追撞事故為道路上常見的交通事故類型，隨著地點的不同，影響追撞事故的因素與嚴重程度也有所差異，基於高行車速率與高事故機率的考量，一般研究常以路段作為追撞課題的研究對象；但是在號誌化路口中，由於加入交控設施的影響，更增加對駕駛者判斷決策的干擾，其潛在危險性頗高。
本研究藉由彙整時相轉換所產生的問題以及追撞事故分析的文獻，來針對影響時相轉換下路口追撞事故的因素，進行分析與探討，期藉此能提供該情境事故問題的特徵，以及各類因素對事故的影響情形，作為交通工程改善的參考，進而達到減少號誌化路口追撞事故發生的最終目的。
本研究從事故資料以及駕駛模擬系統兩方面，分別進行該一課題在巨觀與微觀兩方面的探討。利用民國94年高雄市號誌化路口交通事故資料，搭配羅吉斯迴歸模式進行影響追撞事故顯著因素的篩選，以瞭解高雄市追撞事故的特性；然後整合事故特性以及文獻回顧的資料，挑選影響駕駛通過路口決策和追撞發生的因子(前車煞車、黃燈始亮離路口距離、綠燈行車倒數計時器、速限)，利用實驗設計的理論進行系統化地實驗，降低干擾和誤差，模擬時相轉換下所可能遭遇的情境，蒐集駕駛者的反應和操作行為，來作為時相轉換下路口追撞事故風險與危險行為的評估。
道路交通事故資料顯示，追撞事故為號誌化路口常見的事故類型。30歲以下的駕駛者、有快慢車道分隔、三岔路口以及四岔路口的情境，有較高機率的追撞事故。
模擬實驗結果發現，前車煞車急緩與綠燈行車倒數資訊對於追撞風險有顯著的影響，主要受到前車煞車因子的影響，在前車緊急煞車時，有較高的追撞風險；而有綠燈行車倒數資訊時，則有較低的風險。而在危險行為(闖紅燈、黃燈加速超過速限、緊急煞車)分析則顯示，在離路口距離較近時，有較高的機率發生緊急煞車的行為，而有綠燈倒數資訊時，緊急煞車發生的機率較低。

Rear-end accidents were one of common accidents. With different locations, the causes and severity of them would be different. Considering that higher speed resulted in higher risk, previous study often took rear-end accidents on the sections as subjects. But at signalized intersections, the change of signals would interfere in drivers’ decisions. It resulted in higher risk.
The study utilized the problems of change interval and the researches of rear-end accidents. To improved the rear-end accidents at signalized intersections, the study analyzed their characteristics and factors that influenced the accidents.
The study analyzed the accidents in both macroscopic and microscopic aspects by accident data and driving simulator. Taking 2005 Kaohsuing traffic accidents data at signalized intersections as subjects, it analyzed the chacacteristics of rear-end accidents in Kaohsiung by using logistical regression models. In simulating experiments, the study evaluated the factors (braking behavior, the distances from stop line when the yellow light started, speed limit, green light countdown displays) that affected the decisions and accidents. With design of experiments, it could identify the effect of factors and decrease the noise effectively.
The accident data revealed that rear-end accidents were one of the common accidents at signalized intersections. With age below 30 years old, separation, three-leg and four-leg intersections, the probabilities of rear-end accidents were highter.
The simulations showed that braking of front vehicle and green light countdown display influenced the risk of rear-end accidents significantly. The major factor was braking of front vehicle. With normal-braking and green light countdown display, the probilities of accidents would be lower. In analyses of dangerious behavior (running red, accelerating ove speed limit, abrupt stop) during change interval, the probabilities of abrupt stop decreased with green light countdown display. The fewer distances from the stop line, the higher probabilities of abrupt stop.

1. 王文麟，交通工程學-理論與實務，第四版，民國91年。
2. 王濟川、郭志剛，Logistic迴歸模型：方法及應用，五南圖書出版公司，民國92年。
3. 交通部運輸研究所，台灣地區公路容量名詞與調查方法之研究，民國88年。
4. 交通部運輸研究所，2001年台灣地區公路容量手冊，民國90年。
5. 交通部運輸研究所，號誌交叉口變換時段駕駛行為調查與分析之研究，民國91年。
6. 交通部運輸研究所，標誌標線號誌設置基準之人因工程初探，民國91年。
7. 交通部，道路交通標誌標線號誌設置規則，民國92年。
8. 交通部，交通工程手冊，幼獅文化事業股份有限公司，民93年。
9. 交通部，高速公路及快速公路交通管制規則，民國95年。取自http://law.moj.gov.tw/Scripts/Query4A.asp?FullDoc=all&Fcode=K0040019
10. 交通部統計處，92年台閩地區A1類和A2類汽車肇事事故特性比較，民國93年。
11. 交通部運輸研究所，道路交通事故當事人特性分析之研究，民國93年。
12. 交通部運輸研究所，運輸資料分析，第二十八期，民國94年。
13. 交通部運輸研究所，應用駕駛模擬系統開發智慧型運輸系統實驗平臺之軟硬體規劃設計(1/4)，民國94年。
14. 交通部運輸研究所，先進安全車輛系統發展之推動與研究(I)，民國94年。
15. 李友仁，應用汽車駕駛模擬系統於道路交通事故成因檢討之研究，成功大學交通管理科學研究所碩士論文，民國94年。
16. 李樑堅，建立微觀車流模擬模式以發展交通適應性號誌控制邏輯之研究，成功大學交通管理科學研究所博士論文，民國82年。
17. 何佳娟，微觀汽、機車混合車流模式之研究，交通大學運輸科技與管理學研究所碩士論文，民90年。
18. 周義華、周榮昌、李銷桂，「時相轉換下猶豫區間之研究」，運輸學刊，第十一卷，第一期，頁73-90，民國88年。
19. 林佐鼎、陳志和，「都市地區肇事嚴重程度預測模式之研究」，第八屆運輸安全研討會論文集，頁319-328，民國89年。
20. 吳宗修、詹善斌，「號誌倒數計時器對駕駛行為影響之研究」，93年道路交通安全與執法國際研討會論文集，頁455-467，民國93年。
21. 吳權威，3ds max6動畫製作實務，網奕資訊科技股份有限公司，民國93年。
22. 陳威杉，快速道路號誌路口變換時段下之駕駛行為研究，國立交通大學交通運輸研究所碩士論文，民國87年。
23. 陳高村，道路交通事故處理與鑑定，第二版，民國93年。
24. 黃慶旭，利用簡易型駕駛模擬器探討警示系統對駕駛者的影響，國立清華大學工業工程與工程管理研究所碩士論文，民國91年。
25. 傅耀南，以混合車流模擬方法設計單一交叉路口號誌時制之研究，碩士論文，國立臺灣大學土木工程研究所，民國77年。
26. 曾倦賢，劉嘉福、李光偉、陳銘旭，國內用路人跟車行為潛在風險性分析與前方防撞系統發展之關聯性，93年道路交通安全與執法國際研討會論文集，頁163-177，民國93年。
27. 詹子儀、謝清祿、謝欽城，「花東地區交通事故特性與嚴重程度模式建立之研究」，交通學報，第五卷，第一期，頁53-78，民國94年。
28. 劉正旭，號誌化交叉路口黃燈對駕駛者決策行為之研究，國立交通大學土木工程研究所碩士論文，民國82年。
29. 劉霈、楊仁維、蔡欣翰，「路口交通事故成因分析方法之比較研究」，中華民國運輸學會第20屆論文研討會光碟，民國94年。
30. 魏健宏、謝昀霖、林士敏，「駕駛人分心肇事原因之模擬」，94年道路交通安全與執法研討會論文集，頁165-179，民國94年。
31. 羅文輝，駕駛人行駛猶豫區之研究，以心裡-物理模型為例，國立台灣大學土木工程研究所碩士論文，民國85年。
32. Al-Deek, H. M. et al., “Impact of Traffic Diversion with ATIS on Travelers’ Safety,” Computers ind. Engng, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp.547-558, 1998.
33. AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highway and Streets 2001, 4th edition, 2001.
34. Campbell, K. L. et al., Detailed Planning for Research on Making a Significant Improvement in Highway Safety (Study 2-Safety), NCHRP Project 20-58[2], Transportation Research Board, 2003.
35. Curry, R.C., Greenberg, J.A., and Kiefer, R.J., NADS versus CAMP Closed-Course Comparison Examining "Last Second" Braking and Steering Maneuvers Under Various Kinematic Conditions. Performed by Crash Avoidance Metrics Partnership (CAMP), DOT HS 809 925, Contract DTFH61-01-X-00014, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC, 2005.
36. Eby, D. W., Molnar, L. J., Shope, J. T., “Driving Decision Workbook,” Social and behavioral analysis division university of Michigan Transportation Research institute, 2000.
37. Fell, J. C., “A Motor Vehicle Accident Causal System：the Human Element,” Human Factor, Vol18 (1), pp86-94, 1976.
38. ISO 15623, Transport Information and Control Systems－Forward Vehicle Collision Warning Systems－Performance Requirements and Test Procedures, 2002.
39. Kikuchi, S. and Riegner, J. R., “Methodology to Analyze Driver Decision Environment During Signal Change Interval: Application of Fuzzy Set Theory,” Transportation Research Record 1368, 1992.
40. Kuge, N. et al., “A Study on the Causes of Rear-End Collision Based on an Analysis of Driver Behavior,” JSAE review, Vol. 16, Issue 1, pp.55-60, 1995.
41. Knodler, M. A., Noyce, D. A., Kacir, K. C., and Brehmer, C. L., “Evaluation of Traffic Signal Displays for Protected-Permissive Left-Turn Control Using Driving Simulator Technology,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, pp.270-278, 2005.
42. Lee, J. D., McGehee, D. V., Brown, T. L., and Reyes, M. L., “Collision Warning Timing, Driver Distraction, and Driver Response to Imminent Rear-End Collision in a High-Fidelity Driving Simulator,” Human Factors, Vol. 44, No.2, pp.314-334, 2002.
43. Lerner, N., Steinberg, G. V. and Hanscom, F. R., Development of Countermeasures for Driver Maneuver Errors, Publication No. FHWA-RD-00-022, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1999.
44. Lerner, N., Llaneras, R., Smiley, A., and Hanscom, F., Comprehensive Human Factors Guidelines for Road System, NCHRP Project 17-18[08], Transportation Research Board, 2005.
45. Lora, W. V. and Shinar, D., “Effects of Uncertainty, Transmission Type, Driver Age and Gender on Brake Reaction and Movement Time,” Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 33, Issue 1, pp. 117-128, 2002.
46. Mahalel, D. and Prashker, J. N. “A Behavioral Approach to Risk Estimation of Rear-End Collisions at Signalized Intersections,” Transportation Research Record 1114, pp.92-102, 1987.
47. Minderhoud, M. M., “Extended Time-to-Collision Measures for Road Traffic Safety Assessment,” Accident Analysis and Prevention 33, pp.89-97, 2001.
48. Montgomery, D. C., Design and Analysis of Experiments, 5th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, 黎正中、陳源樹譯，高立圖書（92）, 2001.
49. Moon, Y. J., Lee, J., and Park, T., “System Integration and Field Tests for Developing In-Vehicle Dilemma Zone Warning System,” Transportation Research Record, No. 1826, Paper No. 03-3081, 2003.
50. Moon, Y. J. and Coleman III, F., “Dynamic Dilemma Zone Based on Driver Behavior and Car-Following Model at Highway-Rail Intersections,” Transportation research part B 37, pp.323-344, 2003.
51. Pant, P. D. et al., Field Testing and Implementation of Dilemma Zone Protection and Signal Coordination at Closely-Spaced High-Speed Intersections, Report No. FHWA/OH-2005/006, 2005.
52. Roess, R.P. et al., Traffic Engineering, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, pp.442-444, 1998.
53. Roess, R.P. et al., Traffic Engineering, 3nd Edition, Prentice Hall, pp.515-517, 2004.
54. Sarvi, M. et al., “A Study on Freeway Ramp Merging Phenomena in Congested Traffic Simulation by Traffic Simulation Combined with Driving Simulator,” 8th World Congress on ITS, 2001.
55. Shinya, D. et al., “Modeling of Driver Anxiety during Signal Change Intervals,” Transportation research record 1399, Transportation research board, pp.27-35, 1993.
56. SAE J2399, Adaptive Cruise Control Operating Characteristics and User Interface, 2002.
57. SAE J2400, Forward Collision Warnning System: Operating Characteristics and User Interface Requirements Information Reprot (Draft), 2002.
58. Suzuki, K., Nakamura, H., and Yamaguchi, S., “Analysis on Driver's Risky Behaviors at Signalized Intersections during Inter-Green Periods,” 11th World Congress on ITS, 2004.
59. Sultan, B. and McDonald, M. “Assessing the Safety Benefit of Automatic Collision Avoidance Systems”. Proc. of the 18th Int. Technical Conf. on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (18th ESV), 2003.
60. Sultan, B., Brackstone, M., and McDonald, M., “Drivers’ Use of Deceleration and Acceleration Information in Car-Following Process,” Transportation Research Record 1883, pp.31-39, 2004.
61. Transportation Research Board, Comprehensive Human Factors Guidelines for Road Systems, 2005.
62. Yan, X., Radwan, E., and Abdel-Aty, M., “Characteristics of Rear-End Accidents at Signalized Intersections Using Multiple Logistic Regression Model,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp.983-995, 2005.