“Sorry mate, I didn’t see you”. Is a catchphrase used by drivers up and down the country. Is this a driver being careless and dangerous or did the driver genuinely not see you?
According to a report by John Sullivan of the RAF, the answer may have important repercussions for the way we train drivers and how as cyclists we stay safe on the roads.
John Sullivan is a Royal Air Force pilot with over 4,000 flight hours in his career, and a keen cyclist. He is a crash investigator and has contributed to multiple reports. Fighter pilots have to cope with speeds of over 1000 mph. Any crashes are closely analysed to extract lessons that can be of use.
Note: You can now download the original article by John Sullivan which includes further insights: Dropbox link.
Our eyes were not designed for driving
We are the result of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. Our eyes, and the way that our brain processes the images that they receive, are very well suited to creeping up on unsuspecting antelopes and spotting threats such as sabre-toothed tigers.
These threats are largely gone and they’ve been replaced by vehicles travelling towards us at high speeds. This, we’ve not yet adapted to deal with.
Why?
Light enters our eyes and falls upon the retina. It is then converted into electrical impulses, that the brain perceives as images. Only a small part of your retina, the centre bit called the fovea, can generate a high-resolution image. This is why we need to look directly at something, to see detail.
The rest of the retina lacks detail but it contributes by adding the peripheral vision. However, a mere 20 degrees away from your sightline, your visual acuity is about 1/10th of what it is at the centre.
Try this scary test to see quite how much detail you lose in your peripheral vision
- Stand 10 metres away from a car.
- Move your eyes and look just one car’s width to the right or left of that car.
- Without moving where you eyes are now looking, try and read the number plate of the car.
- Try the test again from 5m.
The test shows you quite how little detail you are able to truly capture from the side of your eyes.
That’s not to say that we cannot see something in our peripheral vision – of course we can. As you approach a roundabout, you would be hard pressed not to see a huge lorry bearing down upon you, even out of the corner of your eye – obviously, the bigger the object, the more likely we are to see it. But would you see a motorbike, or a cyclist?
To have a good chance of seeing an object on a collision course, we need to move our eyes, and probably head, to bring the object into the centre of our vision – so that we can use our high-resolution vision of our fovea to resolve the detail.
Here’s when things get really interesting
When you move your head and eyes to scan a scene, your eyes are incapable of moving smoothly across it and seeing everything. Instead, you see in the image in a series of very quick jumps (called saccades) with very short pauses (called fixations) and it is only during the pauses that an image is processed.
Your brain fills in the gaps with a combination of peripheral vision and an assumption that what is in the gaps must be the same as what you see during the pauses.
This might sound crazy, but your brain actually blocks the image that is being received while your eyes are moving. This is why you do not see the sort of blurred image, that you see when you look sideways out of a train window.
The only exception to this, is if you are tracking a moving object.
Another test to try
If you are not convinced, try this test.
- Look in a mirror.
- Look repeatedly from your right eye to your left eye.
- Can you see your eyes moving? You can’t.
- Repeat the test with a friend and watch them. You will see their eyes moving quite markedly.
You can’t see your own eyes move because your brain shuts down the image for the instant that your eyes are moving. This is called Saccadic masking.
In the past, this served us well. It meant we could creep up on antelopes without our brain being overloaded by unnecessary detail and a lot of useless, blurred images.
However, what happens when this system is put to use in a modern day situation, such as a traffic junction?
Why we miss motorbikes and bicycles
At a traffic junction all but the worst of drivers will look in both directions to check for oncoming traffic. However, it is entirely possible for our eyes to “jump over” an oncoming bicycle or motorbike.
The smaller the vehicle, the greater the chance it will fall within a saccade.
This isn’t really a case of a careless driver, it’s more of a human incapacity to see anything during a saccade. Hence the reason for so many “Sorry mate, I didn’t see you” excuses.
The faster you move your head, the larger the jumps and the shorter the pauses. Therefore, you’ve got more of a chance of missing a vehicle.
We are effectively seeing through solid objects, with our brain filling in the image.
Additionally, we tend to avoid the edges of the windscreen. The door pillars on a car therefore create an even wider blindspot. This is called windscreen zoning.
The danger of playing music
Our ears help us build up a picture of our surroundings. However, inside our cars or with music playing, our brain is denied another useful cue. Additionally, bicycles are almost completely silent, so won’t be heard by car drivers.
How accidents happen
Let’s say you are driving along. You approach a junction and you notice a lack of traffic. You look left and right and proceed forward. Suddenly you hear the blast of a horn, as a motorbike flashes in front of you, narrowly avoiding an accident.
What just happened?
On your approach, you couldn’t see there was another vehicle on a perfect collision course. With a lack of relative movement for your peripheral vision to detect and the vehicle being potentially hidden by being near the door pillar, you miss it entirely.
Lulled into a false sense of security you looked quickly right and left, to avoid holding up the traffic behind you, and your eyes jumped cleanly over the approaching vehicle, especially as it was still close to the door pillar in the windscreen. The rest of the road was empty, and this was the scene that your brain used to fill in the gaps! Scary, huh?
You were not being inattentive – but you were being ineffective.
Additionally, if you didn’t expect there to be a cyclist your brain is more likely to automatically jump to the conclusion that the road is empty.
Now that you’ve been warned. What can you do?
Forewarned is forearmed, so here’s what we can do.
Drivers:
- Slow down on the approach of a roundabout or junction. Even if the road seems empty. Changing speed will allow you to see vehicles that would otherwise be invisible to you.
- A glance is never enough. You need to be as methodical and deliberate as a fighter pilot would be. Focus on at least 3 different spots along the road to the right and left. Search close, middle-distance and far. With practise, this can be accomplished quickly, and each pause is only for a fraction of a second. Fighter pilots call this a “lookout scan” and it is vital to their survival.
- Always look right and left at least twice. This doubles your chance of seeing a vehicle.
- Make a point of looking next to the windscreen pillars. Better still, lean forward slightly as you look right and left so that you are looking around the door pillars. Be aware that the pillar nearest to you blocks more of your vision. Fighter pilots say ‘Move your head – or you’re dead’.
- Clear your flight path! When changing lanes, check your mirrors and as a last check, look directly at the spot which are going to manoeuvre.
- Drive with your lights on. Bright vehicles or clothing is always easier to spot than dark colours that don’t contrast with a scene.
- It is especially difficult to spot bicycles, motorbikes and pedestrians during low sun conditions as contrast is reduced.
- Keep your windscreen clean – seeing other vehicles is enough of a challenge without a dirty windscreen. You never see a fighter jet with a dirty canopy.
- Finally, don’t be a clown – if you are looking at your mobile telephone then you are incapable of seeing much else. Not only are you probably looking down into your lap, but your eyes are focused at less then one metre and every object at distance will be out of focus. Even when you look up and out, it takes a fraction of a second for your eyes to adjust – this is time you may not have.
Cyclists and motorcyclists:
- Recognise the risk of being in a saccade. High contrast clothing and lights help. In particular, flashing LED’s (front and rear) are especially effective for cyclists as they create contrast and the on-off flashing attracts the peripheral vision in the same manner that movement does. There’s nothing wrong with leaving these on during the day. (Especially if they are rechargeable)
- The relatively slower speed of bicycles means that they will be closer to a point of collision if a vehicle begins to pull into their path. Turn this to advantage – when passing junctions, look at the head of the driver that is approaching or has stopped. The head of the driver will naturally stop and centre upon you if you have been seen. If the driver’s head sweeps through you without pausing, then the chances are that you are in a saccade – you must assume that you have not been seen and expect the driver to pull out!
- Recognise that with a low sun, a dirty windscreen or one with rain beating against it drivers are likely to have less of a chance of seeing you.
- Take a cycle training course – this will teach you where you need to be positioned on the road, how to use your eyesight to make sure drivers pay you attention and other useful techniques that can minimise dangers. See: How to make your next bike ride safer than the last.
What should we do with our human weakness?
John Sullivan’s findings and suggestions are excellent. However, they rely on drivers changing well embedded habits. Personally I believe that, unlike RAF pilots, a driver is very unlikely to change their behaviour. Therefore, I’d suggest that this is another reason we should be looking at building safety in to our roads, with Dutch style cycling infrastructure.
Two important takeaways for cyclists: Increasing your contrast helps you be seen. Think flashing bike lights. Also, remember the importance of good road positioning.
Please share this around
Join 5,112 fellow cyclists who are subscribed to the London Cyclist newsletter
Sign up for our free newsletter to get...
- Advice on the best cycling gear
- A Friday roundup of all the latest London cycling news
- Exclusive content not available on the blog
Subscribe today, and get exclusive access forever! (It's free)
*No spam, ever!
As seen on The Guardian, BBC and The Independent.
it is interesting that in the Netherlands flashing lights are banned. any explanation for that?
it is historic I think, legislation from way back.
*all* bicycles had dynamo powered lights and maybe it was introduced to stop people getting away with faulty lights and dodgy connections, in Holland you get fined or riding without lights.
http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/fiets/vraag-en-antwoord/wat-zijn-de-regels-voor-fietsverlichting-en-reflectie-op-een-fiets.html
Tony: Our road infrastructure is not suited to cycling like it is in the Netherlands. In this country we have to jump through hoops to compensate for the safety shortfall.
A great article. Would it be ok for me to copy this information for use in my transport blog?
Very kind of you to ask Kim – please feel free to spread the word – the more people that read and understand this then the safer the roads will be. Note that you can download the original article from the link in the first paragraph. Please post a link to your blog – I am always interested to see how this information is received…
ATB, JS
Hi John,
A question for you: are you aware of eye tracking studies done with RAF pilots/motorists/cyclists? I work in human computer interaction and have an interest in eye tracking (studies of how saccades and fixations affect computer usage).
thanks,
Bernard
Not in the sense that you are referring to Bernard – the Harrier simulator used to employ an eye-tracking system in its simulator for projecting a high resolution image where it was needed, but it was not an analysis tool and I’m not aware of any such studies – that doesn’t mean that haven’t been any, just that I am not familiar with any… ATB, JS
Hi John – may we share this article in our Institute of Advanced Motorists newsletter?
Thanks,
Pete
Hello Peter,
I am very happy or you to use the article in your newsletter – the more widely this information is circulated then the more likely it is that it might contribute to preventing accidents. Thank you for the courtesy of asking.
Very respectfully, JS
BTW – could I get a copy of your newsletter Peter? Many thanks, JS
Hello
could it be possible to publish your story in our website. I translate it in Finnish. It opens many new point in our way to view and see.
rgds
Jukka
Certainly Jukka, please go ahead.
Thanks John and will do – do you have an email address?
On the website : http://www.peterboroughadvancedmotorists.co.uk/images/stories/roadsurvivalguide.pdf
Check out a piece of research by ‘Most and Astur’ on the interaction of colour of riders and accidents at junctions. Puts hiviz in a whole new light .
Most and astur : feature based attentional set as a cause of road traffic accidents
What I take away from that study along with the article presented here, is that cyclists get filtered out of a motorists rapid scan of the road. 90% of motorists are looking for vehicles which will cause harm to themselves. Cyclists do not fit the bill. Might I propose that despite its perceived conspicuity, hi viz yellow can be filtered out by motorists during a rapid scan of the road and actually contribute towards smidsey not prevent it?
I am in Portland OR where bicycle commuting is very common year round, day, night, in the rain, etc,… Regarding High Viz colors, I see alot of it and believe it may have the ability to interfere with an instinctive recognition of what is being seen.
For instance, it appears to me that while bright fluorescent color may be in the visual field, it may take rational effort to identify the object, orient on it and make decisions about how to relate to it spatially.
I suggest this may be due to a reduction of an edge effect or edge contrast. Fluorescent colors emit additional light in the visual range and I believe this reduces the appearance of distinct edges on the object being viewed. It may be analogous to the known camouflage effects of countershading and counterillumination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camouflage#Countershading
When I see something with distinct edges, my ability to know what it is and how to relate to it seems greatly enhanced and seems more or less instinctive. I am not convinced High Viz works as well as many people think it does. I would love to see some research on this.
There was an article in the Australasian vehicular science journal with a very serious article (link in the morning)
And this article
Mentioned here:
http://www.netrider.net.au/threads/great-article-on-hi-viz-effectiveness-from-the-uk.143319/
Also in the realm of cognititive psychology with respect to traffic: papers by ‘most and astur’ all agree with you ( and me!)
See also this policy change as a result of the Australasian research I mentioned: At night, small reflective markers on the limbs as ‘biological markers’ are 50 times more effective than hiviz!
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10866890
Also see this : car colour makes no difference!
https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/CarColorAndSafety.pdf
Two (or maybe three) things I think would help:
Firstly we should persuade our MPs that technology to prevent speeding should be put into all motor vehicles apart from emergency ones. The perception is that would lose them votes so we need to change that perception – I would consider it a vote-winner in my household. If there was any help in references that could be made in such a letter I would welcome that.
Secondly any road user who is found to be a dangerous driver should, at their own expense, pass the Institute of Advanced Motorists test. I consider myself to be a careful driver but I took some lessons with these people a while ago, and found I had developed a large number of bad habits over the years that needed correcting. That would give them extra funds and therefore clout to help with the first of these solutions to give them half a chance against organisations like the AA.
Of course you could also challenge the Head of Transport in your LA to cycle over the roads they are setting the repair budget for – avoiding pot holes on a bike probably makes me into that ‘idiot’ every driver should be expecting!
Fantastic! This nicely underpins what we’ve been teaching riders for decades about side road and using peripheral vision, based upon a Japanese road observation method. Now we can bring our resources and teaching in alignment to this understanding and up to date.
Thank you Andreas!
Can you say more about the Japanese road observation method? It sounds interesting – is there a link?
Very good article, but in my view it leaves another matter out. If we are used to seeing something then we are more likely to recognise it it when we do see it. For example, a person interested in birds will be better at recognising them and will notice far more birds than a person who isn’t interested in them. Far fewer car drivers today have an interest in bikes (motorised or not) than was the case forty years ago- therefor far fewer car drivers notice bikes, and even fewer understand their limitations. Without an understanding of both the strengths and limitations of two wheeled transport it is impossible for a car driver to correctly take them into account.
In answer to Jo
Speeding as such is not the problem as the vast majority of accident/collisions occur well within the speed limits of the road on which happen. It is inapproprate speeds that are sometimes the cause or contribute to such incidents.
To my mind there are just as many so called Advanced drivers or riders involved in accidents as there are who are not. Yes there should be a penalty and that could involve a course of instruction as well as other penalties. All Advanced drivers/riders should be re assessed at regular intervals as they are only re assessed with Rospa and not the others.
As regards this report one might as well say that if one blinks then it is just as dangerous as the conditions given. certainly at speeds in excess of 1000 mph or maybe a sneaze. or a cough. maybe…..Dont disagree with A pillars, mobile etc.
The thing i do not and cannot disagree with ,as a motorcyclists for nearly 50 years, is the danger of low sun in the eyes of a driver and the blinding effects it has on anyones visibility.
One may as well be naked for all the good it does one or indeed be driving a double decker bus or pantechnican. It will not be seen. Another problem is after rain with a wet road surface with the sunlight shining on it, one cannot look at the road without squinting. Another dangerous condition.
Whilst Hi vis etc are a consideration and highly visible in good daylight conditions i would argue that they can blend into the background particularly at dusk and dawn and when overcast with heavy cloud and or raining .then they blend in with all the other reflected lights from shop windows and street lighting thats is there and includes reflective road surfaces also.
Neither can i disagree with the drivers recommendations on how to look or observe at junction etc. but must admit that even if being looked at directly by a driver i never trust that they have seen me and always ride as if they havnt. I never ride close to the kerb unless there is traffic in front of me and i wish to be seen by maybe another vehicle stopped at a junction, where i would not be clearly seen if i was in a more outside postition. I do however prefer to be so far away from the vehicle in front that there is enough space to be seen when that vehicle passes such a junction. This gives me and the other driver time to see and react should it start off inappropriately.
I totally agree that more training should be given on junctions and looking but with many more europeans now driving in this country about 20% of drivers will look to their left first and not to the right, thats the way they didin it in europe.
Brilliant article! Thanks for the read.
As a driver, motorcyclist and cyclist, I’m all too aware of how easy it is for two-wheelers to be unseen on the roads, and how woefully inadequate existing safety measures are at preventing entirely avoidable accidents (at least here in Singapore).
I’m looking for an email address for you John (Sullivan), I was hoping to discuss something with you if possible.
I’ll pass on your email
Thank you Andreas
I have just joined a ‘behavours’ group looking at what we can do to change the behavour of drivers, cyclists & potential cyclists. We work with both the local council (BANES) & British Cycling. Would you be happy for me to share this artice with our group?
Feel free to share Aileen – spread the word!
Could not agree more. Same kind of “eye-techiques” (if you will) can be applied across the field. I’ve received counter special forces training during my service and also familiar on how to really maximize chance of spotting relative information. This is relative easy when you are built to spot stationary or relatively slow moving targets… add speed to target and yourself and you’ve got yourself a whole new ballgame. Will share this on FB, if you don’t mind.
Keep it up John!
V from Finland
Feel free to share V – spread the word!
It was interesting to read the science behind things which I had noticed over the years. We are all told to keep our eyes on the road but not what this really means or how to do it. There is a useful parallel at sea. “Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and by hearing.. .. so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the rsk of collision”. A sailing instructor really drilled home the full appraisal part. It is about evaulating everything around you in a structured way, to decide what is a hazard to you and what is not. It was a useful lesson and one I have always remembered.
A lookout by hearing too – so no MP3 players or music on the brdiges of ships. But how many times have you come across cyclists and pedestrians oblivious to their surroundings with headphones plugged in their ears.
Another feature of the regulations for seafarers is that there is no right of way at sea. Instead the vessel which should give way is identified, but if it doesn’t, then the obligation to give way also passes to the vessel which would have been expecting to continue unimpeded. I have often thought that giving a right of way to one vehicle over another on the road removes a responsibility from the vehicle with that right. I wonder how driver behaviour, and training, would be affected if always at the back of the mind there was the risk that you didn’t have a right of way, but instead an obligation to avoid collisions.
You sound like my dad… who spent 20 years as a radio officer on the ships.
I hold a car license, boat license, motorbike license and I ride my bike to work through the streets of Adelaide. So far, I’ve only been run over by a truck….
The comments from Andy resonated with me. When teaching me to drive Dad used to say “give way to the right but watch out for the bastards on your left!” I use the same advice teaching other drivers.
no right of way at sea – reminded me of the anecdote that ends… “change your heading now to avoid a collision” – “no, YOU change heading, this is a lighthouse”
JS – interesting !
I think all cyclists will improve with mt. biking experience.
“Focus on at least 3 different spots along the road to the right and left. Search close, middle-distance and far.”
so true.
When I support new mt. bikers I advise them there are 3 fields of vision to get used to , – whats the trail turning into 20+m way (is it a steep climb/ swamp, rock garden coming up : what gear to change to ),
most importantly what is my current speed / inertia taking me directly into 3- 5m away : what body position to move toward,
and less importantly whats right infront of the bike, 1m away : any final adjustment in steering.
Processing this info becomes critical for mtb racing. Will help for all safe cycling also.
Simon, NZ.
great article, hopefully i can put the info into practice
“when passing junctions, look at the head of the driver that is approaching or has stopped. The head of the driver will naturally stop and centre upon you if you have been seen.”
Sorry, but this is nonsense. I used to do this 20+ years ago, until two drivers within the space of a few weeks looked directly at me and proceeded to pull out right into my path.
Cyclists should ALWAYS assume that every car potentially entering our roadspace is going to do the most stupid/homicidal thing possible, so for threats ahead of us we should moderate our speed to make sure we have escape options, while for threats behind us we should check to make sure that a driver has reduced his speed to ours so that we reduce the level of danger he poses.