“100 Car” Study:
A key to the development of effective crash countermeasures is an understanding of pre-crash causal and contributing factors. This research effort was initiated to provide an unprecedented level of detail concerning driver performance, behavior, environment, driving context and other factors that were associated with critical incidents, near crashes and crashes for 100 drivers across a period of one year. A primary goal was to provide vital exposure and pre-crash data necessary for understanding causes of crashes, supporting the development and refinement of crash avoidance countermeasures, and estimating the potential of these countermeasures to reduce crashes and their consequences.

Databases from the 100-Car study are available for public use on the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute website: http://www.vtti.vt.edu/.

• Feng Guo, Sheila G. Klauer, Michael T. McGill, and Thomas A. Dingus (September 2010) "Evaluating the Relationship Between Near-Crashes and Crashes: Can Near-Crashes Serve as a Surrogate Safety Metric for Crashes?" DOT HS 811 382
• Sheila G. Klauer, Feng Guo, Jeremy Sudweeks, and Thomas A. Dingus (May 2010) An Analysis of Driver Inattention Using a Case-Crossover Approachon 100-Car Data: Final Report DOT HS 811 334
• Shane B. McLaughlin, Jonathan M. Hankey, Thomas A. Dingus, and Sheila G. Klauer (June 2009) Development of an FCW Algorithm Evaluation Methodology With Evaluation of Three Alert Algorithms Final Report DOT HS 811 145
• Fitch, G.M.; Lee, S.E.; Klauer, S. G., Hankey, J.; Sudweeks, J., and Dingus, T. (2009) Analysis of Lane-Change Crashes and Near-CrashesDOT HS 811 147
• Klauer, S. G., Dingus, T. A., Neale, V. L., Sudweeks, J. D., and Ramsey, D. J.(2009) Comparing Real-World Behaviors of Drivers With High versus Low Rates of Crashes and Near-Crashes DOT HS 811 091
• McLaughlin,S.B., Hankey,J.M., Klauer, S.G., and Dingus, T.A.(2009) Contributing Factors to Run-Off-Road Crashes and Near-Crashes: Final Report DOT HS 811 079
• Lee, S. E., Llaneras E., Klauer S., Sudweeks J. (2007) Analyses of Rear-End Crashes and Near-Crashes in the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study to Support Rear-Signaling Countermeasure Development DOT HS 810 846
• Klauer, S. G., Dingus, T. A., Neale, V. L., Sudweeks, J., Ramsey, (2006) The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data DOT HS 810 594
• Dingus, T. A., Klauer, S. G., Neale, V. L., Petersen, A., Lee, S. E., Sudweeks, J., Perez, M. A., Hankey, J., Ramsey, D., Gupta, S., Bucher, C., Doerzaph, Z. R., Jermeland, J., and Knipling, R. R.(2006) The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study, Phase II - Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment DOT HS 810 593
• Vicki L. Neale, Thomas A. Dingus, Sheila G. Klauer, Jeremy Sudweeks, Michael Goodman (2005) An Overview of The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study and Findings
• Neale, V.L, Klauer, S.G., Knipling, R.R., Dingus, T.A., Holbrook, G.T., Petersen, A. The 100 Car Naturalistic Driving Study: Phase 1- Experimental Design (2002) DOT HS 809 536

To determine when and if a driver is performing safely an objective means to evaluate driver behavior (a metric) needs to be developed. NHTSA is engaged in efforts to be able to measure driver workload, performance and driver distraction. A better understanding of drivers’ capacities can lead to systems that are in line with their capabilities.

Driver Workload Metrics:
Today's drivers often deal with an onslaught of information that can divert their attention from their primary task of driving. Although some in-vehicle technologies are intended to improve safety, the use of multiple devices may distract the driver and actually jeopardize safety. When multi-tasking, drivers divert their attention from the road to glance at displays, operate controls, or listen and speak to a voice interface. These reports are the result of a cooperative study with industry to develop techniques to objectively evaluate the attentional demands of operating in-vehicle devices on various aspects of driver performance.

• L. Angell, J. Auflick, P.A. Austria, D. Kochhar, L. Tijerina, W. Biever, T. Diptiman, J. Hogsett, and S. Kiger (CAMP) (2006) Driver Workload Metrics Project: Final Report. DOT HS 810 635
• L. Angell, J. Auflick, P.A. Austria, D. Kochhar, L. Tijerina, W. Biever, T. Diptiman, J. Hogsett, and S. Kiger (CAMP) (2006). Driver Workload Metrics Project: Final Report - Appendices. DOT HS 810 635

Crash Warning Interface Metrics:

Advanced Crash Warning Technologies (ACWT) have the potential to improve safety by preventing crashes and mitigating their impacts by warning drivers of the need for corrective action. However, the question remains as to whether ACWT will produce the anticipated significant safety improvements. If the system is not designed to be compatible with driver capabilities, drivers may not fully understand or react appropriately to the crash alerts. It is also possible that their use will introduce unforeseen or unintended consequences, particularly if drivers do not understand how the system works Therefore, it is important to develop a set of test protocols and metrics to evaluate the relation of ACWT design to driver performance and behavior. The goal of this project is to derive such metrics.

Enhanced Rear Lighting and Signaling:

• Assessing the Attention-Getting Capability of Brake Signals: Evaluation of Candidate Enhanced Braking Signals and Features, June 2010, DOT HS 811 330 (Vehicle Safety Research Note)
• Development of a Simulation Model to Assess Effectiveness and Safety Benefits of Enhanced Rear Brake Light Countermeasures, June 2010, DOT HS 811 331 (Vehicle Safety Research Note)
• Llaneras, R.E., Nerauter, M.L., and Perez, M. (2010) Evaluation of Enhanced Brake Lights Using Surrogate Safety Metrics Task 2 & 3 Report Development of a Rear Signaling Model and Work Plan for Large Scale Field Evaluation DOT HS 811 329
• Wierwille, W.W., Llaneras, R.E., and Neurauter, M.L (2009) Evaluation of Enhanced Brake Lights Using Surrogate Safety Metrics - Task 1 Report: Further Characterization and Development of Rear Brake Light Signals DOT HS 811 127
• Study of Present-Day LED Brightness and Corresponding Rear Signaling Concepts (LED Optimization). DOT HS 811 128 (Vehicle Safety Research Note)
• Assessing the Attention-Gettingness of Brake Signals: Evaluation of Optimized Candidate Enhanced Braking Signals. DOT HS 811 129 (Vehicle Safety Research Note)
• Initial On-Road Evaluation of Candidate Rear Lighting Configurations. DOT HS 811 130 (Vehicle Safety Research Note)
• Lee, S. E., Llaneras E., Klauer S., Sudweeks J. (2007) Analyses of Rear-End Crashes and Near-Crashes in the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study to Support Rear-Signaling Countermeasure Development, DOT HS 810 846
• Wierwille W. W., Lee S. E., and DeHart  M. C. (2005). Enhanced Rear Lighting and Signaling Systems: Project Final Report Emphasizing Task 3 Results: Test Road Experiment on Imminent-Warning Rear Lighting and Signaling. DOT HS 809 864.
• Wierwille W. W., Lee S. E., and DeHart M. C.(2003). Enhanced Rear Lighting And Signaling Systems Task 2 Report: Testing and Optimization of High-Level and Stopped/Slowly-Moving Vehicle Rear Signaling Systems. DOT HS 809 597.
• Lee S. E., Wierwille W. W., and Klauer S. G. (2002). Enhanced Rear Lighting And Signaling Systems: Literature Review and Analyses of Alternative System Concepts. DOT HS 809 425.

Work on the Center High Mounted Stop Lamp:

• Allen K. (2009). The Effectiveness of Amber Rear Turn Signals for Reducing Rear Impacts. DOT HS 811 115.
• Sullivan J. M. and Flannagan M. J. (2008). The Influence of Rear Turn Signal Characteristics on Crash Risk. DOT HS 811 050 (Vehicle Safety Research Note)
   
• Sullivan J. M. and Flannagan M. J. (2008). The Influence of Rear Turn Signal Characteristics on Crash Risk. DOT HS 811 037. (Technical Report)

Turn signal Color:

• Kahane, C. Hertz, E. (1998). The Long-Term Effectiveness of Center High Mounted Stop Lamps in Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. DOT HS 808 696.

• (November 2011)  Motorcycle Conspicuity and The Effect of Auxiliary Forward Lighting, DOT HS 811 507
• (October 2011)  Effect of Daytime Running Lights On Left Turning Drivers’ Gap Acceptance, DOT HS 811 506
• (September 2011)  The Effects of Motor Vehicle Fleet Daytime Running Lights (DRL) on Motorcycle Conspicuity, DOT HS 811 504
• (September 2011)  Motorcycle Conspicuity and the Effect of Fleet DRL: Analysis of Two-Vehicle Fatal Crashes in Canada and the United States 2001-2007, DOT HS 811 505,
• Morgan C. (2001) The Effectiveness of Retroreflective Tape on Heavy Trailers. DOT HS 809 222.

Forward Vision:

NHTSA is investigating the effects of A pillar designs on crash risk as well as the safety value of Night vision systems.

Night Vision
Lighting system improvements to increase driver vision at night are limited by the concurrent need to avoid blinding other drivers and reducing their ability to see the road. Therefore other methods of increasing driver night vision (NV) capability have been developed that do not affect the vision of other drivers at night. NV systems based on infrared (IR) technology have been developed by some manufacturers who have offered them as options on their production vehicles. NHTSA is currently preparing to conduct a simulator study on IR NV warning systems to investigate the effectiveness of a NV system with automatic warning in eliciting appropriate driver avoidance behaviors to detect pedestrians and road hazards.

Reports:

• Llaneras E. (2006).  Exploratory Study of Early Adopters, Safety-Related Driving with Advanced Technologies - Final Report. DOT HS 809 972
• NightDriver Thermal Imaging Camera and HUD Development Program for Collision Avoidance Applications (2000). DOT-HS-809-163.

Rear Vision:

NHTSA is conducting research to measure the direct visibility from vehicles as well as the capabilities of vehicle technologies aimed to augment rear visibility.

• Elizabeth N. Mazzae, W. Riley Garrott, George H. Scott Baldwin, Adam Andrella, and Larry A. Smith (September 2011) Vehicle Rearview Image Field of View and Quality Measurement DOT HS 811 512.
• Mazzae E., Barickman F. (2009) Direct Rear Visibility of Passenger Cars: Laser-Based Measurement Development and Findings for Late Model Vehicles DOT HS 811 174.
• Mazzae E. and Garrott R. (2008). Light Vehicle Rear Visibility Assessment DOT HS 810 909.
• Mazzae E., Barickman F., Baldwin S. & Ranney T. . (2008). On-Road Study of Drivers' User of Rearview Video Systems (ORSDURVS) DOT HS 811 024.
• Mazzae E. and Garrott R. (2006). Experimental Evaluation of the Performance of Available Backover Prevention Technologies. DOT HS 810 634.

ACC, Parking Aids

Adaptive Cruise Control:

• Rear End Crash Avoidance System (RECAS) Algorithms and Alerting Strategies: Effects of Adaptive Cruise Control and Alert Modality on Driver Performance, Final Report (2008) DOT HS 810 981
• Automotive Collision Avoidance System Field Operational Test Report: Methodology and Results Appendices. DOT HS 809 901
• Automotive Collision Avoidance System Field Operational Test Report: Methodology and Results. DOT HS 809 900.
•  Automotive Collision Avoidance System Field Operational Test Final Program Report. DOT HS 809 866.
• Use of Advanced In-Vehicle Technology by Young and Older Early Adopters. Survey Results on Adaptive Cruise Control Systems.   (2008) DOT HS 810 917.
• Exploratory Study of Early Adopters, Safety-Related Driving with Advanced Technologies - Final Report. Llaneras E. (2006) DOT HS 809 972

Parking Aids/Backover Prevention:

Congressional Reports:

• Vehicle Backover Avoidance Technology Study - Summary
• Vehicle Backover Avoidance Technology Study (2006) - Full Report
• A Study of Commercial Motor Vehicle Electronics-Based Rear and Side Object Detection Systems; Prepared in Response to Section 6057: P.L. 102-240; December 19, 1991; Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. (1994). DOT HS 808 080.

Experimental Reports:

• Mazzae E., Barickman F. (2009) Direct Rear Visibility of Passenger Cars: Laser-Based Measurement Development and Findings for Late Model Vehicles DOT HS 811 174
• Mazzae E. and Garrott R. (2008). Light Vehicle Rear Visibility Assessment DOT HS 810 909
• Mazzae E., Barickman F., Baldwin S. & Ranney T. (2008). On-Road Study of Drivers' User of Rearview Video Systems (ORSDURVS) DOT HS 811 024.
• Mazzae, E. and , Garrott R. (2007). Experimental Evaluation of the Performance of Available Backover Prevention Technologies for Medium Straight Trucks DOT HS 810 865
• Mazzae E. and Garrott R. (2006). Experimental Evaluation of the Performance of Available Backover Prevention Technologies. DOT HS 810 634
• Mazzae E. and Garrott R. (2006). Evaluation of the Performance of Available Backover Prevention Technologies for Light Vehicles. The 20th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles Conference. Paper Number 07-0292
• Garrott, W. Riley and Mazzae, Elizabeth N., Hardware Evaluation of Heavy Truck Side and Rear Object Detection Systems. International Truck & Bus Meeting, Washington, DC, November, 1995, SAE Paper No. 95 10 10.
• Huey, R., Harpster, J., and Lerner, N. (1995). Field Measurement of Naturalistic Backing Behavior. DOT HS 808 532.

Survey Reports:

• Jenness, J. W., Lerner N. D., Mazor S., Osberg J. S., and Tefft B. C. (2007). Use of Advanced In-Vehicle Technology by Young and Older Early Adopters. Survey Results on Sensor-Based Backing Aid Systems and Rear-View Video Cameras DOT HS 810 828.
• Llaneras E. (2006). Exploratory Study of Early Adopters, Safety-Related Driving with Advanced Technologies - Final Report. DOT HS 809 972

Estimates and Case Files:

• Estimation Of Backover Fatalities
• Preliminary Cost-Benefit Analysis Of Ultrasonic And Camera Backup Systems (2006)
• Special Crash Investigation Case Files (Select Case Type: "NITS Backover")

Videos:

• Video footage of Experiment #1 with one- and three-year-old children (Children’s presence behind vehicle controlled by command)
• Video footage of Experiment #2 with one- and three-year-old children (Children allowed random playtime behind vehicle)

Public meeting to identify human factors research to support guidelines and possible standardization of collision warnings

• Presentations
• Human Factors Forum on Advanced Vehicle Safety Technologies: Summary & Proceedings. DOT HS 810 918
• Human Factors Design Guidance For Driver-Vehicle Interfaces. DOT HS 812 360

Distraction is anything that diverts the driver’s attention from the primary tasks of navigating the vehicle and responding to critical events.  To put it another way, a distraction is anything that takes your eyes off the road (visual distraction), your mind off the road (cognitive distraction), or your hands off the wheel (manual distraction).  So when you think about tasks that can be a driving distraction, you can see that they often fit into more than one category: eating is visual and manual, whereas using a navigation system is all three.  

There are two basic components of the distraction safety problem: The attentional demands of the distracting task and the frequency with which drivers choose to multitask.  Task demands relate to the amount of resources (visual, cognitive, manual) required to perform the task.  The other issue is exposure, which is how often drivers engage in the task.  Putting those two concepts together, even an easy task can be a bigger safety problem if the person does the task 50% of their driving time. 

Current and previous NHTSA research investigates how distraction impacts driver performance, and develops and evaluated vehicle-based countermeasures to minimize the negative effects. 

Agency Plans

• NHTSA Distracted Driving Research Plan, DOT HS 811 299, April 2010 

Research Reports

General Distraction Reports

• NHTSA Visual-Manual Driver Distraction Guidelines Test Procedures Documentation, DOT HS 812 739, August 2019
• Detection Response Task (DRT) Evaluation for Driver Distraction Measurement Application, DOT HS 812 077, November 2014
• Explanatory Material About the Definition of a Task Used in NHTSA’s Driver Distraction Guidelines And Task Examples, DOT HS 811 858, November 2013
• Text Reading and Text Input Assessment in Support of the NHTSA Visual-Manual Driver Distraction Guidelines, DOT HS 811 820, August 2013
• REPORT: Support for NHTSA’s Development Of Guidelines on Distraction-Potential From Visual-Manual Interfaces  DOT HS 811 782,  May 2013
• Radio Tuning Effects on Visual and Driving Performance Measures – Simulator and Test Track Studies DOT HS 811 781, May 2013
• Traffic Safety Facts: Comparing Distraction Mitigation Methods - Post-Drive and Real-Time, DOT HS 811 549, May 2013
• Traffic Safety Facts: Distraction Detection Algorithm Evaluation, DOT HS 811 548, May 2013
• Distraction Detection and Mitigation Through Driver Feedback, DOT HS 811 547A, May 2013
• Distraction Detection and Mitigation Through Driver Feedback, Appendices, DOT HS 811 547B, May 2013
• Support for NHTSA Visual-Manual Guidelines: Expert Review of the Visual Occlusion Method and How It Compares to Driver Eye-Glance Behavior, DOT HS 811 763, May 2013
• Driver Behavior During Visual-Manual Secondary Task Performance: Occlusion Method Versus Simulated Driving, March 2013, DOT HS 811 726
• Distraction Effects of In-Vehicle Tasks Requiring Number and Text Entry Using Auto Alliance’s Principle 2.1B Verification Procedure, February 2012, DOT HS 811 571
• Developing a Test to Measure Distraction Potential of In-Vehicle Information System Tasks in Production Vehicles, November 2011, DOT HS 811 463
• Distraction Effects of Manual Number and Text Entry While Driving, August 2011, DOT HS 811 510
• An Analysis of Driver Inattention Using a Case-Crossover Approach On 100-Car Data: Final Report, May 2010, DOT HS 811 334
• Measuring Distraction Potential of Operating In-Vehicle Devices, DOT HS 811 231, December 2009
• Driver Distraction Review of Current State-of-Knowledge - April 2008, DOT HS 810 787
• Driver Strategies for Engaging in Distracting Tasks Using In-Vehicle Technologies, March 2008, DOT HS 810 919
• Characteristics of Voice-Based Interfaces for In-Vehicle Systems and Their Effects on Driving Performance, March 2007  DOT HS 810 867
• The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data, DOT HS 810 594, April 2006
• The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study, Phase II - Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment, April 2006
• An Overview of The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study and Findings, June 2005
• Assessment of Truck Driver Distraction Problem and Research Needs, May 2005
• On-Road Study of Willingness to Engage in Distracting Tasks, March 2005
• Wireless Phone and AutoPC Related Technology: Driver Distraction and Use Effects on the Road, November 2004, DOT HS 809 752
• The Effects of Voice Technology on Test Track Driving Performance: Implications for Driver Distraction, December 2003
• Volume I: Findings--National Survey of Distracted and Drowsy Driving Attitudes and Behavior, DOT HS 809 566, April 2002
• In Vehicle Inventory of Technologies: Human Factors Design Characteristics, DOT HS 810 457, February 2002

Workload

• Driver Workload Metrics Project: Final Report November 2006
• Driver Workload Metrics Project: Final Report - Appendices November 2006

Wireless Communication

• Traffic Safety Facts - Research Note: An Examination of Driver Distraction as Recorded in NHTSA Databases, September 2009 DOT HS 811 216
• Research Note: Driver Electronic Device Use in 2016, DOT HS 812 426, June 2017
• Examination of the Distraction Effects of Wireless Phone Interfaces Using the National Advanced Driving Simulator - Final Report on a Freeway Study, June 2005
• Hand-Held or Hands-free? The Effects of Wireless Phone Interface Type On Phone Task Performance and Driver Preference, June 2005
• A Bibliography of Research Related to the Use of Wireless Communications Devices From Vehicles, February 2005
• Wireless Phone and AutoPC Related Technology:  Driver Distraction and Use Effects on the Road November 2004, DOT HS 809 752
• Examination of the Distraction Effects of Wireless Phone Interfaces Using the National Advanced Driving Simulator - Preliminary Report on a Freeway Scenario Study, April 2004
• NHTSA Report: Driver Distraction with Wireless Telecommunications and Route Guidance Systems, July 2000
• NHTSA Wireless Communications Report: An Investigation of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles, November 1997

Research Programs:

• Safety Vehicles Using Adaptive Interface Technology - SAVE-IT

Public Forums / Presentations

• DOT Announcement of Technical Workshop - March 23, 2012: Visual-Manual NHTSA Driver Distraction Guidelines for In-Vehicle Electronic Devices [Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0053]
• DOT Distracted Driving Summit - September 2009 [Federal Register]
• Driver Distraction: Understanding the Problem, Identifying Solutions - January 2005
• Summary of NHTSA Driver Distraction Expert Working Group Meetings - October 2000
• Public Meeting and Internet Forum 2000 (Web Forum) [Federal Register]

Additional Information

• Distracted Driving
• Investigation and Prosecution of Distracted Driving Cases

Vehicle technologies to reduce teen’s unsafe behaviors:
This project will explore one promising approach to reduce novice teen driver crashes: using advanced in-vehicle technologies to monitor novice teen driver’s behavior. Such technologies can be integrated into a device to monitor and reduce unsafe behaviors through several interface approaches, including:

• Vehicle Adaptations—Automatically prohibiting behaviors detected, e.g., safety belt interlocks;
• In-Vehicle Feedback—Providing drivers with real time information, e.g., speeding in curves;
• Reporting—Recording behaviors to transmit them at a later time to parents, insurance companies, driver educators, etc.

The goal is to provide a knowledge base about teen driver behaviors and support for the development of recommendations for the capabilities, operational concepts, and interfaces that would lead to effective, acceptable, and widely deployed technologies.

Related Reports:

• An Exploration of Vehicle-Based Monitoring of Novice Teen Drivers: Final Report DOT HS 811 333, August 2010
• Summary report: Workshop on vehicle Technologies to aid teen drivers. (2006) DOT HS 810 612
• Traffic Safety Facts 2015 Data: Young Drivers
• Teen Drivers

Enhanced Seatbelt Reminder Systems:

With the goal of increasing safety belt use, automobile manufacturers have designed a variety of reminder systems to alert drivers and front seat passengers that their belt is not being worn.  These warning extend beyond the FMVSS 108 requirement and vary in implementation (e.g., presence and type of auditory or visual characteristics) and duration. 

The goal of the enhanced seat belt reminder system project is to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of these systems on seat belt use.  The evaluation will look at the effectiveness and acceptability of these systems, including specific system characteristics.  The project will also include a separate evaluation of teen drivers and their acceptance of such systems

Reports:

• Effectiveness and Acceptance of Enhanced Seat Belt Reminder Systems: Characteristics of Optimal Reminder Systems by Freedman, M., Lerner, N., Zador, P., Singer,J., and Levi, S., Performed by Westat, Sponsored by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington D.C., February 2009, DOT HS 811 097.
   
• The Effectiveness of Enhanced Seat Belt Reminder Systems. Observational Field Data Collection Methodology and Findings by Freedman, M., Levi, S., Zador, P., Lopdell, J., and Bergeron, E., Performed by Westat, Sponsored by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington D.C., December 2007, DOT HS 810 844.
• Acceptability and Potential Effectiveness of Enhanced Seat Belt Reminder System Features by Lerner, N., Singer, J., Huey, R., and Jenness, J., Performed by Westat, Sponsored by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington D.C., December 2007, DOT HS 810 848.

Related Reports:

• Seat Belt Use in 2017 — Overall Results
• 2004 Motor Vehicle Occupant Protection Facts
• Increasing Teen Safety Belt Use: A Program and Literature Review

Child Seat Use:

Child safety seats are a form of protection most effective for young children in motor vehicles. Common misuses such as loose harnesses, improper attachment, and incorrect recline angles contribute to the difficulty with installing child safety seats. An observational pilot study was conducted to examine child safety seat errors during novice installation.

Our current study focuses on novice installation in cars with the LATCH system. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the design of the CSS and how current vehicles and child seats could be enhanced to be even more effective. Identifying the common error points during child seat installation can lead us to understand the underlying factors that contribute to these errors

Reports:

• Klinich, Manary, et al (2012) Labels, Instructions and Features of Convertible Child RestraintSystems (CRS): Evaluating Their Effects on CRS Installation Errors, DOT HS 811 627, July 2012
• Klinich, Manary, et al (2012) Effects of Vehicle Features on CRS Installation Errors DOT HS 811 626, July 2012
• Tsai, Y.D., Perel, M. (2009) Drivers' Mistakes When Installing Child Seats DOT HS 811 234
• Decina L. E., Lococo K. H., and Doyle C. T. (2006). Child Restraint Use Survey: LATCH Use and Misuse. DOT HS 810 679.
• Decina L.E. and Lococo K. H and Block A. W. (2005).  Misuse of Child Restraints: Results Of A Workshop To Review Field Data Results. DOT HS 809 851
• Decina L.E. and Lococo K. H. (2004). Misuse of Child Restraints. DOT HS 809 671.

Traffic Safety Facts - Fuel Economy Driver Interfaces: Usability Study of Display Component Concepts DOT HS 811 320, May 2010  

Traffic Safety Facts - Fuel Economy Driver Interfaces: Driving Simulator Study of Component Concepts DOT HS 811 321, May 2010

Fuel Economy Driver Interfaces: Develop Interface Recommendations Report on Task 3 (Technical Report) DOT HS 811 319, May 2010

Fuel Economy Driver Interfaces: Design Range and Driver Opinions - Report on Task 1 and Task 2, DOT HS 811 092, August 2009