is possible that direct
comparisons between vision performance and simulator driving performance could lead
to insights that relate back to recommendations on road lighting for seniors driving at
night.
Table 1: Estimates of the percent of older adults showing visual and cognitive losses
Function % showing References
Loss
Acuity Up to 28% Bergman and Sjostrant 2002, Horowitz et al. 2004, Liberman et al.
2004, Rubin et al. 1997, 2007, Stuen and Faye 2003, Tsai et al. 2005,
Van der Pols et al. 2007, West et al. 1997, 2002
Dynamic Up to 30% Anderson and Holiday 1995, Banks et al. 2004, Freeman et al 2006,
Acuity Ishihara et al. 2004, Long and Crambert 1990, McGregor and Chaparro
2005
Contrast 40 to 100% Braybn et al. 2000, Groth and Grover 2003, Haegerstrom-Portnoy et al.
Vision 1999, Normura et al. 2003, Owsley et al. 1983, Rowe and Reed 2002,
Schefrin, et al. 1999, Sloane et al. 1988, Suzuki et al. 2004, USDOT
1997
Depth Up to 80% Bell et al. 1972, Braybn et al. 2000, Garnham and Sloper 2006,
Perception Haegerstrom-Portnoy et al. 1999, Kuang et al. 2005, Norman et al.
2004, Rubin et al 1994
Visual 30-52% Becic et al. 2007, Brown et al 1998, Edwards et al. 2006,2008, Madden
Attention and Langely 2003, Rubin et al. 1999, Scialfa and Joffe 1997, Sekular et
al. 2000
Processing Most older Earles and Kersten 1999, Gilmore et al. 1983, Giovagnoli et al. 2007,
Speed adults show Hoyer et al. 2004, Joy et al. 2000, Perianez et al. 2007, Salthouse et al.
losses 2000, 2001, Soukup et al. 1998, Weilgos and Cunningham 1999
Older drivers show less driver confidence and have vision and cognitive deficits that may
be exacerbated by low luminance. Further, studies have shown reductions in collisions
following increases in roadway lighting. However, little is known about the effect of
these minimal increases in roadway lighting on specific driver behaviours of older adults.
Certainly, based on research, such increases could improve roadway visibility and thus
increase driver confidence. It is, however, necessary to determine which driving
_______________________________________________________________________
-12-
behaviours would be impacted by road light increases. The main objective of this study is
to determine if minimal increases in road lighting could lead to improved driving
performance in older adults. Since little is known about night driving in older adults, a
further objective of this project was to learn about the night driving experiences of older
adults and relate these experiences to age-related changes in vision and cognition
_______________________________________________________________________
-13-
2. METHODOLOGY
To meet these objectives we designed a three phase project (See Figure 1). In the first
phase older adults were queried about their night driving experiences. In the second
phase, younger, middle aged and older adults were screened with visual and cognitive
tests prior to answering a short survey about their night driving experiences. In the third
phase, these same younger, middle aged and older adults were asked to drive in a driving
simulator in one of two conditions. In the first condition, roadway lighting was set at 0.6
cd/m2 (typical roadway lighting on Ontario highways) and in the second condition
roadway lighting was increased to 2.5 cd/m2.
Figure 1: Major tasks of the methodology
2.1 OLDER ADULT NIGHT DRIVING SURVEY

2.1.1 SURVEY DESCRIPTION
The survey consisted of 15 questions covering the key issues in assessing difficulties
faced by older adults when driving at night. Respondents were asked to indicate driving
situations that they found most difficult at night and to describe their own driving
behaviours (i.e. errors, compensation, frequency of driving, driving avoidance). In
addition to these rating questions, respondents were asked to provide their opinions on
the potential effects of lighting on their own driving difficulties. Participants also
indicated their age, years licensed, and gender.
_______________________________________________________________________
-14-
2.1.2 DISTRIBUTION AND RESPONSE RATE

The survey was designed as an online internet survey written in HTML code. Members
of Ryerson University’s LIFE Institute (Seniors’ continuing education group) received
electronic notification about the survey and a hyperlink to click on that would
automatically transfer to the survey. In addition, paper copies of the survey were sent to
all members (800 estimated members) with their Fall 2008 Life Institute Registration in
late August 2008. Life Institute allows those over the age of 55 to join their group and
those between 55 and 59 were not eligible to participate. This group likely accounts for
approximately 20% of the membership or 160 members. Of the remaining 640 members,
we estimate, based on research, that 30% (or 192 individuals) of these members would
not be licensed drivers and thus would not be eligible to fill out the survey. Thus, our
survey was received by approximately 448 eligible seniors. Potential eligible respondents
were asked to return the survey to the Life Institute along with their fall registration.
Two-hundred and nineteen completed surveys were received by the authors for data
analysis providing an estimated response rate of 49%. Of these two-hundred and nineteen
participants, 70% were between 60 and 75, and the remaining were older than 75. Fifty-
nine percent were female. On average these respondents had driven for 51 years.
2.2 AGE/VISION/COGNITION EXPERIMENT

2.2.1 SAMPLE CHARACTHERISTICS
Thirty Younger group (19-27 years old), twenty-eight middle aged group (37-56), and
thirty-nine older adults (62-88) completed a series of visual and cognitive tests, followed
by a brief survey of self-reported night driving behaviours. Forty-five percent of the
sample was male. Vision variables included acuity, low contrast acuity, dynamic acuity
and stereo acuity. Each measure was conducted at optimal light levels (100 cd/m2) and
low light levels, typical at night highway driving (0.6 cd/m2), except stereo acuity which
can only be conducted at optimal light levels. Cognitive variables included visual
attention (alone and during divided attention and selective attention tasks), processing
speed for timed tasks (Letter comparison and Digit symbol tasks) and processing speed
during scanning (Trails A and Trails B tasks).
2.2.2 VISION/COGNITIVE MEASURES

The following vision/cognitive measures are used in this study:
1. Static Visual Acuity for Far Vision: This is measured by the standardized Regan
Contrast Letter Charts (96% contrast, Paragon Services Inc.). Acuity is assessed by
the smallest letters visible.
2. Contrast Sensitivity: This is measured by the standardized Regan Contrast Letter
Charts (25, 11% contrast, Paragon Services Inc.). Acuity is assessed by the smallest
letters visible.
_______________________________________________________________________
-15-
3. Stereo-acuity: This test measures the ability of subjects to see in depth binocularly
(two eyes). This ability was tested using a stereo circle test (Stereo Optical Co Inc).
This test is scored by the smallest angle of stereopsis that elicits depth.
4. Dynamic acuity: Acuity using the Regan high contrast letter chart was measured
during controlled head motion. (80 degrees/second).
5. Visual Attention: The Useful Field of View test was used. The test provides “a
measure of the spatial area where individuals can be alerted” [USDOT, 1997]. Time
to process visual information is measured under three conditions, during no
distraction (processing speed), divided attention (two tasks must be completed at
once) and selective attention (same as divided attention but distracters are present).
6. Speed of Processing: The digit symbol [Weschler, 1981], Letter Comparison and
Trails Tests [Reitan, 1958] are speed of processing tests [Szlyk et al., 2002]. The digit
symbol test requires participants to substitute as many digits as possible with the
corresponding symbols within a 90-second time limit. The letter comparison test
requires participants compare and determine whether two letter strings are the same
or different within 120 seconds. In the trails test participants see a group of circles,
each with a number in it. They are to connect the circles in numerical order by
connecting them with straight, continuous lines. Trails A has only numbers and in
Trails B numbers and letters must be ordered alternately (1-A-2-B etc). Participants
are timed to completion.
2.3 DRIVING SIMULATOR EXPERIMENT

2.3.1 SUBJECT CHARACTERISTICS
Twenty-five younger (19-27 years), twenty-three middle aged (37-56 years) and twenty-
seven older (63-84 years) adults from our vision, cognition and self report study had
completed a series of visual and cognitive tests, followed by a brief survey of self-
reported night driving behaviours and volunteered to return to our laboratory to
participate in a night driving simulation. Forty-nine percent of these respondents were
male. As described above, vision variables tested included acuity, low contrast acuity,
dynamic acuity and stereo acuity. Each measure was conducted at optimal light levels
(100 cd/m2) and low light levels, typical at night highway driving (0.6 cd/m2), except
stereo acuity which can only be conducted at optimal light levels. Cognitive variables
included visual attention (alone and during divided attention and selective attention
tasks), processing speed for timed tasks (Letter comparison and Digit symbol tasks) and
processing speed during scanning (Trails A and Trails B tasks).
The survey consisted of 15 questions covering the key issues in assessing difficulties
faced by older adults when driving at night. The survey description is reported in Section
2.1 and Appendix 2. Here four variables were examined in relation to simulator driving
performance. These include self reported night driving avoidance, frequency of night
driving, opinion of driving performance relative to when participants were younger (older
group only) and the number of self reported driving difficulties.
_______________________________________________________________________
-16-
2.3.2 DESIGN OF DRIVING SCENARIO
The night driving simulation took place in the Road Safety Research Laboratory located
at the Department of Civil Engineering, Ryerson University. The STISIM Driving
Simulator (Systems Technology Inc.), which is located at this laboratory has the
capability to simulate different real-life driving situations and to measure various aspects
of driver performance, including reaction time, steering accuracy, and driver speed.
Individuals were asked to participate in driving simulations that track driver performance
in night driving situations at two levels of road lighting, 0.6 cd/m2 and 2.5 cd/m2. The
lower light level was chosen because it is typical of Ontario highways and the higher
light level was chosen because it is minimally higher than the maximum luminance in
most jurisdictions (typically the maximum luminance varies between 1.2 cd/m2 and 2
cd/m2, see Appendix 1). The lighting levels were achieved in the simulation environment
with the use of neutral density filters (Rosco Cinigel Filters). Light measures were taken
from the roadway pavement as is standard in light measurements on Ontario highways.
The driving scenario included three segments: freeway segment, transition segment, and
rural segment. The freeway segment had two lanes in one direction and included four
signs with each with a letter and one of the letters was to be visually identified by the
participants. The letter sequence in the low light level was F, B, E, and P and that in the
higher light level was B, E, F, and P. To ensure consistency in both light conditions, the
sign to be identified was E in the low light condition and F in the higher light condition,
which is the third sign in both light conditions. The rural segment had four-lane
undivided road (two lanes in each direction) and included stop signs and changes in the
posted speed limit (see Figure 2). The transition segment between the freeway and rural
segments was accomplished through a reverse horizontal curve with an intermediate
tangent and was intended to mimic an off ramp.
The dependent measures included driving speed, steering accuracy, brake reaction time
during speed change (reduction) at posted speed signs, reaction distance to sign
identification, lane position accuracy, individual variability in speed and lane position,
and accuracy in identifying the posted letter signs. The participants were asked to drive as
they normally do, adhering to all driving rules.
In the freeway segment, the posted speed was 100 km/h. During this segment the drivers
were asked to hit a button attached to the steering wheel when they identified a particular
black on white sign bearing a letter The speed signs were typical of those on Ontario
highways, having a white background and black lettering. In the lower light condition,
the luminance of the letter signs and speed signs (for all parts of the scenario) was 1.2
cd/m2, which is typical of the recommended luminance for road signs (Carlson and
Hawkins, 2003). In the higher road lighting conditions, the luminance was 4.6 cd/m2.
Here we measured driver speed and distance to the identified sign.
In the transition segment, the participants were required to slow from 100 km/h to 50
km/h (yellow speed sign) which is the speed limit of a horizontal curve to the right (with
a radius of 95 m). The sign luminance for these yellow speed signs was 0.76 cd/m2 in the
lower light scenario and 2.2 cd/m2 in the higher light scenario. Here we measured
accuracy and precision in lane position and curve position, mean and variable speed, the
_______________________________________________________________________
-17-
distance from the posted sign at which the participant began to slow and the reaction time
to brake (which measure the time to move the foot from the accelerator to the brake).
After a short straight section, the transition segment included a horizontal curve to the left
(with a radius of 110 m) on which the participant slows to 30 km/h. The measures taken
were the same as those of the previous transition segment.
In the rural segment, the drivers changed the speed after coming to a stop sign, where the
posted speed sign change from 70 km/h to 50 km/h and then to 30km/h. While the
distance to slow and the reaction time were measured during these speed changes, the
number of stop signs missed was also tracked (though no effect of age or light was found
for this variable). The scenario ended when the driver arrive at a traffic signal.
The number of times the driver exceeded the posted speed limit and road excursions to
the shoulder were tracked throughout the entire scenario. Originally we also tracked the
number of midline excursions. However, older adults, as was previously reported in the
literature, were not found to make these types of excursions. The road lighting was
counterbalanced between participants, where some participants started with the low light
scenario followed by the high level scenario, and vice versa for others. Here we report
only the outcomes that were affected by changes in the road lighting level.
_______________________________________________________________________
-18-
Figure 2: Geometry of driving simulator Scenarios. Sign sequence is

F, B, E, P for low light level and B, E, F, P for high light level.
_______________________________________________________________________
-19-
3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
The following section describes analyses and results from the survey, the
age/vision/cognition experiment and the simulator experiment. Each section includes a
brief summary and discussion of findings.
3.1 DATA ANALYSIS

For the older adult night driving survey, descriptive statistical analyses were conducted
for each question. For questions that required respondents to provide scale ratings, the
following analyses were conducted and reported: (a) the overall mean (average) rating for
the question and (b) the percent of respondents that gave ratings below at or below
neutral, and above neutral. For binary questions (i.e. yes/no), the following analyses were
conducted: (a) the percent of respondents that answered ‘yes’ and (b) confidence around
percents to determine differences between demographic groups. In order to help with the
interpretation of the survey results we have only considered significant differences as
indicated by the 95% confidence level.
Responses to each survey question were also divided by key demographic breakdowns
(age, gender, driving avoidance, driving frequency, and perception of changes in driving
behaviour with age). For the Older Adult Survey of Night Driving, age was divided into
two groups, those between 60 and 75, and those older than 75. The percentage of
respondents that agreed with each question was then calculated for each demographic
breakdown. The purpose for dividing the survey results by these demographic variables is
to see if any of the opinions expressed are unique to particular groups (e.g. those over
75).
For open-ended questions where participants express an opinion content analyses were
conducted. This involved categorizing individual comments by theme. The following
items are reported:
- The number of comments made for the question

- The number of comments made within each content category
- A notable comment which captures the intention of the category
- Verbatim original comments
Correlation analyses were conducted on survey data between the number of driving
maneuvers found difficult at night and age, driving frequency and strength of opinion that
driving is more difficult with age. Both correlation analyses and standard regression
techniques (backward and logistic) were used to predict driving, vision, and cognitive
performance from self-reported driving difficulties (i.e. driving avoidance)
The multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) techniques followed by the standard

analysis of variance procedures were used to determine whether driving performance is
_______________________________________________________________________
-20-
affected by cognitive and vision performance or, driver self-report (driving frequency,
driving confidence, number of self-reported night difficulties, and avoidance).
3.2 RESULTS OF OLDER ADULT NIGHT DRIVING SURVEY

Only the most significant results from the survey are presented below. For more a more
detailed description of results please see Appendix 2. Results from the survey are divided
into three categories, 1) Self-Reported Night Driving Behaviours, 2) Difficult Driving
Maneuvers at Night, and 3) Driving Errors and Compensation.
3.2.1 SELF REPORTED NIGHT DRIVING BEHAVIOURS
Two-thirds of seniors drive at least one time per week and males more often drive at
night than do females. Thirty-nine percent of seniors avoid driving at night. Comments
suggest that older drivers most often avoid driving at night because they perceive their
vision is less acute at night. Overall, older drivers report that there are more difficulties in
driving at night now as compared with driving at night when they were younger and
those that avoid driving at night more strongly believe this.
Driving Avoidance
Overall, thirty-nine percent of older adults surveyed avoid driving at night and this is true
of both age groups and genders (See Table 2). Older adults state that they avoid driving
most often because of vision problems (See Table 3, C95, P=.05).
Table 2: Percent who avoid driving at night by age and gender

Age % Who Avoid
All Seniors 39
Younger Seniors 40
Older Seniors 38
Gender % Who Avoid
Female 40
Male 39
_______________________________________________________________________
-21-
Table 3: Frequency of reported responses as to why night driving is avoided a

Comment Notable
Frequency % of sample
Category Comment
Vision Problems 51 23 My night vision is not as good as it was when I was younger.
Not comfortable, especially if it is raining, oncoming headlights
Weather Issues 20 9 and poor light conditions make lane control too much of a
challenge.
Outside of Toronto, where I live, I find the lights and lighting too
Road Issues 13 6
difficult on major highways. I drive in small towns when visiting.
Don't need to drive - use public transit. I am uncomfortable
Confidence Issues 10 5
driving at night, particularly if it rains.
Visiting friends out of town I'm more likely to arrange an
Fatigue Issues 5 2 overnight stay than drive home late, especially in winter,
because I get tired & sleepy more easily.
a
Verbatim comments can be found in Appendix 2
Driving Frequency
Very few older adults completely avoid night driving (See Table 4). Males appear to
drive more frequently than females and this is mainly due to the fact that older senior
males drive more frequently than do younger senior females (C95, P < 0.05).
Table 4: Percent of those driving at night by frequency, age and gender

Less Than Once Per 2-4 Times Per More Than 4
Age Never Once Per Week Week Times Per
Week Week
All Participants 5 29 19 37 10
Younger Seniors (%) 5 26 20 35 14
Older Seniors (%) 3 37 16 44 0
Less Than 1x 1x Per 2-4 X Per More Than 4 X
Gender Never
Per Week Week Week Per Week
Female (%) 8 28 24 31 10
Male (%) 1 30 12 44 12
Driving Confidence
Drivers rated how much they agree that driving at night is more difficult now than when
they were younger on a five point Likert type scale, where 1 meant disagree and 5 meant
agree. Seventy percent of respondents at least somewhat agreed that driving at night has
become more difficult and this agreement does not differ between age groups, gender or
frequency of driving (See Figure 3). However, those that avoid driving more strongly
agree that night driving is affected by their age (Table 5, C95, P=.05)). Drivers that agree
that aging affects driving at night suggested this was because of aging issues such as
changes in vision and changes in the driving environment such as traffic volumes (Table
6).
_______________________________________________________________________
-22-
Frequency of Responses:
100
90
80
70
60
Frequency
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Rating
Figure 3: Frequency of responses for belief that personal

driving is affected by age, where 1 = disagree that age
affects driving and 5 = agree
Table 5: Beliefs split by night driving avoidance
Mean
Avoid Driving at Night? Rating
N % Agree
Yes 4.47 83 89
No 3.58 129 60
Table 6: Reasons that night driving is more difficult with age a

Comment % of Notable
Frequency
Category Sample Comment
Speed and volume of traffic seems to have increased

Increased traffic, pedestrians generally even throughout the city. Cars that run the
40 18
and unskilled drivers orange (and red) traffic lights. My responses are perhaps
not as quick as they were in my younger days.
Obviously sight is reduced in older adults and glasses do
Aging Issues 55 25 no fully compensate especially at night.
a
Verbatim comments can be found in Appendix 2
3.2.2 DIFFICULT NIGHT DRIVING SITUATIONS
Seniors reported that some of the most difficult night driving situations included driving
on freeways, rural roads, undivided roads, high traffic volume roads and reading static
signs. Those who believed that driving performance is affected by age, report more night
difficulties than other drivers. Those that drive most frequently at night report fewer night
time driving difficulties. Seventy-two percent of respondents believe that increased road
lighting would help them with difficult driving situations.
Difficult Night Driving Situations
Potential situations that could cause night driving difficulties were listed (i.e. driving on
freeways, rural roads etc.) and participants chose which, if any, give them difficulties at
night. Respondents could also add situations they felt were difficult but not listed. The
_______________________________________________________________________
-23-
percent of respondents choosing different situations is shown in Table 7. Notably

respondents found driving on freeways, driving on rural roads, roads with little light,
undivided roads, high traffic volumes, narrow roads and reading static signs as
particularly difficult at night. The number of situations that each respondent chose as
difficult at night was calculated. On average, respondents stated they had difficulty with
five night driving situations and this was not affected by age or gender. However, those
that avoid driving reported more difficult night driving situations (mean = 7.88) than
those that do not avoid driving (mean = 3.28, C95, P = 0.05). Correlation analyses
indicate small but significant correlations between the total number of difficult
maneuvers reported and driving frequency and ratings of difficulty. In other words, as the
number of reported difficulties increases the frequency of driving at night decreases. In
addition, as the belief that age affects driving increases, the number of reported
difficulties also increases.
Table 7: The percent of the sample identifying certain driving situations as

difficult
Driving Situations Identified Percent of Sample
as Difficult
Driving on local roads 10
Driving on freeways such as Highway 401 34
Driving in urban settings 11
Driving on rural roads 37
Driving on roads with little light 62
Driving on lighted roads 3
Driving on undivided roads 42
Driving on curved highway sections 26
Driving in high traffic volume roads 37
Driving when pedestrians are about 17
Driving on narrow roads 33
Driving through intersections without traffic signals 25
Driving through intersections with traffic signals 3
Reading static signs (e.g., speed limit, direction, street names, school zone) 31
Reading variable/changing message signs (e.g., lane blockages) 15
Making left turns at an intersection 15
Making right turns at an intersection 2
Following other cars 3
Seeing road barriers (e.g., traffic calming barriers, road closed blockages) 19
Entering and exiting freeways on interchange ramps 26
Driving through mid-block crosswalks 8
Driving on roundabouts 23
Driving through temporary roadway work/construction zones 28
Other (specifications below) 11
_______________________________________________________________________
-24-
Light Reduces Driving Difficulties
Seventy-two percent of respondents believed that increased lighting would reduce driving
difficulties. However, those that avoid night driving more frequently expressed this belief
(86%) than those that do not avoid driving (64%, C95, P = 0.05). Those that felt light
would help in driving at night believed that this would improve visibility, in particular for
road curves, rural roads, highway lane divisions, signs and objects (see Table 8).
Table 8: Comments about reasons increased road lighting would help

Frequency
Category sample Comment
Improved lighting always improves visibility so that

Visibility Issues 43 20
additional reaction time is available
If driving on a road where the speed limit is quite high

Road Issues (and on an unfamiliar road), good lighting would take the
guesswork out of where the dividing line on the road is
(curved, rural, highway lanes 31 14
and where the shoulder of the road is. If there is someone
divides) following close behind you and you can't see the road
markings clearly, it makes for a very scary drive!
Being able to read the street names better would make it

Ability to see signs 26 12 safer (less hesitation when looking for a given street to
turn onto).
Situational Issues Good lighting is always beneficial - it enables seeing

problems before they are virtually on top on you, spotting
(environment, pedestrians, 15 7 desired locations, seeing pedestrians before they step out
barriers, hazards,
on the road
confidence)
Make everything easier to see. Decrease glare and

Glare Issues 7 3
shadows
Verbatim Comments can be found in Appendix 2
3.2.3 DRIVING ERRORS AND COMPENSATION
The majority of respondents stated that they attempt to compensate for night driving
difficulties and this is reported more often by those that avoid night driving and those that
drive less frequently. To compensate for driving difficulties seniors state that they reduce
speed, actively try to increase concentration and attention, avoid distractions, and avoid
difficult roads.
Compensation for Night Driving Difficulties
Sixty-seven percent of seniors report compensating for night driving difficulties.

However, as shown in Table 9, those avoiding driving, drive less frequently or who feel
driving is more difficult with age more frequently compensate for driving difficulties. To
compensate for night driving difficulties older adults intentionally try to increase
concentration, attention, reduce speed and avoid distractions (see Table 10). When asked
about the types of errors that they make when night driving older adults stated that they
_______________________________________________________________________
-25-
miss signs, streets, objects and people. In addition they sometime make errors in driving
maneuvers such as judging distance. For the types of errors listed, 79% of those who
admit to driving errors, felt that extra road lighting would help reduce these errors.
Table 9: Percent who compensate for errors split by driving avoidance,

driving frequency and belief that age affects driving.
Driving Avoidance
% Yes N
Category
a
Yes avoid driving 85 85
a
No do not avoid 55 132
Driving Frequency % Yes N

a
Once or less/week 77 114
> once per week* 56 103
Difficult Relative to
% Yes N
Younger Years
a
More Difficult 77 154
a
Not More Difficult 46 59
a
Significant difference between groups (C95, P = 0.05).
Table 10: Reported activities that help with night driving difficulties a
Frequency
Category sample Comment
Reduce Speed 116 53 Reduced speed to improve reaction time
Need to be extra cautious on peripheral viewing. I watch

Concentrate More 53 24
everything and everyone.
Turn off radio, ask passengers to stop conversation when

Avoid Distractions 39 18
merging, turning, and so on.
I open my window to double check when making a left

Personal activities 20 9 turn, I use the horn if I think there is someone
approaching, even though I don't see anyone.
Take Actions to Reduce To avoid glare from oncoming headlights I focus to my

15 7
Glare right
a
Verbatim Comments can be found in Appendix 2.
3.2.4 DISCUSSION
Overall, a large proportion of older adults report that they avoid driving at night and they
are infrequent night drivers. These drivers claim that they have more difficulties driving
now than when they were younger and this is in part due to vision issues, traffic
_______________________________________________________________________
-26-
increases, and other issues related to aging (e.g. reaction time). Older drivers identified
driving conditions that were difficult for them. These most frequently included driving on
roads with low light, undivided roads, driving on rural roads, freeways, narrow roads and
high traffic volume roads. The majority of these drivers believed that increased road light
could help them with these reported difficulties.
Some participants identified errors that they make in night driving. These were often
associated with missing signage and making judgment errors (e.g. misjudge distance). To
help with these errors and other driving difficulties, drivers reported reducing speed,
attempting to concentrate more and avoid distractions. Notably, in many situations those
that avoid driving at night report more difficulties when driving at night, feel that it is
more difficult to drive now than when they were younger, more frequently try to
compensate for driving errors, and more frequently feel that more light would be
beneficial. In addition, those who more frequently drive at night report fewer difficult
driving conditions and thus compensate less often for driving errors as a group. Overall,
older drivers appear cognizant of aging issues that may affect driving, as well as, methods
to compensate for driving difficulties. Given that older adults believe vision and attention
affects their night driving, direct comparisons between self-report and vision/cognitive
performance could lead to new insights. This is the focus of the next section of this
report.
3.3 RESULTS OF AGE/VISION/COGNITION EFFECTS ON SELF-

REPORTED NIGHT DRIVING PERFORMANCE
Only the most significant results from the vision and cognition screening and self report
study are described here. For more a more detailed description of results please see
Appendix 3. These results are divided into three sections: (1) Vision and Cognitive
Variables, (2) Self-Report Night Driving Behaviours, and (3) Vision, Cognition and Self-
Report Comparisons
3.3.1 VISION VARIABLES
Visual acuity, contrast acuity (25%, 11% contrast), and dynamic acuity were measured in
younger, middle aged and older adults at optimal light levels (100 cd/m2) and at low light
levels, typical of highway driving (0.6 cd/m2). For all types of acuity older adults showed
significant losses as compared to younger and middle aged adults. In addition, while low
light levels reduced acuity for all participant groups, older adults were more affected by
reductions in light than were middle aged and older adults. Stereo acuity at optimal light
levels was also measured. While no significant differences were found in mean stereo
acuity between age groups, proportionally older adults do not reach clinically normal
stereo acuity than do younger adults and middle aged adults.
Static Acuity, Dynamic Acuity and Contrast Acuity
All acuity types were measured in optimal lighting (100 cd/m2) and low luminance (0.6
cd/m2). Figure 4 shows acuity values for younger, middle aged and older adults by
luminance. Here, values are given in standard visual acuity scores (i.e. 20/40). This
number (20/40) represents that the viewer can see at twenty feet what typical viewers can
_______________________________________________________________________
-27-
see at forty feet. In other words, the higher denominator means a reduction in acuity. In
Figure 4, the plotted acuity value is the denominator (i.e. 40). Higher values represent
poorer performance. For all types of acuity, performance was poorer at low luminance
than optimal luminance (all F’s, P < 0.001). In addition, for all types of acuity the age of
participants affected performance (all F’s, P < 0.001). Older participants showed larger
losses than their younger and middle aged counterparts (all Tukey HSD, P = 0.05). For
all types of acuity, there was a significant interaction between light and age (all F’s, P <
0.002), which showed that low luminance exacerbated acuity in older adults more than in
other groups. In addition, the contrast of the eye chart (98%, black on white, 25% and
11%, grey on white) significantly affected performance, but the effect was greatest on
older adults (F(4,176) = 19.173, P < 0.001).
Static Acuity Dynamic Acuity Contrast Acuity

Optimal Light C96
Low Light C96)
Optimal Light C25
Optimal Light Optimal Light
Low Light C25
Low Light Optimal Light C11
Low Light
Low Light C11
120
250
70
Dynamic Acuity Value
60 100 225
Acuity Value
50 200
80
40 175
Acuity Value
30 60 150
20 125
10 40 100
0 75
20
Young Middle Older 50
0 25
Age
Young Middle Age Older 0
Age Group Age Group
Younger Middle Older
Age Group
Figure 4: Static, dynamic and contrast acuity values (higher = poorer) for younger,
middle aged and older adults at optimal light levels (100 cd/m2) and low luminance (0.6
cd/m2)
Stereo-Acuity
Figure 5 shows the minimal amount of disparity (in visual arc seconds) needed between
the right and left eyes to perceive depth in an image. Small numbers represent better
performance and the best possible score on this test is 40 arc seconds of visual angle.
Analysis of variance techniques revealed no significant main effects in mean
performance between age groups. To determine if proportionally more participants in
older age groups do not achieve clinically normal performance (40 arc seconds), we
calculated the proportion of individuals in each age group who do not reach clinically
normal performance. In the younger age group, 13.3% show stereo acuity losses. In the
middle aged group 32.1% show losses and in the older age group 69.2% show losses.
Based on confidence about proportions (C95, P = 0.05), a greater proportion of older
adults do not reach clinically normal levels of performance than younger or middle aged
adults.
_______________________________________________________________________
-28-
250
Stereo Acuity (arc seconds)

200
150
100
50
0
Young Middle Age Older
Age group
Figure 5: Mean minimum amount of disparity, in arc seconds, needed to

perceive depth by age. Smaller numbers represent better depth ability
3.3.2 COGNITIVE VARIABLES
The Useful Field of View test was used to determine visual attention. This test measures
processing speed for visual attention, divided attention speed and selective attention. On
all visual attention tests older adults were significantly slower than younger or middle
aged adults. Letter comparison tasks and Digit symbol tasks were used to determine the
ability of participants to complete a task in a limited time period. On these tasks older
adults completed significantly fewer items overall and significantly fewer items correctly
than did younger or middle aged adults. The Trails A and B tasks were used to determine
the speed to task completion (processing speed) during scanning behaviour. On both
tasks, older adults took significantly more time to complete these tasks than did younger
and middle aged participants.
Visual Attention
In the useful field of view test participants are given three sub-tests. The first is a measure
of visual attention processing speed, the second measures processing speed while
attention in central vision is diverted by a peripheral task (divided attention) and the third
measures processing speed while central attention is divided by a peripheral task in the
presence of distracters (selective attention). Impairment is based on poor speed values for
each test (measured in milliseconds). As shown in Figure 6, there was an affect of age on
visual attention speed (All Fs, P < 0.004). In all cases, the older group was significantly
slower than the other age groups (all Tukey HSD, P < 0.05).
_______________________________________________________________________
-29-
Processing Speed Divided Attention Selective Attention

35 120 300
30
100 250
25
Time (msec)
Time (msec)
Time (msec)
80 200
20
60 150
15
40 100
10
20 50
5
0 0 0
Young M iddle Age Older Young M iddle Age Older Young Middle Age Older
A g e Gro up A g e Gro up A ge Gr oup
Figure 6: Mean time in seconds to correctly identify a scanned image under scan alone
(processing speed), divided attention and selective attention conditions for age groups.
Speed of Processing Tests
Speed of processing tests measure the amount of material a participant can complete
within a time limit. Analysis of variance techniques were used to determine differences in
speed of processing between age groups and gender. In all tests, as illustrated in Figure 7,
older age groups completed fewer items and completed fewer items correctly than did
younger and middle aged adults (All, F, P < 0.001, Tukey HSD, P < 0.05).
Digit Symbol Complete Digit Symbol Correct Letter Comparison Complete Letter Comparison Correct
80 80 70 70
70 70
Number Complete
60
Number complete
60
Number Correct
Number Correct
60
60
50 50
50 50
40 40
40
40
30 30
30
30
20 20
20
20
10 10 10
10
0
0 0 0
Youn g M iddle Age Older
Youn g M iddle Age Older Youn g M iddle Age Older Youn g M iddle Age Older
A ge Gr oup
A ge G r oup Age Gr oup A ge Gr oup
Figure 7: Mean number of symbols or comparisons completed and completed correctly

for young, middle aged and older participants.
Timed tasks for visual scanning
In the Trails A test, participants are asked scan a paper where numbers are printed in
random fashion on different parts of the paper. The participant must start at the number 1
and draw a line connecting 13 numbers in order. Trails B is similar except that the
participant must connect both numbers and letters in an order fashion (i.e. 1-A-2-B-3-C),
thus they must not only scan but switch attention from numbers to letters during the task.
The time in seconds it takes to complete the task is measured (Figure 8). In both tasks,
_______________________________________________________________________
-30-
older age groups took longer to complete the task than did younger and middle aged
adults (All, F, P < 0.001, Tukey HSD, P < 0.05).
Trails A Trails B
40 80
35 70
30 60
Time (Seconds)
Time (Seconds)
25 50
20 40
15 30
10 20
5 10
0 0
Young Middle Age Older Young Middle Age Older
Age Group Age Group
Figure 8: Mean time to complete the Trails A and B tasks for young, middle aged and
older participants
3.3.3 SELF REPORTED NIGHT DRIVING BEHAVIOURS
Proportionally more older adults than middle aged adults avoid driving at night and more
than twenty percent of females of all age groups avoid driving at night. Less than eight
percent of younger and middle aged males avoid driving at night while fifty percent of
older males avoid driving at night. Younger adults who avoid driving at night do so
because they are fearful that their lack of experience could impede night driving. Middle
aged and older drivers that avoid driving at night suggest that poor visibility is a concern
to them. The majority of older adults reported that they have more difficulties with night
driving now than they did when they were younger due to increased traffic, poorer
reaction times and poorer eyesight.
No differences existed in the frequency of driving at night between age groups or genders
and very few participants reported being involved in a night driving collision or near
collision (only one older adult reported this).
Driver Avoidance
Significantly more older adults avoid driving at night than do middle aged adults (C95, P
= 0.05). In addition, while no differences exist between the percent of females in each age
group who avoid driving at night, significantly more older males avoid driving at night
than do younger or middle aged males (C95, P = 0.05, see Table 11). Like the seniors
from our survey, most that avoid driving do so because they perceive that their vision is
compromised.
_______________________________________________________________________
-31-
Table 11: Percent reporting driving avoidance by age

Age % Yes
Younger 27
Middle Age 14
Older * 44
Gender % Yes
Female Younger 41
Female Middle 23
Female Older 39
Male Younger 8
Male Middle 7
Male Older 50
Frequency of driving at night
Fifty-four percent of participants drive one or fewer times per week, while the remaining
drive more than once per week at night. There was no difference in the frequency of
driving at night between age groups or genders.
Driving Confidence
Seventy-four percent of older drivers report that driving is more difficult now than when
they were younger. There was no difference in this belief between genders or between
those that do or do not avoid driving at night (C95, P < 0.05). Those that felt night
driving is more difficult with age believed this was due to increased traffic, slow reaction
times and poor eyesight.
3.3.4 DIFFICULT NIGHT DRIVING CONDITIONS
Participants in all age groups listed difficult driving situations. Commonly, participants
noted that there were difficulties in driving on undivided roads, roads with little light and
on narrow roads. The number of night driving difficulties was calculated for each
participant. Overall, there were no significant differences in the number of difficulties
reported by each group. However, those that avoid night driving reported more
difficulties than those that do not avoid night driving. Further, those that drive most
frequently at night reported fewer night driving difficulties than do those that drive less
frequently. Correlation analysis also suggested that older adults who drive the most
frequently have fewer night driving difficulties.
Almost all participants, regardless of age, gender, driving frequency or driving

avoidance, believed that increased road lighting at night would benefit them. All
participants had concerns about visibility in seeing objects, signs, and people at night.
Older adults also were aware that with age their reaction time and vision was generally
reduced which disadvantaged them at night.
_______________________________________________________________________
-32-
Difficult Night Driving Situations
Participants were asked to identify driving situations that were difficult for them at night.
Table 12 shows the percent of each age group choosing each driving situation. The
highlighted cells in the table show situations that were frequently chose by all age groups,
driving on roads with little light, driving on undivided roads and driving on narrow roads.
In addition, over one third of older adults also chose driving on freeways, driving on rural
roads, seeing static signs, and entering and exiting freeways. The number of reported
driving situations that were difficult at night was calculated for each participant. The
mean number of calculated difficulties is shown in Table 13. While no differences existed
in the number of night driving difficulties reported between age groups or genders, those
that avoid driving at night reported more difficulties than those that do not avoid driving
and frequent night drivers report fewer difficulties than infrequent night drivers (all P =
0.05). Further, correlation analyses indicate small but significant correlations between the
total number of difficulties reported and night driving frequency (whole sample, r = -
0.44, older adults, r= -0.5). In other words, as the number of reported difficulties
increases the frequency of driving at night decreases. Ninety-four percent of respondents
believe that increased lighting would help them in difficult driving situations.
Table 12: Percent of sample identifying each condition as difficult by age group a
Night Driving Conditions Identified as Young Middle Older
Difficult by Age Group (%) (%) (%)
Driving on freeways such as Highway 401 23 4 38
Driving on rural roads 23 50 33
Driving on roads with little light 70 75 72
Driving on undivided roads 43 39 41
Driving on curved highway sections 27 32 28
Driving in high traffic volume roads 37 11 23
Driving when pedestrians are about 40 14 26
Driving on narrow roads 47 43 39
Driving through intersections without traffic signals 37 29 26
Reading static signs (e.g., speed limit, direction, street names, 23 21 33
school zone)
Making left turns at an intersection 20 7 26
Seeing road barriers (e.g., traffic calming barriers, road closed 13 29 18
blockages)
Entering and exiting freeways on interchange ramps 23 11 33
Driving on roundabouts 23 21 33
Driving through temporary roadway work/construction zones 27 32 26
a
Due to the small sample numbers the table above should be considered descriptive only.
_______________________________________________________________________
-33-
Table 13: Mean number of difficulties reported by group, driving avoidance, frequency of driving
and self-perception that age is a factor in night driving
Group Mean # of Difficulties Frequency of Driving at Mean # of

Night Difficulties
Younger 5.43 Never 11.67
Middle Aged 4.86 < 1/week 6.88
Older 5.77 1/week 5.38
Females 6.23 2-4/week 4.07
Males 4.41 >4/week* 3.60
Rating of Difficulty
Mean # of
Compared to young
Avoid Driving at Night? Mean # of Difficulties Difficulties
years (older only)
Yes* 8.34 Disagree 3.50
No 4.15
Somewhat Disagree 4.50
Neutral 2.50
Somewhat Agree 6.69
Agree 6.44
* a significant difference (C95) exists
Driving Errors and Compensation
Eighty-four percent of participants noted that they do make errors when driving at night.
Young adults frequently suggested that they miss important signs such as stop signs and
have difficulty staying in their lane. Middle aged adults suggested that they miss-reading
street signs and misjudge lanes. Older adults noted that they often make errors in locating
turns and drive at inappropriate speeds. Most drivers try to compensate for these errors by
reducing speed. In addition, older adults also try to increase attention and confidence
during night driving. Ninety-four percent of drivers believed that when dealing with their
errors, increased road lighting would benefit them.
3.3.5 VISION/COGNITION AND SELF-REPORT COMPARISONS
In this section, we compare visual and cognitive performance to four survey variables:
1. The total number of night driving difficulties reported,
2. The strength of agreement with the statement ‘Do you agree that there are more
difficulties in driving at night now as compared with driving at night when you were
younger?’
3. The frequency of reported night driving and
4. Whether or not the participant avoids night driving.
Results in older adults revealed that while there were small but significant correlations
between the number of night driving difficulties reported and vision, visual attention, and
processing speed measures, night driving difficulties were best predicted by a
combination of measures of divided visual attention, processing speed for scanning
(Trails B) and the frequency of reported night driving.
Small but significant correlations showed that older drivers with the poorest contrast
acuity and poorest divided attention most strongly agreed that relative to their youth night
_______________________________________________________________________
-34-
driving was now more difficult. In addition, regression and MANOVA techniques
suggest those with the strongest agreement have the poorest high and low contrast visual
acuity.
MANOVA and correlation analyses revealed that driving frequency is related to speed of
processing for scanning, inidcating that for older drivers, less frequent night drivers are
slower to process during scanning behaviours (Trails B). Older adults who avoid night
driving have slower visual attention processing speeds, scanning processing speeds and
task completion speeds than do those who do not avoid night driving.
Vision/Cognitive Variables and Number of Reported Night Driving Difficulties
Correlation analyses revealed small but significant correlations between the number of
reported night driving difficulties for all participants and some vision variables (Acuity at
optimal light levels, contrast acuity (25% & 11%) at optimal and low light levels). In
addition, visual attention variables (all three UFOV tests) and some processing speed
variables (letter comparison and trails tests) were correlated with the number of reported
night driving difficulties (see Table 14). These correlations suggest that as those with the
poorest acuity, visual attention and processing speed have the most driving difficulties.
Analyses also revealed that for older adults alone, their self reported driving difficulties
were correlated only to low contrast (11%) acuity (high and low light), divided attention
(UFOV) and all processing speed variables. This suggests that those with the poorest low
contrast acuity, poorest divided attention and slowest processing speed report the most
night driving difficulties.
Table 14: Correlations between the reported night driving difficulties

and vision, visual attention and cognitive variables
a
Measure Vision Visual Processing Speed Variables
Variables Attention
Variables
Total 0.2 to 0.26 0.21- to 0.31 0.23 to 0.34

Difficulties All
Participants
Total 0.33 to 0.36 0.4 0.4-0.59

Difficulties
Older Only
All significant at P < 0.05

a- note that the letter comparison tests and digit symbol are negatively correlated
Regression analyses suggest that the best predictors of total driving difficulties over all
participants is the reported driving frequency, Trails B test and divided attention (UFOV),
accounting for twenty seven percent of the variance in these data. When considering
older drivers only, these same three variables predict forty-four percent of the variance in
these data.
_______________________________________________________________________
-35-
The strength of Agreement Related to Driving Difficulty
Only older adults were considered in this analysis. Correlation analyses were only
conducted for the old participants (see Table 15). These analyses revealed the agreement
that driving is more difficult with age is correlated only to optimal visual contrast acuity
(96%, 25%, and 11% contrast), high contrast acuity at low light levels, and divided
attention (UFOV). This suggests that those with the poorest contrast acuity, poorest
divided attention most strongly agreed that age affects driving.
Table 15: Correlations between belief that age affects night

performance and vision, visual attention and cognitive variables
Item Vision Visual Attention Processing
Variables Variables Speed Variables
Statement 0.34 to 0.4 0.42 NA
Agreement
All significant at P < 0.0.05
Regression analyses suggest that the best predictor the belief that driving is affected by
age is divided attention, digit symbol completion times and low contrast acuity (11%
contrast) at optimal light levels. Three variables predict twenty-six percent of the
variance in these data.
Data for this variable was split between those that agreed that driving is affected by age
and those that showed less agreement (neutral or disagree). A multivariate analysis of
variance procedure (MANOVA) procedure revealed that some vision variables
influenced this agreement (Visual acuity and low contrast acuity (11%)). We therefore
ran a univariate analysis of variance procedure to further investigate this effect. A main
effect of agreement was found (F(1,37) = 4.49, P = 0.041). This suggests that those with
the strongest agreement with this statement have the most difficulties with contrast
acuity.
Frequency of Reported Night Driving
Correlation analyses revealed a small but significant correlation between the frequency of
self reported night driving and processing speed over all participants (r = -0.20, P = 0.05).
This correlation suggests that as processing speed decreases (improves) frequency of
reported night driving increases. When considering the older sample only, small but
significant correlations exist between frequency of reported night driving and two
cognitive variables, letter comparison (r = 0.37, P = 0.05) and Trails B (r = -0.4, P =
0.05). These correlations suggest that as those with the poorest processing speed (lowest
letter comparison complete or highest trails times) drive least frequently.
Further regression analyses on the older sample also revealed that a combination of
vision and cognitive variables (acuity, contrast acuity, letter comparison and digit symbol
scores) account for twenty-nine percent of the variance in these data.
When data were split, for older drivers by frequent night driving (drive 2 or more times
per week) and infrequent night drivers, MANOVA techniques revealed that only one
_______________________________________________________________________
-36-
variable was affected by night driving frequency. Those who were less frequent drivers
had significantly higher Trails B completion times than those who were more frequent
drivers (F(1,37) = 5.413, P = 0.026).
Night driving avoidance and vision and cognitive variables
Only a small proportion of middle age drivers report avoiding night driving, thus only
older drivers were considered in this analysis. MANOVA techniques revealed that for the
older sample, visual attention processing speed, letter comparison tasks and the Trails B
task was affected by driving avoidance. Further analyses revealed that those that avoid
driving at night have slower processing speeds than those that do not avoid driving at
night (All Fs, P < 0.034). Logistic regression techniques revealed that these variables
account for thirty-three percent of the variance in these data.
3.3.6 DISCUSSION
As expected from our literature review, older drivers have more difficulties with acuity,
contrast acuity, and dynamic acuity than do younger or middle aged drivers. Here, we
also find that acuity variables for all age groups are reduced under highway driving light
levels (0.6 cd/m2) and that these levels are more exacerbated for older adults than for
other age groups. Further, relative to younger age groups older adults show more vision
reductions than do middle aged adults.
We also expected from literature that visual attention processing speed, processing speed
and scanning processing speed would be affected by age. This was confirmed in this
study, where older adults showed a reduction in cognitive performance on all tests
relative to younger counter parts.
As predicted from our survey, older adults frequently avoid driving at night because they
are concerned about poor visibility. Those that avoid night driving have difficulties with
more night driving situations than do those that do not avoid driving at night. The
majority of older adults also report that they have more difficulties with night driving
now than they did when they were younger due to increased traffic, poorer reaction times
and poorer eyesight. In addition they note that they have the most difficulties with driving
on roads with little light and driving on freeways. Night driving avoidance is of concern
because those that drive most frequently at night have the fewest difficulties in driving at
night. Although it is difficult to say whether night driving difficulties leads to reduced
driving frequency or whether reduced driving frequency leads to night time difficulties,
Hakemies-Blomquist et al. (2002) found that individuals who drive infrequently have
increased crash risks. It may be that night driving practice is essential for good night
driving performance.
All participants noted that they make night driving errors. While younger adults
suggested that they miss important signs such as stop signs and have difficulty staying in
their lane, older adults make errors in locating turns and drive at inappropriate speeds.
Older adults also were aware that with age, their reaction time and vision was generally
reduced which disadvantaged them at night. Most drivers compensate for their driving
_______________________________________________________________________
-37-
errors by reducing speed, however, older adults try to actively increase attention and
driving confidence.
Finally, we compare visual and cognitive performance to four survey variables, we find
that divided visual attention, processing speed for scanning and the frequency of reported
night driving best predict the number of self-reported night driving difficulties. Further,
those with the poorest contrast acuity and poorest divided attention most strongly agree
that night driving is affected by age. In addition, less frequent night drivers are slower to
process during scanning behaviours than are higher frequency night drivers. Finally,
older adults who avoid night driving have slower visual attention processing speeds,
scanning processing speeds and task completion speeds than those who do not avoid
night driving. These results suggest that most often cognitive variables predict self-
perception of night driving. The question remains whether these self-reports of
performance and self-predictions of improvements of driving with increased light are
consistent with actual performance, the focus of the next section of this report.
3.4 RESULTS: EFFECTS OF LIGHTING ON NIGHT DRIVING

PERFORMANCE
Only the most significant results from the night driving simulation study are described
here. For more a more detailed description of results please see Appendix 4. These results
are divided into three sections 1) The effect of road light levels on driving performance 2)
Road lighting and self-report night driving behaviours and 3) Road lighting and vision
and cognitive variables.
3.4.1 EFFECT OF ROAD LIGHTING LEVELS ON DRIVING PERFORMANCE
In four situations the change of road lighting impacted on driving behaviour. These
situations included the mean curve position during a segment of road where the road
curve radius was 110 degrees, the mean distance to identify a road sign in highway
driving conditions, the mean number of speed exceedances during the driving scenario
and the mean number of road edge excursions during the scenario.
Road lighting affected the driver curve position. Lower light levels resulted in less
difference between the actual and mean vehicle curve than did higher light levels and this
was due to the performance of the older adults. With increased road lighting older
participants may have increased their confidence which resulted in decreased attention
and thus poorer accuracy in their curve positions. Mean curve position at both light levels
were best predicted by acuity and visual attention.
The mean distance to identify a road sign during highway driving was affected by road
lighting. In higher light conditions sign identification occurred further away than in the
lower light condition. There was no effect of age on this variable. Acuity and visual
attention were predictive of driver performance for the lower road lighting condition.
Road lighting affected the number of speed exceedances in older adults more so than in
younger adults. Older adults exceeded speed limits more often in higher than in lower
_______________________________________________________________________
-38-
road light levels, suggesting that a change in driving strategy occurs with increased road
lighting. Vision and cognitive variables do not predict speed exceedances.
Road lighting also affected the number of road edge excursions that occurred. Higher
light levels resulted in more road excursions. The number of road excursions was not
affected by age. These results suggest a different driver strategy when light levels are
increased. When visibility improves, driver confidence may increase which leads to less
driver attention. Static and contrast acuity was predictive of road excursions. Those with
the poorest acuity showed the most excursion.
In addition to those reported above, older adults were significantly affected by road
lighting when reducing speed (from 50 to 30 km/hr) during curved segments of the
scenario. At both light levels older adults did not begin adjusting speed until after the
posted sign, however in the higher light level they began adjustment one meter after the
sign and in the lower light condition, this adjustment did not occur until 35.7 meters after
the sign. Further, older adults were less variable in their speed during the curved segment
of the scenario in the lower road light condition than in the higher road light condition.
Mean Curve Position
The mean curve position was calculated using the mean actual driving curvature of the
vehicle (produced by the simulator) relative to the actual segment curvature, given by
(1/R), where R = curve radius. Overall, the road lighting variable affected the driver
curve position (Figure 9). Lower light levels resulted in less difference between the actual
and mean vehicle curve (F(1,72) = 5.623, P = 0.02). This was mainly due to the
performance of the older adults. A significant interaction between age groups and light
indicated that the difference in accuracy of mean curve position at the two road light
levels was more pronounced for older than younger adults (F(1,72)= 3.354, P = 0.04).
Further a significant group effect showed that overall older adults have a greater
difference between their mean curve position and actual curve position than do younger
adults (F(2,72) = 6.616, P = 0.002). While these results seem counter intuitive, it may be
that with increased road lighting older participants increased their confidence which
resulted in decreased attention. As evidence, individual variability in curve position was
higher in the 2.5 cd/m2 condition than in the 0.6 cd/m2 condition (approaching
significance (F(1,26) = 3.234, P = 0.08). Such an explanation is consistent with target risk
theory [Wilde, 2001] and previous empirical findings demonstrating decreased
concentration with increased lighting conditions [Assum, 1999].
_______________________________________________________________________
-39-
Low (0.6 cd/m2)
High (2.5 cd/m2)
2.45
2.4
mean vehicle curve difference
2.35
2.3
(1/rx1000)
2.25
2.2
2.15
2.1
2.05
Age group
Figure 9: Mean curve position relative to actual curve position for younger
and middle aged and older adults
To explore the influence of vision and cognition, we correlated vision variables and
cognitive variables with mean curve position. In addition, standard regression techniques
were utilized. Overall, in our 2.5 cd/m2 condition we found that small and moderate
correlations existed between mean curve position and all types of acuity (static, dynamic
and contrast), ranging between -0.292 and -0.527. This suggest those with the poorest
acuity had the least accurate curve position. However, acuity did not influence the 0.6
cd/m2 condition. Small but significant correlations were also found for the 2.5 cd/m2
condition between mean curve position and cognitive variables (visual attention and
processing speed), ranging from -0.262 to -0.542. Here we found those with the poorest
cognitive performance showed the poorest accuracy in curve position. Only processing
speed was correlated with mean vehicle position for the 0.6 cd/m2 position (r=-0.258).
Using standard regression techniques, we found that, for both high and low road light
conditions, mean curve positions were best predicted by a combination of cognitive and
vision variables [for 2.5 cd/m2, dynamic acuity (optimal and low light) and visual
attention (processing speed), for 0.6 cd/m2, dynamic acuity (optimal), visual attention
(processing speed and selective attention), acuity (low light), and contrast acuity (25% at
optimal and low light)], accounting for 35.4 and 21.7 percent of the variance in these data
respectively. When data for older adults were considered alone, in the 2.5 cd/m2
condition, mean curve performance was best predicted by a combination of stereo acuity,
contrast acuity (25% contrast, low light), visual attention processing speed and letter
completion, accounting for 71.6% of the variance in these data. In the 0.6 cd/m2 condition
39.8% of the variance is accounted for by visual attention processing speed and contrast
acuity (optimal levels at 11 and 25%).
_______________________________________________________________________
-40-
Mean Distance to Identify a Road Sign on the Highway
A significant effect of the road lighting level was found when individuals were asked to
identify a road sign when traveling along a section of highway posted at 100 km/hr. In
higher light levels (2.5 cd/m2), identification of the sign took place further away (54.45
m) than in lower light conditions (0.6 cd/m2) where identification took place at 41.28
meters (F(1,60)= 9.447, P=.003). However, there was no effect of age group on this
identification.
Identification distance was not correlated with any vision or cognitive variable in the 2.5
cd/m2 condition. However small but significant correlations showed that acuity (static,
contrast and dynamic) and visual attention variables (processing speed and selective
attention) were related to road sign identification (r = -0.253-0.469) for the 0.6 cd/m2
condition. Those with the poorest acuity needed to be closer to the road sign for
identification. In addition, those with slower visual attention needed to be closer to the
sign to identify it.
Scenario Speed Exceedances
In this variable, the number of times the participant exceeded the posted speed limit was
tracked. An effect of light level was found, which indicated speed exceedances occurred
more in the higher road light condition (2.5 cd/m2) than in the lower light condition (0.6
cd/m2, F(1,72) = 5.52 P = 0.022). A significant interaction suggested that the older group
was more affected by the light changes than the younger group (F(1,72) = 4.48, P =
0.015, see Figure 10). When considering data for older adults alone, there was a
significant effect of road light level on the number speed exceedances during the
scenario. Fewer speed exceedances were found when traveling in the 0.6 cd/m2 light
condition than when traveling in the 2.5 cd/m2 light condition (F(1,26) = 19.623, P <
0.001).
Low (0.6 cd/m2)
High (2.5 cd/m2)
16
Number of Speed Exceedances
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Age Group
Figure 10: The number of speed exceedances during the driving scenario
by younger, middle aged and older adults
_______________________________________________________________________
-41-
No significant correlations were found between the number of speed exceedances and
any vision or cognitive variable for either the 2.5 or 0.6 cd/m2 conditions, except there
was a small but significant correlation between the number of speed exceedances and
Trails A test of processing speed (r = -0.259) in the low light condition. Those with the
fastest completion time exceeded speed limits more often.
Number of Road Edge Excursions
The number of times drivers committed a road edge excursion was calculated during the
scenario. Those in higher road light conditions made more excursions than did those in
lower road light conditions (Mean 2.2 vs. 1.8, F(1,72) = 3.236, P=.076). There was no
effect of age group on road light condition. These results suggest that attention in the
lower light condition is enhanced, which is consistent with self-reports of drivers (See
Appendix 2 and 3)
Road edge excursions were correlated with static and contrast acuity in both road light
conditions. Those with the poorest contrast acuity also showed the most road excursions
(ranges from 0.28 to 0.49). Visual attention processing speed was also correlated with
road edge excursion in both road lighting conditions. Those with the poorest visual
attention time had the most road excursions. Finally, in the 2.5 cd/m2 condition
processing speed for visual scanning and attention switching (Trails B) was correlated
with road excursions (r = 0.272). Those with the poorest processing speed (for scanning
and attention switching) have the most road excursions.
Road Lighting: Unique effects for older adults
In addition to those reported above, older adults were significantly affected by road
lighting when reducing speed (from 50 to 30 km/hr) during curve segments of the
scenario. At both light levels older adults did not begin adjusting speed until after the
posted sign, however in the higher light level they began adjustment one meter after the
sign and in the lower light condition, this adjustment did not occur until 35.7 meters after
the sign (F(1,17) = 4.449, P = 0.05). This distance speed adjustment was correlated with
Trails A performance. Trails A measures processing speed for visual scanning. Those that
were the slowest scanners were poorest at making speed adjustments. Further, older
adults were less variable in their speed during the curved segment of the scenario in the
lower road light condition than in the higher road light condition (F(1,26) = 6.888 P =
0.014). This speed variability was correlated with visual attention and processing speed at
both road lighting levels (r = 0.398 to 0.640). Those with the slowest visual attention
scores had the most variability in their speed. In addition, those with the fastest
processing times showed less variability in their speed.
Trends for older drivers who do not generally change speed in the two light conditions
Fifteen older drivers had generally consistent speeds in the higher light and the lower
light conditions. Given the small sample size only two results reached significance and
all trends reported below are significant at P < 0.02. Consistent with our full sample, the
speed limits were more often exceeded in the high light than the low light condition (t14
= 2.358, P = 0.033). In addition, in the larger angle curve, drivers were more precise in
_______________________________________________________________________
-42-
the low than the high light condition (t14 = 2.423, P = 0.030) and the decisions to
decelerate during the curved segment occurred after the sign in both light conditions but
sooner in the high light than the low light condition (t10 = 3.365, P = 0.004). Unlike our
full sample, a trend suggested that the mean curve position (vehicle curve relative to
roadway curve) was more accurate in the high than the low light level, however there was
less variability in speed in the low light level. Unlike our full sample, where no
differences based on the light level existed in the mean curve position in our smaller
angle curve, curve position was more accurate in the high light than low light condition
(t14 = 2.138, P = 0.051) and a trend suggested that the curve position for these
participants was more precise in the high light condition. A trend further suggested that
during this less steep curve mean lane position (staying in the middle of the lane) was
more accurate in the low than the high light condition. Finally, a trend suggested that
during a speed change from 100 km/h to 50 km/h these participants began to decelerate
sooner in the low light condition and had slower reaction times (smoother speed changes)
in the low light condition. The driving speed may be an indicator of the driver
confidence, based on our driving questionnaire. Those that do not change speed between
light levels may represent a group of more confident drivers as they may not perceive the
need to drive with more caution. The trends for these drivers might suggest that older
drivers represent a heterogeneous group, where the driving behaviours depend on a
number of factors such as driver confidence and driving frequency.
Oldest olds vs. Younger olds
Fifteen participants in our older group were aged between 62 and 75 years (younger olds)
and seventeen were 76 to 84 years (older olds). However, four younger olds and one
older old experienced motion sickness in the simulator and thus discontinued
participation. As a result, these sample sizes were too small to make strong conclusions
about variance in driving behaviours; however, a few analyses suggest that further study
of these groups may be necessary. Here we found a significant interaction between age
and light for the number of times the driver exceeded speed limits (F(1,25) = 5.636, P =
0.026). While in general speed limits were exceeded more often in higher light, younger
olds in the higher light condition exceeded speed limits more often than did older olds in
the higher light. In lower light, fewer speed exceedances occur and there is no difference
in the number of exeedances between younger olds and older olds. In addition, a
significant interaction between light and age in the number of road edge excursions was
found (F(1,25) = 6.526, P = 0.017). Younger olds make a similar number of road edge
excursions lower light and higher light. Older olds make more road edge excursions in
higher light than lower light. Based on the mean road excursion, older olds in general
make more excursions in both light conditions than do younger olds. In addition, there
was a trend that suggested that the mean vehicle curve position varies between younger
olds and older olds. In the smaller curve segment younger olds were more accurate in the
higher than the lower light level, while older olds were more accurate in the lower than
the higher light level. One further trend suggested that during sign recognition younger
olds drove faster in the high than the low light level, while older olds drove faster in the
low than the high light condition.
_______________________________________________________________________
-43-
3.4.2 ROAD LIGHTING AND SELF-REPORTED DRIVNG BEHAVIOURS
We examined four self-report variables to determine if these variables had an effect on

driving performance in our two night driving conditions. The four self-report variables, as
indicated by our survey data were: (a) night driving avoidance, (b) night driving
frequency, (c) older driver’s opinion of effects of age on driving and (d) self-report of the
number of night driving difficulties.
Those who avoid driving at night showed poorer accuracy and precision in their curve
position in then did those that do not avoid night driving. In addition, those that avoid
driving show less accuracy in curve position in the 2.5 cd/m2 condition than they do in
the lower light condition, where accuracy in those that do not avoid night driving is
relatively unaffected by road lighting. Further, those that avoid driving show faster
reaction times to speed changes in curved segments of road than do those that do not
avoid driving. While initially this finding may seem counterintuitive, it was not
unexpected. Reaction time here is measured as the time for the participant to begin
release of the accelerator to the point at which they begin braking. Reaction times suggest
that those who do not avoid night driving anticipate the speed change better and thus
begin that process of accelerator release so as to smoothly brake. Those that avoid night
driving take quick brake actions, suggesting that they are not anticipating the changes in
speed as well.
Older drivers who frequently drive at night made more road edge excursions in the lower
road lighting conditions than when driving in the higher light condition. Older drivers
who infrequently drive at night, made fewer road edge excursions in lower road light
levels than do those in the higher road light condition. These results suggest that there are
different patterns of behaviour in driving for older adults based on frequency of driving.
Infrequent night drivers appear to use more caution when confronted with low road
lighting levels and as a result make fewer excursions. Frequent drivers, however, seem
less affected by light and may not change their driving behaviour in different light levels,
leading to more excursions in lower road light levels.
Those drivers that believed that their driving is unaffected by age showed less steering
accuracy in moderate curved segments of the scenario than did those who believed age
affected their driving performance. These results suggest that those who believe age is a
factor in their driving attempt to compensate for perceived losses.
Older and middle aged adults, who report many driving difficulties, are less accurate in
curve position than those reporting few difficulties. Further older adults who have many
night driving difficulties show less accuracy for higher light levels than low light levels.
Further, in higher road light conditions no difference in speed in curved road segments
was found between those reporting few or many night driving difficulties. In lower road
light conditions, those reporting fewer night driving conditions have higher driving
speeds than those who report many night driving difficulties. This suggests that in lower
light conditions, one’s belief about their own driving affects the amount of caution they
exert in driving.
_______________________________________________________________________
-44-
Self-reported Avoidance
(a) Mean Curve Position

Mean curve position was calculated by the mean radial curve position (1/R) of the vehicle
relative to the actual radial curve position (1/R). Overall, consistent with that reported
above, road lighting affected the driver curve position (F(1,73)=9.461, P.003). In
addition, those who avoid driving at night showed poorer accuracy in their curve position
in then did those that do not avoid night driving (F(1,73) = 11.417, P < 0.001, Figure 11).
A significant interaction between lighting and night driving avoidance revealed that those
that avoid driving show less accuracy in the 2.5 cd/m2 condition than they do in the lower
light condition, where accuracy in those that do not avoid night driving is relatively
unaffected by road lighting. When older adult data was analyzed alone, similar effects of
road lighting level and driver avoidance was found (all Ps < 0.009), however no
interaction between light and avoidance was found.
Low (0.6 cd/m2)

High (2.5 cd/m2)
2.5
Curve Accuracy (driver curve-actual curve)
2.45
2.4
2.35
2.3
2.25
2.2
2.15
2.1
No Avoidanc e Night Avoidanc e
Night Driving Avoidance
Figure 11: Effect of driver avoidance on driver accuracy during curved

scenario sections
Analyses on individual precision of driver curve performance revealed that those who
avoid driving are less precise in driving during curve segments of highway than are those
that do not avoid night driving (F(1,73)=5.718, P=.019).
(b) Driver speed during sign searches
An effect of avoidance was found on driver speeds during sign searches in freeway
driving (F(1,61) = 5.828, P = 0.019). Those that avoid driving are significantly slower
than those that do not avoid night driving.
(c) Reaction time to speed changes during curved segments

_______________________________________________________________________
-45-
Older adults that avoid driving are faster to react to speed changes during curved road
segments than those that do not avoid driving (F(1,16) = 6.313, P = 0.023). While
initially this finding may seem counterintuitive, it was not unexpected. Reaction time
here is measured as the time for the participant to begin release of the accelerator to the
point at which they begin braking. Reaction times here suggest that those who do not
avoid night driving anticipate the speed change better and thus begin that process of
accelerator release so as to smoothly brake. Those that avoid night driving take quick
brake actions, suggesting that they are not anticipating the changes as well.
Self-reported Frequency
Frequency of night driving was divided into two groups, infrequent night drivers (night
driving one or fewer times per week) and frequent night drivers (night driving two or
more times per week). No effects of driving frequency were found when examining the
entire sample. However, and interaction between driver frequency and road lighting level
was found for older drivers (F(1,25) = 5.136, P = 0.033). As illustrated in Figure 12,
frequent night drivers driving in the lower road lighting condition made more road edge
excursions than when driving in the higher light condition. Infrequent night drivers in the
low light condition make fewer road edge excursions than to those in the higher road
light condition. These results suggest that there are different patterns of behaviour in
driving for older adults based on frequency of driving. Infrequent night drivers appear to
use more caution when confronted with low road lighting levels and as a result make
fewer excursions. Frequent drivers, however, seem less affected by light and may not
change their driving behaviour in different light levels, leading to more excursions in
lower road light levels.
Low (0.6 cd/m2)

High (2.5 cd/m2)
4.5
4
Mean Edge Road Excursions
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
Frequent Inf requent
Night Drive r type
Figure 12: Effect of driving frequency on road edge excursions
_______________________________________________________________________
-46-
Frequent older drivers
We examined driving performance of frequent older drivers alone. Twelve older drivers
stated that they drive at night more than once per week. Consistent with our full-sample
findings, the speed limits were more often exceeded in high light than in low light (t9 =
2.978, P = 0.013). Some trends were also evident in these data. As was found in the full
sample, the precision of vehicle position during curved segments tended to be improved
in the lower light than higher light. In addition, the distance to detect signage was farther
from the sign in the higher light condition and the distance to begin deceleration after
seeing the posted speed limit during curved segments was farther in the higher light than
the lower light condition (All Ps < 0.2).
Perception that Current Driving is more Difficult than in Younger Years
Only one finding related to driver self perception relative to their younger years was
found. Those drivers that believed that their driving is unaffected by age showed less
steering accuracy in moderate curved segments of the scenario than did those who
believed age affected their driving performance (F(1,25), P = 0.024). These results
suggest that those who believe age is a factor in their driving attempt to compensate for
perceived losses. Target risk theory would suggest that this belief should lead to more
cautious driving (Wilde, 2001). Those that believe their driving is unaffected by age,
have no reason to change their driving strategies, which would affect their driving
performance (especially since data presented here suggests that age is a factor in driving
performance). No effects of lighting in combination with driver opinion were found.
Self Reported Driving Difficulties
Participants had been asked to identify driving conditions that they found difficult when
driving at night. A medium split was used on these data and those that showed five or
fewer night driving difficulties were classified as ‘few difficulties’, while those with five
or more difficulties were classified as ‘many difficulties’.
(a) Mean Curve Position
Significant interactions between light, number of reported night driving difficulties and
participant group were found (F(1,69) = 5.049, P = 0.009). Examination of means
suggests that for older and middle aged adults, those reporting many driving difficulties
are less accurate in curve position than those reporting few difficulties. Further, older
adults who have many night driving difficulties show less accuracy in higher light levels
than low light levels. For younger adults, there was little effect of reported difficulties
and road light level on mean curve position.
(b) Driving Speed During Curved Segments
A significant interaction between the number of night driving difficulties reported and
road light level on driving speed during curved segments was found (F(1,69) = 4.995, P =
0.029). In higher road light conditions, no difference in speed was found between
reporting few or many night driving difficulties. In lower road light conditions, those
_______________________________________________________________________
-47-
reporting fewer night driving difficulties have higher driving speeds than those who
report many night driving difficulties. These suggest that in lower light conditions, one’s
beliefs about their own driving difficulties affect the amount of caution they exert in
driving.
3.4.3 ROAD LIGHTING AND VISION AND COGNITIVE VARIABLES
To further understand the effects of vision and cognitive variables on driving

performance, we examined three representative variables for acuity, visual attention and
processing speed in the older driver group. First we took median splits of each variable in
order to compare those with the most difficulties in acuity, visual attention and
processing speed to those with the fewest difficulties. Contrast acuity at 25% contrast
taken in optimal viewing conditions was used to represent acuity performance, the UFOV
processing speed task was used to represent visual attention and the Letter comparison
completion task was used to represent processing speed. These three tasks were chosen
because they had shown in previous analyses to impact some driving performances.
The effects of contrast acuity, visual attention and processing speed were further
examined. Overall, it was found that those with the poorest acuities are affected
differentially by road lighting. In the higher road lighting condition, those with poor
acuity were more precise on curved road segments than those with better acuity.
However, in the lower road lighting condition those with poor acuity were less precise
than those with better acuity. These results suggest that higher road lighting benefits
those with poor contrast acuity but for those with better acuity, higher road lighting does
not lead to improved precision, possibly due to driver confidence.
Those with faster visual attention processing speeds were more accurate in curve position
than those with poorer visual attention. In addition, those with better visual attention
drove faster during sign searches than did those with poorer visual attention. Those with
poorer processing speed were less accurate in vehicle curve positions than those with
faster processing speeds in the higher roadway lighting condition. In the lower roadway
lighting condition, faster and slower processors are equally accurate in their curve
positions. This suggests that both groups may be attempting to compensate when light
levels are reduced.
Contrast Acuity and Night Driving
A significant interaction between road lighting and contrast acuity was found for
individual precision when driving on curved segments of the roadway (F(1,25) = 4.699, P
= 0.040). In the higher road lighting condition, those with poor acuity were more precise
than those with better acuity. However, in the lower road lighting condition those with
poor acuity were less precise than those with better acuity. These results suggest that
higher road lighting benefits those with poor contrast acuity but for those with better
acuity, higher road lighting does not lead to improved precision, possibly due to driver
confidence. We also found that on these curved segments those with better acuity chose
to begin to slow to a change in posted speed after the speed sign, while those with poor
contrast acuity slow prior to a posted speed sign (F(1,16) = 4.633, P = 0.047). This
_______________________________________________________________________
-48-
suggests that those with better contrast acuity have different patterns of driving behaviour
than those with poorer acuity.
Visual Attention and Night Driving
An effect of roadway light and an effect of visual attention were found for mean curve
position. Those with faster visual attention were more accurate in curve position than
those with slower visual attention. Like previous analyses, higher roadway lighting
resulted in less accuracy than lower roadway lighting (see above). In addition, those with
faster visual attention drove faster (89 km/hr) during sign searches than did those with
slower visual attention (59 km/hr, F(1,16) = 15.421, P = 0.001).
Processing Speed and Night Driving
An interaction between roadway lighting and processing speed was found (F(1,25) =
5.649, P = 0.025) for mean curve accuracy. Those with poorer processing speed were less
accurate than those with faster processing speeds in the higher roadway lighting
condition. In the lower roadway lighting condition, faster and slower processes are
equally accurate in their curve positions and based on means somewhat more accurate
than in the higher road light condition. In addition, during sign searches, those with
slower processing speeds drove slower than did those with faster processing speeds
(F(1,16) = 5.735, P = 0.029).
3.4.4 DISCUSSION
One of the main findings in this study is that light has differential effects on driving
behaviours depending on the type of behaviour and the age of the participant. Increases in
road luminance were helpful for older adults when reacting to posted signs. They were
able to identify the road signs from a further distance and reacted to the road signs sooner
in higher light conditions. However, increases in light levels also resulted in some
changes in driving that appear to be related to driver caution and attention. In higher light
levels, drivers of all age groups made more road edge excursions and all drivers exceeded
posted speed limits more often. Further, older adults were less accurate and precise in
following road curvature during curved segments of the road in higher light conditions.
These results suggest that while light is helpful in improving sign recognition, during
higher light segments drivers also drive with less caution. These results echo our previous
survey findings that indicate that older drivers consciously attempt to increase attention in
driving situations they perceive to be higher risk, such as lower light situations. These
results are also well explained by the theoretical notion of target risk, that is, humans
have a relatively stable level of risk tolerance and will modify behaviour in different
settings in order to maximize benefits without compromising risk homeostasis [Wilde,
2001]. Decreased attention may be thought of as a kind of cognitive benefit that is
afforded by a less demanding driving scenario.
_______________________________________________________________________
-49-
In addition, with exception of speed excursions both vision and cognitive performance
was predictive of driving performance. In contrast, our survey work showed that self
reported driving performance was best predicted by cognitive variables such as
processing speed, even though older adults complained of vision difficulties during
driving. Our results suggest that both cognitive and vision losses do impact on some
driving performance. In higher light conditions different types of acuity would be
advantaged leading to better sign identification. On the other hand, in low light
conditions, where acuity is not well advantaged, increases in attention may compensate
for acuity losses.
We examined this scenario by comparing older drivers with poor acuity, visual attention
and processing speed to those with better acuity, visual attention and processing speed.
We found that those with the poorest contrast acuity were most benefited by increases in
road lighting and those with stronger acuities did not benefit from increases in road
lighting. In addition, those with poor visual attention, drove much slower than those with
better visual attention, suggesting an attempt to compensate for their attention losses.
Finally, those with poorer processing speeds are generally less accurate in following the
curvature of the road in higher light conditions but in lower light conditions faster and
slower processors are equally accurate (showing an improvement in accuracy),
suggesting that both groups may be attempting to compensate when light levels are
reduced. All these results suggest a change in driving strategy with changes in light. We
believe the difference is due to driver confidence and thus driver attention.
Driver confidence was further examined by comparing their self-reported driving with
their actual driving performance. Here we compared driving performance between those
who do/do not avoid night driving, those who frequently/infrequently drive at night, those
who report many/few night driving difficulties and those who believe/do not believe age
has affected their night driving performance. Overall, it was found that in some situations
those that avoid night driving showed poorer accuracy and precision in driving in high
light than low light, suggesting that they are attempting to compensate for the light
conditions, while those that do not avoid driving are not affected by light levels. In
addition, those who avoid driving at night show faster brake times, suggesting that they
do not anticipate speed changes well.
In addition, older drivers who infrequently drive at night made fewer road edge
excursions in lower light than higher light conditions, suggesting that in low confidence
situations they are driving with more caution. Finally, older adults that believe age does
not affect their driving showed less accuracy in driving in some situations. If confidence
level is an issue in increasing driving caution, this result suggest those with more
confidence are less likely to compensate because they do not view caution as necessary.
This is further supported by the fact that older adults who report many night driving
difficulties show more accuracy in driving at lower road lighting and drive slower than
individuals who state that they have fewer night driving difficulties. Decreased
confidence in their abilities appears to increase caution.
_______________________________________________________________________
-50-
4. CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 CONCLUSIONS
Increasing road lighting from 0.6 cd/m2 to 2.5 cd/m2 had an impact on night driving
performance. However, the impact depended on the type of driving maneuver, driver age,
driver vision and cognitive performance and driver self-perception (i.e. driver
confidence). In other words, the relationship between roadway light levels and driver
performance is a complex one.
The increase in road lighting level was helpful to older adults in recognizing posted signs.
Older adults can react sooner. As shown in our survey of night driving, older adults
explain that they often miss signage and believe that increased lighting would be helpful
to them. Here we find that in some driving situations road lighting does improve sign
recognition. Many older adults suffer from both visual and processing speed losses.
Increases in lighting may help compensate for such losses.
In contrast, increased lighting appears to affect driver performance in some less desirable
ways. All drivers made more road edge excursions and exceeded posted speed limits
more often in the higher road light condition, than in the lower road light condition. In
addition, older drivers were less accurate and precise in following curved sections of the
highway in higher than lower light levels. It appears that when the roadway light is
increased drivers increase driving confidence and thus decrease attention. This is
consistent with the self-reports of our participants who state that when they perceive that
the situations are more difficult they try to compensate by reducing speed and increasing
attention. This is also consistent with some research that suggested that when light levels
on roads are increased drivers reduce attention [Assum et al., 1999].
We also find that vision and cognitive performance impacts driving differently at
different light levels. For example, those with the poorest acuity benefit the most from
increased road lighting but those with strong acuity do not benefit from such increases.
Further, those who show cognitive performance losses (i.e. visual attention losses)
attempt to compensate for their losses but in some situations compensation is different at
different light levels.
Finally, driver self-perception impacts on road lighting. Those that avoid driving or who
drive infrequently showed more errors in driving in the higher light condition than the
lower light condition and those that do not avoid night driving are not impacted by the
light level. These results, we believe, are related to driver confidence. Situations that are
perceived as less difficult have less compensation, and compensation in older adults is to
increase attention and concentration. Those who avoid night driving compensate more in
_______________________________________________________________________
-51-
the lower luminance condition. Those who do not avoid night driving do not perceive
either situation as needing compensation.
4.2 RECOMMENDATONS
1. Overall we recommend that light levels could be increased around important signage
and this would help older adults with way-finding (direction signs) and driving rules
(e.g. posted speed). Higher roadway lighting around signage would be especially
advantageous for those older adults with cognitive or vision losses, giving them extra
time to react to posted signage.
2. We do not recommend that road light levels be increased on parts of the road where
some extra caution is needed. Our results showed that drivers (including older
drivers) do increase attention to driving with the road light levels currently used on
Ontario highways (0.6 cd/m2) and increased lighting did not lead to better accuracy
and precision in driving maneuvers. It is possible that driver attention to driving is
compromised with higher road light levels, but this is situation specific. We do
recommend examining road lighting effects in any specific driving situations where
the Ministry is considering raising light levels. Ideally, the effect of increasing road
lighting should be looked at along a continuum so as to provide prescriptive levels
leading to optimal performance for a given situation.
3. We recommend that driving self-restriction not be adopted as a general way to deal

with older drivers. Our data suggest that in some situations drivers who avoid driving
at night do exercise more caution. However, those that avoid night driving report
many difficulties in night driving. In addition, those that avoid night driving seem to
have some difficulties anticipating required behaviour changes at night. For example,
they brake quickly, rather than smoothly reducing speed. Some researchers have
suggested that infrequent driving practice can lead to increased crash risk [Hakemies-
Blomquist et al., 2002]. Increasing older adult’s night time driving practice could lead
to general benefits in night time driving and should be the focus of further study.
4. Cognitive performance was related to self-reported driving performance and also to

simulator performance. Many studies today show that cognitive performance can be
improved through training [see for example Yang et al., 2009]. What is not clear is
the impact of cognitive training on every day skills such as driving performance. This
is an area of research that could lead to important intervention measures. In addition,
given the relative success of cognitive variables in predicting driver performance in
older adults, it would be worthwhile to expand the scope of cognitive variables
assessed. Doing so may reveal critical cognitive variables that might eventually be
taken into consideration in the senior driver renewal program.
5. We tested a number of driving situations that might be impacted by increasing light

levels. However, little is known about night driving performance in older adults in
general and this should be a focus of future research. For example, given the increases
in the number of drivers over the age of 75, night driving performance in younger
olds (60-75) and older olds (75+) should be examined. In addition, older adults show
losses in driving confidence and those losses might affect their ability to maneuver
_______________________________________________________________________
-52-
around highway road hazards at night (i.e. work zones, slow vehicles). Further, here
we found that older adults had particular difficulties on curved sections of highway.
Further research about this difficulty (i.e. what angle of curvature is difficult) may be
warranted.
_______________________________________________________________________
-53-
REFERENCES
Alferdinck, J.A.M., “Target detection and driving behaviour measurements in a driving
simulator at mesopic light levels”, Ophthalmology and Physiological Optics, Vol. 26,
2006, pp. 264-280.
Anderson, S.J. and Holliday, I. E., “Night driving: Effects of glare from vehicle
headlights on motion perception”, Ophthalmology and physiological optics, Vol. 15,
1995, pp. 545-551.
Arumi, P., Chauhan, K. and Charman, W. N., “ Accommodation and acuity under night
driving illumination levels”, Ophthalmology and Physiological Optics, Vol. 17, No.
4, 1997, pp. 291-299.
Assum, T., Bjørnskau, T, Fosser, S. and Sagberg, F., “Risk compensation—the case of
road lighting”, Accident. Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 31, 1999, pp. 545–553.
Baldock, M.R.J., Mathias, J.L., McLean, A.J. and Berndt, A., “Self-regulation of driving
and its relationship to drivingability among older adults”, Accident Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 38, 2006, pp. 1038–1045
Ball, K., Owsley, C., Sloane, M.E., Roenker, D.L., and Bruni, J.R., “Visual attention
problems as a predictor of vehicle crashes in older adults”, Investigative
Ophthalmology and Vision Science, 34, 1993, pp. 3110-3123.
Ball, K., Owsley, C., Staley, B., Roenker, D.L., Sloane, M.E. and Graves, M., “Driving
avoidance and functional impairment in older adults”, Accident Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 30, 1998, pp.313-322.
Banks, P.M., Moore, L.A., Liu, C. and Wu, B., “Dynamic visual acuity : a review”, South
African Optometry, Vol. 63, 2004, pp. 58-64
Becic, E. Cramer, A.F., and Boot, W.R., “Age related differences in visual search in
dynamic displays”, Psychology and Aging, Vol. 22, 2007, pp. 67-74.
Bell, B., Wolfe, E., and Bernholz, C.D., “Depth perception as a function of age”, Aging
and Human Development, Vol. 3, 1972, pp. 77-81.
Bergman, B and Sjöstrand, J., “A longitudinal study of visual acuity and visual
rehabilitation needs in an urban Swedish population followed from the ages of 70 to
97years of age”, Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavia, Vol. 80, 2002, pp. 598–607
Brown, H.D., Kosslyn, S. M., and Dror, I.E,. “Aging and scanning of imagined and
perceived visual images”, Experimental Aging Research, Vol. 24, 1998, pp. 181-
194.
Caird, J.K. Edwards, C.J,. Creaser, J.I. and W.J. Horrey, W.J., “Contributing factors to
accidents by older drivers: R&D plan and empirical studies” Transportation
Development Centre, Transport Canada TP 13939E, 2002.
Caird, J.K., Edwards, C.J., Creaser, J.I. and Horrey, W.J., “Older Driver Failures of
Attention at Intersections: Using Change Blindness”, Human Factors, Vol. 47, 2,
Summer 2005, pp. 235-249.
Canada Safety Council, “Safety and the aging driver”, 2006, Available at
http://www.safety-council.org/info/seniors/safedriv.html
_______________________________________________________________________
-54-
Canada Safety Council, “Seniors behind the wheel”, 2006, Available at

http://www.safety-council.org/news/sc/2000/senior_wheel.html
Canada Safety Council., “Seniors behind the wheel”, Safety Canada, Vol. XLIV (1),
2000, pp. 1-2
Carlson, P.J. and Hawkins, H.G., “Updated minimum retroreflectivity levels for traffic
signs.” Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-03-081, 2003.
Charlton, J.L., Oxley, J., Fildes, B. Oxley, P. Newstead, S. Koppel, S., and O’Hare, M.,
“Characteristics of older drivers who adopt self-regulatory driving behaviours”,
Transportation Research, Part F, Vol. 9 , 2006, pp. 363–373.
Earles, J. L. and Kersten, A.W., “Processing speed and adult age differences in activity
memory”, Experimental Aging Research, Vol. 25, 1999, pp. 243-253.
Edwards, J.D., Ross, L. A., Ackerman, M. L., Small, B.J. Ball, K. K., Bradley, S., and
Dodson, J.E., “Longitudinal Predictors of Driving Cessation Among Older Adults
From the ACTIVE clinical trial”, The Journals of Gerontology, Vol. 63B, 2008, pp.
P6-P12.
Edwards, J.D., Ross, L.A., Wadley, V.G., Clay, O.J., Crowe, M., Roenker, D.L., and
Ball, K.K., “The Useful Field of View Test: Normative data for older adults”,
Archives in Clinical Neuropsychology, Vol. 21, 2006, pp. 275-286.
Eloholma, M., Ketoma¨ ki, J., Orrevetela¨inen, P., and Halonen L., “Visual performance
in night-time driving conditions”, Ophthalmology and Physiological Optics, Vol. 26,
2006, pp. 254-263.
Federal Highway Administration., “Enhanced night visibility series: Phase II, Study I.
Visual performance during night time driving in clear weather”, US Department of
Transportation, Publication no: FHWA-HRT-04-134, 2005.
Florida at risk driver council. “The effects of aging on driving ability. Department of
Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles”, 2004. Available at
http://hsmv.state.fl.us/DDL/ATRISKDRIVER. pdf
Freeman,E.E., Mun˜oz,B., Turano,K.A., and West, S. K., “Dynamic measures of visual
function and their relationship to self-report of visual functioning”, Investigative
Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol. 47, 2006, pp. 4762-4766.
Garnham, L., and Sloper, J.J., “Effect of age on adult stereoacuity as measured by
different types of stereotests.” British Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 90, 2006, pp.
91-85.
Gilmore, G.C., Royer, F.L. and Gruhn, J.J. “Age differences in symbol-digit substitution
task performance”, Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol. 39, pp. 114-124.
Giovagnoli A.R., Del Pesce M. l, Mascheroni S., Simoncelli M. 1, Laiacona M., and
Capitani E., “Trail Making Test: Normative values from 287 normal adult controls”,
International Journal of Neurological Science, Vol. 17, 1996, pp. 305-309.
Green, E. R., Agent, K. R., Barrett, M.L. and Pigman, J. P., “Roadway lighting and driver
safety”, Kentucky Transportation Center, Research Report KTC-03-12/SPR247-02-
IF, 2003.
_______________________________________________________________________
-55-
Groth, K. E., Gilmore, C.G., and Thomas, C.W., “Impact of Stimulus Integrity on Age
Differences in Letter Matching”, Experimental Aging Research, Vol. 29, 2003, pp.
155–172.
Haegerstrom-Portnoy, G., Schneck, M.E. and Brabyn, J.A., “Seeing into old age: Vision
function beyond acuity”, Optometry and Vision Science, Vol. 76(3), 1999, pp. 141-
158.
Hakamies-Blomqvist L., Raitanen, T., Desmond O_Neill, D.O., “Driver ageing does not
cause higher accident rates per km”, Transportation Research, Part F, Vol. 5, 2002,
pp. 271–274.
Higgins, K.E., Wood, J. and Tait, A., “Vision and driving: Selective effect of optical blur
on different driving tasks”, Human Factors, Vol. 40, 1998, pp. 224-232.
Ho, G., Scialfa, C.T., Caird, J.K., and Graw, T., “Visual search for traffic signs: The
effects of clutter, luminance, and aging”, Human Factors, Vol. 43, 2001, pp. 194-207
Horowitz A., “The prevalence and consequence of vision impairment in later life”,
Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, Vol. 20, 2004, pp. 185-195.
Hoyer, W.J., Stawski, R.S., Wasylyshyn, C., and Verhaeghen, P., “Adult Age and Digit
Symbol Substitution Performance: A Meta-Analysis”, Psychology and Aging, Vol.
19, 2004, pp.211-214.
Ishihara, K., Ishihara, S., Nagamachi, M.,Osaki, H. and Hiramatsu, S., “Independence of
older adults in performing instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) and the
relation of this performance to visual abilities”, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic.
Science, Vol. 5, 2004, pp. 198-213
Joy, S., Fein, D., Kaplan, E. and Freidman, M., “Speed and memory in the WAIS-R-NI
Digit Symbol performance among healthy older adults”, Journal of the International
Psychological Society, Vol.6, 2000, 770-7780.
Kantor, B., Mauger, L., Richardson, V. E., and Unroe, K. T., “An analysis of an older
driver evaluation program”, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Vol. 52,
2004, pp. 1326-1330.
Kline, D.W., Buck, K,Sell, Y.; Bolan, T.L. and Dewar, R.E., “Older observers' tolerance
of optical blur: Age differences in the identification”, Human Factors, Vol. 41, 1999,
pp. 356-364.
Kuang, T.M., Hsu, W. M., Chou, C.K., and Chou, P., “Impact of stereopsis on quality of
life”, Eye, Vol. 19, 2005, pp. 540-545
Long, G. M., and Crambert R.F., “The nature and basis of age-related changes in
dynamic visual acuity”, Psychology and Aging, Vol. 5, 1990, pp. 138-143.
Madden, D.J. and Langley, L.K., “Age related changes in selective attention and
perceptual load during visual search”, Psychology and Aging, Vol. 18, 2003, pp. 54-
67.
McGregor, L. M., and Chaparro, A., “Visual Difficulties Reported by Low-Vision and
Nonimpaired Older Adult Drivers”, Human Factors, Vol. 47, 2005, pp. 469-478.
_______________________________________________________________________
-56-
McPhee, L.C., Scialfa, C.T., Dennis, W.M., Ho, G., and Caird, J.K., “Age Differences in
Visual Search for Traffic Signs During a Simulated Conversation”, Human Factors,
Vol. 46, 2004, pp. 674-685.
Molnar, F. J., Patel, A., Marshall, S. C., Man-Song-Hing, M., and Wilson, K. G.,
“Clinical utility of office based cognitive predictors of fitness to drive in persons
with dementia: A systematic review”, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society,
Vol. 54, 2006, pp. 1809-1824.
Nicoletta, J. “Driving characteristics of the young and aging population”, Statistics
Canada: Transportation Division. Ottawa, Ontario, Catalogue no. 53F0007XIE, 2002.
Norman, J.F., Clayton, A.M., “Aging and the perception of depth and 3D shape from
motion”, Psychology and Aging, Vol. 19, 2004, pp. 506-514.
Owens, D.A., Wood, J.M. and Owens, J.M., “Effects of Age and Illumination on Night
Driving: A Road Test”, Human Factors, Vol. 49, 2007, pp. 1115-1131.
Owsley, C, Stalvey B.T. and Phillips, J.M., “The efficacy of an educational intervention
in promoting self-regulation among high-risk older drivers”, Accident Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 35, 2003, pp. 393–400
Owsley, C. and McGuin, G., “Vision Impairment and Driving.,”, Survey of
Ophthalmology, Vol. 43, 1999, pp. 535-550
Owsley, C., Sekular, R., and Siemsen, D., “Contrast sensitivity throughout adulthood”,
Vision Research, Vol. 23, 1983, pp. 689-699.
Oxley, J., Charlton, J.L., Fildes, B., Bohensky, M., Skully, J., Koppel, S., “Driving
experiences, crash risk and mobility amongst older female drivers in Australia”,
Transed: Transport Canada. 2007 Available at
http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/Transed2007/pages/1100.htm
Perianez, J. A., Rios-Lango, M., Rodriguez-Sanchez, J. M., Adrover-Roig, D., Sanchez-
Cubillo, I., Crespo-Facorro, B., Quemada, J. I. and Barcelo, F., “Trail Making Test
in traumatic brain injury, schizophrenia, and normal ageing: Sample comparisons
and normative data”, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Vol. 22, 2007, 433-
447.
Raven, D. and Loveless, R., “Assessing road lighting performance”, New Zealand:
Odyssey Energy Limited, 1999.
Reed, MJ., and Burdett, F., “Apparent motion processing strabismic observers with
varying levels of stereo vision”, Behavioural Brain Research, Vol. 133, 2002, 383-
390.
Reitan RM., “Validity of the Trail Making test as an indicator of brain damage”,
Perceptual Motor Skills, Vol. 8, 1958, pp. 271–76.
Rowe, G, and Reed, M.J. “The effects of age related contrast decline on activities of daily
living”, The Cognitive Aging Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, May, 2002.
Rubin, G. S., Ng, E. S. W., Bandeen-Roche, K., Keyl, P. M., Freeman, E. E., West, S. K.,
et al., “A prospective, population-based study of the role of visual impairment in
_______________________________________________________________________
-57-
motor vehicle crashes among older drivers: The SEE study,” Investigative
Ophthalmology Visual Science, Vol. 48, No. 4, 2007, pp. 1483-1491.
Rubin, G., West, S., Munoz, B., Bandeen-Roche, K., Zeger, S., Schein, O., et al., “A
comprehensive assessment of visual impairment in a population of older Americans.
the SEE study. salisbury eye evaluation project”, Investigative Ophthalmology
Visual Science, Vol. 38, No. 3, 1997, pp. 557-568.
Rubin, G.S., Keyl, P.M., Monoz, B., Bamdeen-Roche, K., Huang, G.H., West, S.K. and
SEE Project Team., “ The association of vision, cognition and attention with crashes
in an older American population: SEE study.”, Investigative Opthalmology and
Visual Science Supplement, Vol. 40, 1999, pp. S387.
Rubin, G.S., Roche, K.B., Prasada-Rao, P., and Fried, L.P., “Visual impairment and
disability in older adults”, Optometry and Vision Science, Vol. 71, 1994; pp. 750-
760.
Salthouse, T. A., “Attempted decomposition of age-related influences on two tests of
reading”, Psychology and Aging, Vol.16, 2001, pp. 251-263.
Salthouse, T. A., Toth, J., Daniels, K., Parks, C., Pak, R., Wolbrette, M., and Hocking,
K.J., “Effects of aging on efficiency of task switching in a variant of the Trail
Making Test”, Neuropsychology, Vol. 14., 2000, pp. 102-111.
Schefrin, B.R., Tregear, S.J., Harvey Jr., L.O., and Werner, J.S., “Senescent changes in
scotopic contrast sensitivity”, Vision Research, Vol. 39, 1999, pp. 3728-3736.
Schnell, T., Aktan, F., and Li, C., “Traffic sign luminance requirements of nighttime
drivers for symbolic signs”. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1862, 2004, pp.
24-35.
Sekular, A.B., Bennett, P.J., and Mamelak, M., “The effects on aging on the useful field
of view”, Experimental Aging Research, Vol. 26, 2000, pp. 103-120.
Sloane, M.E., Owsley, C, and Alvarez, S.L., “Aging, senile miosis and spatial contrast
sensitivity at low luminance”, Vision Research, Vol. 28, 1988, pp. 1235-1246.
Soukup, V. M., Ingram, F. Grady, J.J., and Schiess, M. C., “Trails Making Test: Issues in
normative data selection”, Applied Neuropsychology, Vol. 5, 1998, pp. 65-73.
Statistics Canada., “Population by sex and age group. Ottawa Ontario”, 2007. Available
at http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo10a.htm?sdi=age
Statistics Canada., “Chart 28.1 (data) Population projections, 65 years and older. Ottawa
Ontario”, 2006. Available at
http://www41.statcan.ca/2007/70000/grafx/htm/ceb70000_000_1_e.htm #table
Stuen, C. and Faye, E.E., “Vision Loss: Normal and not normal changes among older
adults“, Generations, Spring 2003, pp. 8-14.
Sullivan, J. M. and Flannagan, M. J., “Determining the potential safety benefit of
improved lighting in three pedestrian crash scenarios”, Accident. Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 39, 2007, pp. 638–647.
_______________________________________________________________________
-58-
Suzuki,T.,Yi, Q.,Sakuragawa,S., Tamura, and K. Okajima, K., “Comparing the Visibility

of Low-Contrast Color Landolt-Cs: Effect of Aging Human Lens”, COLOR
Research and Application, Vol. 30, 2002, pp. 5-12.
Szlyk, J. P., Taglia, D.P., Paligia, J., Edward, D.P., and Wilenski, J.T., “Driving
performance in patients with mild to moderate glaucomatas clinical vision changes”,
Journal of rehabilitation Research and Development, Vol. 39, 2002, pp. 467-482.
The Auditor General of Ontario., 2005 Annual Report of the Office of the Auditor
General of Ontario. Chapter 3, Section 3.06: Driver Licensing, Ontario Ministry of
Transport, 2005, pp. 126-148.
Transport Canada., “Mature drivers in causality motor vehicle collisions”, 1988-1998.
Fact sheet RS 2001-04, TP 2436 E, 2001.
Transport Canada., “Road Safety in Canada-2003”, Publication Number TP 13951 E,
2006
Tsai, C., Woung, L., Chou, P., Yang, C., Sheu, M., Wu, J., et al., “The current status of
visual disability in the elderly population of Taiwan”, Japanese Journal of
Ophthalmology, Vol. 49, No. 2, 2005, pp. 166-172.
Turcotte, M., “Senior’s access to transportation”, Canadian Social Trends, Catalogue
Number 11-008, 2006, pp. 43-49.
US Department of Transport. “Synthesis of human factors research on older drivers and
highway safety. Volume I: Older driver research synthesis”, Publication No. FHWA-
RD-97-094, 1997.
Va´rady, G. and Bodrogi, P., “Mesopic spectral sensitivity functions based on visibility
and recognition contrast thresholds”, Ophthalmology and Physiological Optics, Vol.
26, 2006, pp. 246-253.
van der Pols,J C., Bates, C. J., McGraw, P. V., Thompson, J. R., Reacher, M., Prentice,
A., et al., “Visual acuity measurements in a national sample of British elderly
people”, British Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 84, No. 2, 2000, pp.165-170.
Visual Awareness Inc. UFOV User’s Guide, Version 6.0.9., Birmingham Atlanta, 2002.
Walkey, H. C.,Harlow and J. A. and Barbur, J. L., “Changes in reaction time and search
time with background luminance in the mesopic range”, Ophthalmology and
Physiological Optics, Vol. 26, 2006, pp. 288-299.
Wechsler, D., WAIS-R manual. Psychological Corporation, New York, 1981.
West C.G., Gildengorin G., Haegerstrom-Portnoy G., Lott L., Schneck M.E. and Brabyn
J.A,. “Vision and driving self-restriction in older adults”, Journal American Geriatric
Society, Vol 51, 2003, pp. 1348-1355.
West, C. G., Gildengorin, G., Haegerstrom-Portnoy, G., Schneck, M. E., Lott, L., and
Brabyn, J. A., “Is vision function related to physical functional ability in older
adults?”, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Vol. 50, No. 1, 2002, pp. 136-
145.
_______________________________________________________________________
-59-
West, S., Munoz, B., Rubin, G., Schein, O., Bandeen-Roche, K., Zeger, S., et al.,
“Function and visual impairment in a population-based study of older adults, the
SEE project. Salisbury eye evaluation”, Investigative Ophthalmology Visual
Science, Vol. 38, No. 1, 1997, pp. 72-82.
Wilde, G., “Target risk 2: A new psychology of safety and health”, PDE Publications,
Toronto, Canada. 2001.
Wood, J. M., “Age and visual impairment decrease driving performance as measured on
a close-circuit road”, Human Factors, Vol. 44, 2002, pp.482-494.
Wood, J.M., Tyrell, R. A. and Cranberry, T.P., “Limitations in Drivers' Ability to
Recognize Pedestrians at Night”, Human Factors, Vol.47, No. 3, 2005, pp. 644-653.
Yang, L., Reed, M., Russo, F., and Wilkinson, A., “How do older adults learn from
repeated testing? Retest learning in inductive reasoning, perceptual speed and visual
attention”, Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 2009, (in press).
Zur, A. and Shinar, D., “Older people's driving habits, visual abilities, and subjective
assessment of daily visual functioning”, Work, Vol. 11, 1998, pp. 339-348.
_______________________________________________________________________
-60-
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance and dedication of PhD candidates Atif
Mehmood and Essam Dabbour who were instrumental in project design and simulator
programming. In addition, we would also like to thank MA students Michael
Maksimowski and Sami El-Sibaey for help with our on-line survey. We also wish to
thank research assistant Katy Curtis for her assistance in all phases of this project. The
authors and Ryerson University gratefully acknowledge the funding provided by the
MTO Highway Infrastructure Innovation Funding Program that made this work possible.
We would also like to thank Martin Aitkenhead and Ousama Shebeeb of MTO for their
input
Disclaimer
This research was supported by a contribution from the Ministry of Transportation of

Ontario. Opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and may not
necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario.
_______________________________________________________________________

Effect of Road Lighting On Night Driving

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effect of Road Lighting On Night Driving

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Effect of Road Lighting on Night Driving

350 Victoria St.

350 Victoria St.

Older Adult Survey of Night Driving

Effects of Road Lighting on Older Adult Driving Performance

Conclusion and Recommendations

Based on this study the following recommendations are made:

Figure 1: Major tasks of the methodology

2.1 OLDER ADULT NIGHT DRIVING SURVEY

2.1.2 DISTRIBUTION AND RESPONSE RATE

2.2 AGE/VISION/COGNITION EXPERIMENT

2.2.2 VISION/COGNITIVE MEASURES

2.3 DRIVING SIMULATOR EXPERIMENT

2.3.2 DESIGN OF DRIVING SCENARIO

Figure 2: Geometry of driving simulator Scenarios. Sign sequence is

3. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

3.1 DATA ANALYSIS

- The number of comments made for the question

The multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) techniques followed by the standard

3.2 RESULTS OF OLDER ADULT NIGHT DRIVING SURVEY

3.2.1 SELF REPORTED NIGHT DRIVING BEHAVIOURS

Table 2: Percent who avoid driving at night by age and gender

Table 3: Frequency of reported responses as to why night driving is avoided a

Table 4: Percent of those driving at night by frequency, age and gender

Figure 3: Frequency of responses for belief that personal

Table 6: Reasons that night driving is more difficult with age a

Speed and volume of traffic seems to have increased

3.2.2 DIFFICULT NIGHT DRIVING SITUATIONS

Difficult Night Driving Situations

percent of respondents choosing different situations is shown in Table 7. Notably

Table 7: The percent of the sample identifying certain driving situations as

Light Reduces Driving Difficulties

Table 8: Comments about reasons increased road lighting would help

Improved lighting always improves visibility so that

If driving on a road where the speed limit is quite high

Being able to read the street names better would make it

Situational Issues Good lighting is always beneficial - it enables seeing

Make everything easier to see. Decrease glare and

Verbatim Comments can be found in Appendix 2

3.2.3 DRIVING ERRORS AND COMPENSATION

Compensation for Night Driving Difficulties

Sixty-seven percent of seniors report compensating for night driving difficulties.

Table 9: Percent who compensate for errors split by driving avoidance,

Driving Frequency % Yes N

> once per week* 56 103

Reduce Speed 116 53 Reduced speed to improve reaction time

Need to be extra cautious on peripheral viewing. I watch

Turn off radio, ask passengers to stop conversation when

I open my window to double check when making a left

Take Actions to Reduce To avoid glare from oncoming headlights I focus to my

3.3 RESULTS OF AGE/VISION/COGNITION EFFECTS ON SELF-

3.3.1 VISION VARIABLES

Static Acuity, Dynamic Acuity and Contrast Acuity

Static Acuity Dynamic Acuity Contrast Acuity

Stereo Acuity (arc seconds)

Figure 5: Mean minimum amount of disparity, in arc seconds, needed to

3.3.2 COGNITIVE VARIABLES

Processing Speed Divided Attention Selective Attention

A g e Gro up A g e Gro up A ge Gr oup

Speed of Processing Tests

Figure 7: Mean number of symbols or comparisons completed and completed correctly

Timed tasks for visual scanning

3.3.3 SELF REPORTED NIGHT DRIVING BEHAVIOURS