Optimizing timing for emergency vehicle approaching warnings

Weibull, Kajsa; Lidestam, Björn; Prytz, Erik · 2024 · Crossref

DOI: 10.14311/app.2024.51.0125

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This paper addresses the optimization of timing for Emergency Vehicle Approaching (EVA) warnings, an Intelligent Transport System service designed to alert civilian drivers of nearby emergency vehicles. The research is motivated by the safety risks associated with emergency vehicle interactions, which involve high-speed driving and complex maneuvers. While EVA warnings help drivers prepare for move-over maneuvers, previous studies relied on distance-based triggers that failed to account for vehicle speed, potentially resulting in insufficient reaction time. Furthermore, warnings presented too early risk being perceived as false alarms or irrelevant if the emergency vehicle changes route. The study aims to determine the optimal warning timing that balances sufficient preparation time with reliability. To investigate this, the authors analyzed post-survey data from five distinct driving simulator studies involving a total of 216 participants. The studies varied in scenario complexity, including highway driving, offramp navigation, and urban intersections. Participants were exposed to EVA warnings with different lead times: 12 seconds (Study 4), 15 seconds (Studies 1 and 3), and 20 seconds (Study 2). Study 5 involved a 14-second warning timing. Participants rated their experience using Likert scales regarding warning usefulness, trust, stress, and perceived improvement in driving behavior. Statistical analyses, including ANOVA and Tukey HSD post hoc tests, were used to compare responses across the different timing groups. The results indicate that warning timing significantly influences driver perception. Drivers who received warnings 20 seconds before the emergency vehicle interaction reported significantly greater improvement in driving behavior compared to those receiving warnings 12 or 15 seconds prior. The 20-second group also found the warnings significantly more useful than the 12-second group. Trust in the warning system was significantly lower for the 12-second group compared to the 15- and 20-second groups. No significant differences were found regarding stress levels or willingness to use the system in personal vehicles across groups. In Study 5, 60% of participants felt the 14-second timing was sufficient, while 35% preferred an earlier warning. The study concludes that an EVA warning timing of 15–20 seconds is appropriate for allowing drivers to execute safe move-over maneuvers. The findings highlight that time-based warnings, which account for vehicle speed, are superior to distance-based triggers, which can yield inconsistent reaction times depending on velocity. The authors recommend that future EVA systems prioritize timing based on the estimated time to arrival rather than static distance thresholds to maximize driver trust and behavioral compliance.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-09; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• feedback modes
• emergency work zone conspicuity