Project Manager

David Jorgensen, Transport and Main Roads Qld

Prepared by

Paul Roberts, Kathy Boddington and Libby Rodwell

ARRB Group

Published in January 2014.

© Austroads Ltd 2014.

 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Impact of Roadside Advertising on Road Safety

About Austroads

Austroads’ purpose is to:

 promote improved Australian and New Zealand transport outcomes

 provide expert technical input to national policy development on road and road
transport issues
 promote improved practice and capability by road agencies
 promote consistency in road and road agency operations.

Austroads membership comprises the six state and two territory road transport and
traffic authorities, the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and Transport, the
Australian Local Government Association, and NZ Transport Agency. Austroads is governed
by a Board consisting of the chief executive officer (or an alternative senior executive officer)
of each of its eleven member organisations:

Roads and Maritime Services New South Wales

Roads Corporation Victoria

Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland

Main Roads Western Australia

Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure South Australia

Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources Tasmania

Department of Transport Northern Territory

Department of Territory and Municipal Services Australian Capital Territory

Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure and Transport

Australian Local Government Association

New Zealand Transport Agency.

2|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................- 6 -

1.1. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................- 6 -
1.2. PURPOSE AND OUTLINE OF THE PROJECT............................................................................- 6 -

2. METHOD..............................................................................................................................- 7 -

3. ROADSIDE ADVERTISING DEVICES.............................................................................- 8 -

3.1. NON-CHANGEABLE ADVERTISING DEVICES.......................................................................- 8 -

3.2. CHANGEABLE ADVERTISING DEVICES..............................................................................- 11 -
3.2.1. MECHANICALLY-CHANGED............................................................................................- 11 -
3.2.2. ELECTRONICALLY-CHANGED..........................................................................................- 11 -
3.3. ILLUMINATION..................................................................................................................- 14 -

4. GENERAL HUMAN FACTORS CONSIDERATIONS...................................................- 16 -

4.1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................- 16 -
4.2. THE NATURE OF ATTENTION............................................................................................- 16 -
4.2.1. AUTOMATIC CAPTURE OF ATTENTION...........................................................................- 16 -
4.2.2. ATTENTIONAL BIASES....................................................................................................- 17 -
4.2.3. LIMITED CAPACITY OF ATTENTION...............................................................................- 18 -
4.3. PERCEPTUAL ISSUES.........................................................................................................- 18 -
4.4. SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................- 19 -

5. REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON THE SAFETY IMPACT OF ROADSIDE ADVERTISING.-

20 -

5.1. DISTRACTION AS A SAFETY ISSUE....................................................................................- 20 -

5.2. ROADSIDE ADVERTISING AS A SAFETY ISSUE..................................................................- 21 -
5.3. SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................- 22 -

6. BEST PRACTICE PRINCIPLES.......................................................................................- 23 -

6.1. POTENTIAL FOR CAPTURING ATTENTION INVOLUNTARILY..............................................- 24 -

6.1.1. MOVEMENT....................................................................................................................- 24 -
6.1.2. DWELL TIME..................................................................................................................- 24 -
6.1.3. TRANSITION TIME..........................................................................................................- 24 -
6.1.4. LUMINANCE....................................................................................................................- 24 -

3|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

6.1.5. CONTENT........................................................................................................................- 25 -
6.2. MENTAL WORKLOAD........................................................................................................- 25 -
6.2.1. VISUAL CLUTTER...........................................................................................................- 25 -
6.2.2. DRIVING DEMAND..........................................................................................................- 25 -
6.2.3. CONTENT........................................................................................................................- 25 -
6.3. GAZE DIRECTION..............................................................................................................- 26 -
6.3.1. OFFSET...........................................................................................................................- 26 -
6.3.2. ELEVATION.....................................................................................................................- 26 -
6.4. ROAD ENVIRONMENT........................................................................................................- 26 -
6.4.1. CRASH RATE ASSESSMENT............................................................................................- 26 -
6.4.2. RISK ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................................- 26 -

7. CURRENT GUIDELINES.................................................................................................- 27 -

8. GAP ANALYSIS................................................................................................................- 28 -

9. REFERENCES....................................................................................................................- 29 -

4|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

TABLES
Table 3.1. Conventional billboard and poster formats used in outdoor advertising...............- 9 -
Table 7.1. Key jurisdiction and/or planning authority and industry guidance documents for
roadside advertising..............................................................................................................- 27 -

FIGURES
Figure 3.1. Examples of a freestanding billboard (top), wall-mounted billboard (left) and
bridge-mounted billboard (right)_______________________________________________- 9 -
Figure 3.2: Examples of a mobile billboard (left) and a billboard displayed as part of a bus
shelter (right)_____________________________________________________________- 10 -
Figure 3.3. Examples of digital billboards located within the boundaries of (left) or visible
from (right) state-controlled roads_____________________________________________- 12 -
Figure 3.4. Example of a variable message sign displaying advertising content__________- 13 -
Figure 3.5. Example of an externally illuminated advertising device (left) and an internally
illuminated advertising device (right)__________________________________________- 15 -
Figure 6.1. Austroads Safe Systems diagram____________________________________- 23 -

5|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Australia’s new National Road Safety Strategy notes that, ‘Driving is a complex task
and sources of driver distraction, both within the vehicle and in the general road environment,
have increased substantially in recent years’ (National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020, p.
83). While it is recognised that inattentive driving is a contributor to road crashes and that
roadside advertising may be one of the contributors to such inattention, criteria for the
management of roadside advertising devices vary considerably between jurisdictions.

In a number of jurisdictions, responsibility for the criteria resides with the planning
agency, while in others it is a road agency function. A number of road agencies have
sponsored projects to better inform themselves about the safety implications of outdoor
advertising, which also has contributed to variations in jurisdictional practice. Given that the
income derived from outdoor advertising can be significant, particularly on high volume
corridors, the state practice guidelines are able to be ‘played off’ against each other by the
outdoor advertising industry.

1.2. Purpose and outline of the project

For these reasons there is considerable interest in coming to a definitive understanding
of the risks associated with roadside advertising in its various guises so that informed
guidelines for the regulation of such advertising can be formulated.

This project is designed to facilitate the harmonisation of agency criteria for the
management of roadside advertising devices and promote improved and consistent practice by
road agencies. Most importantly, it will assist road agencies to understand and address a
significant emerging safety issue – the use of digital display technology for outdoor
advertising signs.

There are four major tasks in this project:

review the human factors elements relevant to understanding the possible safety
implications of roadside advertising

undertake a literature review of existing research investigating the distraction

potential of roadside advertising

document the guidelines, practices (and underpinning rationale) adopted by road

and planning agencies for the management of roadside advertising

develop ‘best practice’ guiding principles and guidelines for the placement of
outdoor advertising signs.

6|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

7|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

2. METHOD
The research method included extensive desktop research, including internet, library
and database searches to locate all relevant material (English language only).

This process was conducted with the aid of the M.G. Lay Library. The M.G. Lay
Library contains the most comprehensive and up-to-date collection of international literature
on land transport issues (particularly roads) in Australia, and is one of the leading technical
libraries in its field in the world.

The library is staffed by a team of full time professionally qualified staff. The ARRB
Group library has close contact with major libraries both in Australia and overseas, for
example the Library at the UK Transport Research Laboratory. Inter-library loans are easily
arranged, or document abstracts in other libraries can be accessed via on-line communications.
The Australian Transport Index (ATRI), the International Transport Research Documentation
database (ITRD), and the Transportation Research Information Services (TRIS) were all
searched for relevant information.

ATRI is a database produced by ARRB Group. The Australian Transport Index

provides a record of significant material published about roads and land transport in Australia,
the United Kingdom, the USA, Europe and Asia. Many of the records include an abstract. The
Australian Transport Index is available online and on CD-ROM through Informit, the
electronic publishing arm of RMIT University. ATRI contains over 143 000 records. ITRD is
managed by the OECD Division of Transport. ITRD covers published technical literature from
around the world as well as details of current research projects.

The database contains information from 40 major technical institutes from 24 countries
and more than 350 000 references including an informative abstract. TRIS is a database
prepared by the US Transportation Research Board and covers all modes of transport. It
includes publications and descriptions of research projects and contains over 450 000
references.

8|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

3. ROADSIDE ADVERTISING DEVICES

Roadside advertising devices are defined in this report as all advertising signs and
devices which are visible to road users (intentionally or otherwise) and are used to display
advertising copy that promotes a product, service, event or any other activity for an
organisation that would derive a benefit from the display of the advertising. For the purpose of
this project, the focus is on advertising devices which are located within or are visible from the
boundaries of state-controlled roads1.

Definitions and terminology used to describe different types of roadside advertising

devices can vary considerably, both internationally and across Australian states. The sections
below provide a comprehensive summary of the most commonly used devices in Australia
that are likely to impact on road safety, detailing industry standards where appropriate. The
categories adopted here reflect common industry classification schemes.

Within the summary, devices have been primarily categorised as non-changeable or

changeable. Another important characteristic used to distinguish between devices is
luminance. Both non-changeable and changeable devices can be illuminated, as discussed in
greater detail in Section 3.3.

3.1. Non-changeable Advertising Devices

Non-changeable devices display a single advertisement copy that can only be changed
manually on-site. The content of the advertising copy remains static (i.e. constant) for the
duration of the display.

Conventional billboards and posters

These devices refer to large advertising signs, greater than 4 m2, with messages that
incorporate words, symbols or pictorial displays and are printed on paper or alternative
materials such as computer generated woven polyester panels or ‘skins’. As illustrated in
Figure 3.1, the advertising copy may be mounted on freestanding structures or attached to
building walls, roofs and overhead transport infrastructure (e.g. bridges and overpasses). The
messages displayed on these conventional devices do not change unless manually replaced on-
site.

A variety of sizes are used; the 24 Sheet poster, or traditional ‘Billboard’, is the most
frequently used format in outdoor advertising. The messages may be illuminated through
external power sources, although this does not usually achieve the same perceived brightness
as the digital billboards described in Section 3.2.2. Table 3.1 provides an overview of the
different formats of poster used in roadside advertising in Australia.

9|Page
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Figure 3.1. Examples of a freestanding billboard (top), wall-mounted billboard (left) and bridge-
mounted billboard (right)

Table 3.1. Conventional billboard and poster formats used in outdoor advertising

10 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Other contexts in which conventional billboard or poster formats are displayed are
described below and illustrated in Figure 3.2.
Mobile/portable billboards
Mobile or portable billboards generally consist of posters mounted on small
commercial vehicles or trailers, sometimes illuminated and with two-sided displays. The
vehicle remains motionless while the advertisement is displayed.

Public transport shelter and street furniture poster displays

Posters are commonly displayed as an integral part of freestanding structures such as
bus stop shelters or on street furniture in business and entertainment areas of city centres. They
are usually illuminated and typical dimensions are 1.8 m x 1.2 m or 1.5 m x 1.0 m.

Figure 3.2: Examples of a mobile billboard (left) and a billboard displayed as part of a bus shelter
(right)
Other
There are numerous other miscellaneous formats of non-changeable advertising devices
that are commonly used on the road network, although often prohibited on some roads such as
freeways and motorways. These include but are not limited to:
 local business, community and event signs
 real estate signs
 tourist information signs
 banners and flags
 paintings or murals on building walls
 building wrap and hoarding
 transit displays (i.e. on moving vehicles such as buses, trams and taxis)
 aerial displays.

11 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

3.2. Changeable Advertising Devices

Changeable advertising devices have the capability to mechanically or electronically
change the advertising message being displayed automatically or remotely i.e. without the
requirement for human intervention on-site. This enables more than one advertisement to be
presented, either through the rotation of static images at specified intervals or the use of
dynamic displays.

3.2.1. Mechanically-changed
These devices allow the presentation of two or more static messages that are rotated
mechanically (i.e. by a motor) through a pre-determined sequence at regular intervals, while
the supporting structure remains stationary. There are motionless periods in between the
presentation of different messages and the number of messages that can be displayed is
restricted. Unlike electronic devices, the change between advertising messages cannot be
instantaneous.

Trivision
In trivision devices, messages are printed onto a series of adjacent vertical prisms
(usually three-sided), which when aligned display a single advertising image. The prisms are
rotated in unison, typically every four to ten seconds, to show one of three messages. They are
also referred to as ‘tri-action’, ‘tri-panel’ or ‘changing slat’ signs. These devices are typically 3
m x 6 m or 12 m x 3 m in dimension.

Multi-advertisement scrolling
Also referred to as rolling devices, these devices have multiple advertisements printed
onto a looped canvas or connected to form a single scroll. The scroll is usually wound around
a vertical axis using a motorised spool, so that the adverts are sequentially presented in the
front display panel. These are often smaller signs installed at street level or incorporated into
public transport infrastructure such as bus stops. The advertisements are often illuminated or
backlit.

3.2.2. Electronically-changed
These devices use digital technology to display bright, high quality electronic images
which are uploaded and changed using a computer and modem via a secure network. Digital
billboards feature LED (light emitting diode) technology which enables luminance to be
controlled and adjusted automatically. Within Australia, Victoria was the first state to permit
these types of signs on its road network.

Digital billboards

Similar to conventional billboards, digital billboards are generally large signs with
dimensions greater than 4 m2 displaying messages which incorporate text, symbols and other
pictorial or graphical images.

12 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

13 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Digital billboards can utilise static electronic displays or non-static electronic displays.
They are also known by a large variety of terms including electronic billboards, electronic
message displays, dynamic message signs, commercial electronic variable message signs,
video billboards and moving or animated electronic signs.

The two display types are described below.

 Static electronic displays contain static images only which are presented successively
but do not contain or imply motion within the message itself. The device is
programmed to alternate the static images at short intervals. Dwell time, transition time
and luminance can all be controlled and changed electronically. Different approaches
can be taken to the transition between messages e.g. scroll, dissolve, fade or fly-in. In
the USA, typical dwell times for digital billboards range between four and ten seconds
(with restrictions on proximity to entry and exit ramps), with transition times varying
between instantaneous to four seconds (OMA 2010). These times are comparable to
standards in other countries such as Canada and the UK. Some Australian states
however currently utilise longer dwell times, as detailed in Section 7.

 Non-static or dynamic electronic displays present moving images, or images with

features that give the impression of motion and change dynamically similar to a video.
This includes animation, flashing, scrolling, intermittent or full-motion video and
special effects. These displays are not commonly permitted in many countries,
including the UK and the majority of jurisdictions in Australia and America.

Figure 3.3. Examples of digital billboards located within the boundaries of (left) or visible from (right)
state-controlled roads

14 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Variable message signs (VMS)

VMS are primarily used by road authorities with the purpose to present messages to
motorists to facilitate more effective management of traffic and to promote road safety. VMS
have the capability to present text and/or graphical displays.

In Australia, traffic VMS are generally static electronic text-only displays and are most
commonly used to display a single message for a significant period of time. Road agencies
usually prescribe detailed specifications regarding the format and content of these signs,
including size of text, use of colour and permitted words. Messages may be tactical (e.g.
incident warnings) or advisory (e.g. safe driving advice or journey time information). Under
normal traffic conditions, when there is no need for a safety-critical instruction, the road
authority may authorise use of the sign to display other information which may have relevance
for both traffic management and advertising; for example, details of upcoming special events.

VMS can also be used solely for commercial advertising purposes. These are often in
the form of portable devices located on lower speed roads and adjacent to business premises,
as illustrated in Figure 3.4.

Figure 3.4. Example of a variable message sign displaying advertising content

15 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

3.3. Illumination
It is important that advertising devices are illuminated appropriately for the ambient
light conditions to ensure there is no unacceptable glare (making it difficult to read the sign
because of excessive external light sources) or reflectance (making the sign itself so bright that
it is distracting) that may result in safety issues for road users or that will produce
unacceptable light spillage to the local environment. Advertising devices can be classified
according to the following definitions:

Non-illuminated devices do not have specifically designed internal or external means of

illumination, although they may be indirectly illuminated by street lighting or other local light
sources. They may be non-reflective, retro-reflective or partially retro-reflective.

Illuminated devices have specifically designed internal and/or external means of

illumination of the entire advertising copy or a portion of the device. Both changeable and
non-changeable devices can be illuminated.

Externally illuminated devices have an external light source which is used to illuminate
the advertising copy (see Figure 3.6). For example, through the use of fluorescent and/or
incandescent bulbs. They may also be referred to as floodlit signs, and most commonly consist
of conventional billboards and posters.

Internally illuminated devices have internal lighting to illuminate the advertising copy,
see Figure 3.6. This includes digital billboards which use LED technology, as well as devices
which contain lights or illuminated tubes arranged as an advertisement such as neon signs. The
lighting can be adjusted, either automatically using sensors or manually, to match the
appropriate luminance for ambient light conditions.

Static illumination refers to illuminated advertising devices where the illumination of

the entire device is constant in form, intensity and colour; for example, an externally-lit
conventional billboard.

Non-static illumination refers to an illuminated advertising device where the

illumination of the entire device is not constant in form, intensity and colour. For example,
animated and video displays or advertisements incorporating flashing, scintillating or blinking
lights which emit light intermittently.

16 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Figure 3.5. Example of an externally illuminated advertising device (left) and an internally illuminated
advertising device (right)

17 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

4. GENERAL HUMAN FACTORS CONSIDERATIONS

4.1. Introduction
Driving a motor vehicle is a complex task that requires the ability to divide one’s
attention between numerous competing tasks. Drivers must simultaneously maintain an
appropriate and legal speed, change lanes, navigate traffic and intersections and read and
interpret signs of various kinds. Furthermore, drivers are often challenged by conditions that
can change almost instantaneously. Some of these changing conditions can be critical to the
driving task while others are not. When they are not they are therefore potential distractions
from the driving task. Such distractions can result from factors either internal or external to the
vehicle.

This review is focussed on distraction from an external source; advertising billboards.

The fundamental logic of roadside advertising is to attract attention to something that is not
part of the driving task. In order to contribute to the current evaluation of whether this might
have an impact on driving safety, the following sections review the nature of attention and
some perceptual issues that are likely to be important to the driving task.

4.2. The Nature of Attention

There are two key aspects of attention that are important for understanding the problem
of distraction from advertising billboards. One is the automatic capture of attention and the
other is the limited capacity of human attention.

4.2.1. Automatic Capture of Attention

One concern with digital billboards in particular is that drivers will deliberately attend
to them at the expense of the driving task purely to see what is displayed in the next transition
(the Zeigarnik Effect; see e.g. Watchel 20092). Contrary to this concern however, it has been
found that drivers typically modulate their off-road glances, not looking away from the
forward roadway for more than 1.5 seconds at a time (Dingus et al. 1989). Despite this, there
is concern that such self-regulation could be involuntarily disrupted by the attention-grabbing
properties of roadside advertising.

While the notion of attention is to some extent synonymous with voluntary, goal-
directed activity, nevertheless it appears that attention may sometimes be captured
involuntarily by certain events. For example, most people would have had the experience of
sudden movement in their peripheral vision resulting in a seemingly automatic orienting in
that direction.

The question for the current purpose is, when and to what extent this is likely to occur.
If one is walking alone on a dark street in a bad neighbourhood then the answer is likely to be;
frequently and dramatically. But what about when it is not important, or not desirable, to

18 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

display such vigilance? What happens when a digital billboard changes or animates in
peripheral vision when driving? Can we avoid being distracted by such stimuli?

In recent years researchers have been investigating to what extent this attentional
capture is outside of voluntary control and what kinds of stimuli give rise to it. This interest
has been driven by purely theoretical considerations, but obviously has important implications
for understanding the distraction potential of various kinds of roadside advertising. While
there is still debate over some of the theoretical subtleties in this research, there are some clear
findings of relevance to the issue of the distraction potential of roadside advertising.

While some early research suggested that the appearance of new objects in the visual
field was the key to predicting attentional capture (e.g. Yantis & Hillstrom 1994), other
research suggested that luminance changes were necessary to capture attention (Theeuwes
1995).

More recent research appears to suggest that the presence of unique sensory transients
may be the key to predicting attentional capture (Hollingworth, Simons & Franconeri 2010).
That is, in order to capture attention there must be a salient change in the environment that
creates a new event in the observer’s sensory system. This could be luminance changes, which
could arise from the appearance of a new object, or motion in a previously immobile object.

With respect to the issue of the extent to which the capture of attention is involuntary;
the research is similarly complicated. While some research appears to show that involuntary
attentional capture by environmental events does occur, other research suggests that this
attentional capture can be suppressed (Yantis & Jonides 1990). The key seems to be that this
suppression is more likely if the primary task is very demanding and requires a focussed
attentional state, but that such suppression becomes less likely as the primary task becomes
less demanding, requiring a less focussed attentional state (Lamy & Tsal 1999; Ruz &
Lupianez 2002). The results of Young et al. (2009) showing poorer recall of road signs
(suggesting greater attention to roadside advertisements) are consistent with this and are
discussed in more detail below.

4.2.2. Attentional Biases

It is well known that attention may be controlled by the emotionality of information.
For example, the sound of someone crying will likely attract our attention. This is not
surprising as emotional content is likely to signify that the information is important from a
survival perspective. Less well appreciated within road safety is the fact that personality
factors appear to dictate how attention to emotional material is controlled. For example, in a
seminal study, MacLeod, Matthews and Tata (1986) demonstrated that clinically anxious
subjects directed attention towards threatening material, at the cost of attention to other
material, while non-anxious subjects directed attention away from threatening material.

Most et al. (2005) provided another demonstration of how the emotionality of material
may distract attention away from critical target material. They presented a series of
photographs and asked participants to respond to a particular target. When the target was

19 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

preceded by a photograph with a negative emotional content, participants more often missed
the target than when it was preceded by a neutral photograph.

20 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

This ‘blindness’ was evident up to 800 msec after the presentation of the emotional
photograph. Participants who scored low on harm avoidance were more easily able to modify
their cognitive processing to reduce the induced blindness when given appropriate instructions
than were participants who scored high on harm avoidance.

These considerations suggest that billboards with emotional content have a greater
capacity to attract and hold the attention of individuals for whom that emotional content is
significant, and this may result in decrements in driver performance.

4.2.3. Limited Capacity of Attention

Once attention is captured or is strategically focussed, the processing of the material
within the focus of attention competes with other ongoing for cognitive resources. It is well
understood that processing resources may have limited capacity (Wickens 2002). This can be
seen very clearly in everyday tasks such as trying to follow a news item on television while
having a phone conversation; comprehension of one or the other is likely to suffer.

However, drivers can drive quite successfully most of the time while having a
conversation. This is because large chunks of the task of driving are relatively automated
and/or do not draw on the same processing resources. When this is not the case driving
performance is apt to suffer.

For example, because driving relies so heavily on visual information processing,

driving and comprehension performance are better when instructions are presented verbally
while driving than if they are presented visually (Parkes & Coleman 1990). For the same
reason, billboards always have the potential to interfere with driving performance.

Even if billboards do not deflect gaze direction away from the forward roadway, to the
extent that they have captured attention they are likely to reduce the processing capacity
available for other visual information processing required for driving. Furthermore, as Strayer
and Johnston (2001) have shown in the case of mobile phone conversations, some driving-
irrelevant stimuli can sometimes be so engaging that essentially all spare capacity is recruited
to the secondary task, with serious consequences for driving performance. A billboard that
was this engaging would undoubtedly be a serious safety risk for driving.

4.3. Perceptual Issues

Thus far consideration has been given to how the capture of attention and the
consumption of processing capacity by roadside advertising might impact on driving
performance. Another way in which roadside advertising is likely to impact on driving
performance is via inappropriate visual fixation, usually away from the forward roadway. That
is, even if cognitive capacity is not being consumed to such a degree as to impair driving
performance in itself, the fact that a driver is not looking in the correct direction to safely
negotiate the road and other traffic may result in an incident, especially if conditions change
suddenly.

21 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

In a key finding in this area, Klauer et al. (2006), in an analysis of the 100-Car
Naturalistic Driving Study, found that glances away from the forward roadway for more than
two seconds doubled the near-crash and crash risk compared to baseline. This result is
averaged across all road types and traffic conditions. One can imagine that in challenging road
environments in heavy traffic this risk would be much greater. At 70 km/h a two second
glance away from the forward roadway equates to just under 40 m of travel down the
roadway.

In certain road environments and in heavy traffic it becomes quite likely that conditions
in the forward roadway will have changed over this distance and hence that a driver not
looking ahead will not be able to respond appropriately to these changes.

4.4. Summary
Most drivers, in most driving situations, most of the time, probably possess substantial
spare cognitive capacity for the processing of driving-irrelevant information. Given this, and
given the exploratory nature of human cognition and the likelihood that drivers attempt to
maintain an optimal level of arousal via task difficulty homeostasis (Fuller 2005), it may be
very difficult to prevent drivers from directing attention away from the driving task (Trick &
Enns 2009).

This in itself is not necessarily undesirable as it may serve to maintain an appropriate

level of arousal, thus combating the negative effects of monotony (e.g. Oron-Gilad, Ronen &
Shinar 2008). Indeed, in a recent Austroads (2011) study it was found that roadside signage
that was designed to engage drivers in some mental activity, improved driver alertness.

The key question is whether there are situations or individuals where processing is
recruited or interfered with by driving-irrelevant material to the detriment of driving
performance. The considerations reviewed above suggest that the answer to this is in the
affirmative.

22 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

5. REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON THE SAFETY IMPACT OF

ROADSIDE ADVERTISING
The consideration of relevant human factors issues, outlined above, suggests that
roadside advertising, especially billboards that exhibit movement and/or luminance changes,
that are in an already cluttered road environment and that are especially salient and engaging,
could reasonably be expected to have a detrimental effect on driving performance. This is
likely to be especially true for inexperienced drivers and older drivers.

However, this analysis does not directly answer the question of whether roadside
advertising is actually distracting in any real driving environments, to such an extent that it
leads to reduced safety and contributes to crashes. In order to evaluate this issue further the
review below first discusses the evidence for the involvement of distraction in crashes and
then the evidence for the involvement of roadside advertising in distraction and crashes.

5.1. Distraction as a Safety Issue

Studies based on crash reports suggest that perhaps 30% of all crashes involve driver
distraction (Wang, Knipling & Goodman 1996) and in around 30% of those the distraction is
from outside the vehicle (Stutts et al. 2001). However this source of data is likely to
underestimate the contribution of distraction to crashes as drivers are unlikely to admit to such
a cause and police may be unwilling to assign distraction as a cause without eyewitness
testimony.

In one of the most compelling studies to date, Klauer et al. (2006) analysed the
consequences of driver inattention using data from the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study.
While brief glances away from the forward roadway for the purpose of scanning the driving
environment were found to actually decrease the crash risk, glances of two seconds or more
doubled the crash risk. In addition, this risk was further increased for certain demanding traffic
environments such as intersections and high density traffic.

Some of the riskiest kinds of inattentive driving that contributed to crashes and near
crashes in the Klauer et al. (2006) study originated from either drowsiness or in-vehicle
distractions. Importantly, looking at an external object exhibited the second highest significant
odds ratio of all distractions, (reaching for a moving object produced the highest significant
odds ratio) with a driver 3.7 times more likely to have a crash or near crash when looking at an
external object.

However this kind of distraction accounted for less than 1% of all crashes and near
crashes in the study. Thus while looking at an external object appears to be quite risky
behaviour when it is engaged in, it is not a frequent cause of crashes overall.

23 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

5.2. Roadside Advertising as a Safety Issue

While the Klauer et al. (2006) study does not identify which external objects drivers
were looking at when they were so looking, a number of studies have attempted to investigate
whether distraction from roadside advertising specifically, might contribute to crashes.

Crundall et al. (2006) showed participants in their study video clips taken from the
driver’s perspective and asked them to either scan for hazards only or to look for
advertisements also. Advertisements were either at street level or raised 3 m above street level.
The core finding from this study was that street level advertisements attracted more attention
than raised advertisements when drivers were instructed to look for hazards. Crundall et al.
(2006) suggest that this occurs because street level advertisements fall within the normal
window within which drivers habitually scan for hazards and that advertisements within this
window are inappropriately capturing attention.

Of course this study is somewhat removed from the experience of actually driving,
simply requiring, as it does, that drivers passively watch a video (although note that Crundall
et al. (2006) discuss why there is good reason to believe that their methodology in this study
appropriately taps the key aspects of the driving task).

This concern does not arise in the study by Lee, McElheny and Gibbons (2007). In this
naturalistic study drivers drove an instrumented vehicle around a 50 mile loop in Cleveland
Ohio. They found that drivers took longer glances at digital billboards than at conventional
billboards and baseline sites. While there has been some criticism of their methodology and
conclusions (Wachtel 2009) it would be agreed by all parties that Lee, McElheny and
Gibbon’s results show that in real world driving, digital billboards can be more distracting
than conventional billboards.

Young et al. (2009) conducted a simulator study to investigate the effect of

conventional roadside advertising on driver attention and performance. Drivers experienced
urban, rural and motorway environments, with and without billboards. The presence of
billboards was found to impair lateral control. Similarly, Edquist et al. (2011) found increased
delay in the time taken to change lanes in response to signs in a simulator study was delayed
by the presence of billboards, although not to a greater extent for changeable digital billboards.

The negative impact of roadside advertising on lateral control has also been reported by
Bendak and Al-Saleh (2010) in their simulator study. While the frequency of ‘crashes’ in
Young et al.’s study was too low for statistical analysis, it is worth noting that there were three
times as many crashes in the presence of billboards compared to driving conditions where
billboards were absent. Interestingly, they also found that participants displayed significantly
poorer recall of traffic control in the motorway and rural driving conditions, compared to
urban driving conditions, suggesting that participants were spending more time processing
advertisements in these less demanding driving scenarios, at the expense of attending to
information that is important for safe driving.

24 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

25 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

In recent times, very few studies have attempted to investigate the impact of roadside
advertising on actual crash rates. Smiley et al. (2005) investigated the impact of video
advertising in Toronto on driving performance in a series of studies, including a before – after
installation comparison of crash rates. While Smiley et al. found no statistically significant
effect on crash rates overall, they note that sample sizes were not large enough to detect any
effect that might accrue from the presence of the billboards. The descriptive statistics in this
study however, are consistent with a relative increase in collisions, of all the various types, at
the approaches to the video advertising sites.

There are a number of much older studies investigating the effect of roadside
advertising on crash rates, but of course these do not deal with modern digital technology. In a
review of these older studies, Wallace (2003) concluded that, while many are correlational,
thus making it difficult to unambiguously attribute causality, nevertheless, ‘the case for
arguing that visual ‘clutter’ at junctions (associated with billboards and signs) can lead to
unsafe driving is very strong.

5.3. Summary
There is compelling evidence that distraction is a major contributor to crashes.
However, studies providing direct evidence that roadside advertising plays a significant role in
these distraction based crashes are currently not available. The studies that have been
conducted show convincingly that roadside advertising is distracting and that it may lead to
poorer vehicle control. However, the evidence is presently only suggestive of, although clearly
consistent with, the notion that this in turn results in crashes.

It is also worth noting, on the basis of Klauer et al.’s (2006) results, that while looking
at an external object increased the crash risk by nearly four times, less than 1% of all crashes
and near crashes were from this source of distraction. A substantial proportion of these
external objects would not have been advertising signs. Thus, while it is not possible to tell
from the reported results, it is reasonable to conclude that far less than 1% of all crashes and
near crashes involved distraction from roadside advertising.

26 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

6. BEST PRACTICE PRINCIPLES

Australian and New Zealand jurisdictions are now firmly committed to the Safe
Systems approach to road safety (see Figure 6.1). This approach, which is derived from the
Swedish Vision Zero and Dutch, Sustainable Safety approaches to road safety, has at its core
the recognition that road users are fallible and will make mistakes, even if alert and intending
to comply with the road rules. As a result, vehicles and road infrastructure need to be designed
to discourage errors and protect against the consequences of errors when they do occur.
Within this philosophical context it is difficult to see how adding roadside infrastructure that
has the potential, however minor, to encourage driver error (through distraction) could be
justified.

27 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Figure 6.1. Austroads Safe Systems diagram

28 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

However, as noted earlier, the human factors issues are not straightforward when
attempting to be definitive about what is and is not desirable from a distraction perspective.
Firstly, in some environments, some level of appropriate roadside ‘distraction’ may be
desirable. Secondly, it seems very likely that if drivers are not completely engaged by the
driving environment they will spontaneously engage in other ‘distracting’ activities. Finally, it
appears that in many cases drivers regulate their engagement with potentially distracting
stimuli so that its distraction potential is controlled to some extent.

This does not mean that roadside advertising is of no concern, but it does mean that
there are situations where it is unlikely to compromise the integrity of the Safe System. The
key is to specify the principles that are important in determining those situations.

Based on the human factors issues and the specific research outlined above, the
following principles should be considered when formulating guidelines for the approval and
placement of roadside advertising.

6.1. Potential for Capturing Attention Involuntarily

While the function of roadside advertising is clearly to capture attention, this is
undesirable from a safety perspective if it results in attention being diverted involuntarily from
the central task of driving. In order to minimise the possibility that such automatic attentional
capture occurs, the following principles should be considered.

6.1.1. Movement
The potential for sudden movement and change in the environment to capture attention
in a way that is outside volition suggests that digital billboards should not display moving or
flashing images (or lighting) or change in a way that produces an impression of movement.

6.1.2. Dwell Time

For similar reasons, the length of time for which an image is displayed should be as
long as possible to reduce the frequency of those sudden environmental changes that can
capture attention involuntarily.

6.1.3. Transition Time

Again, the transition time between images should be instantaneous in order to reduce
the number of sudden environmental changes that could capture attention.

6.1.4. Luminance
Signs that have luminance levels that are high relative to other objects in the
environment are likely to gain preferential attention and be particularly good at capturing
attention when they change. As a result, digital signs should have luminance levels no greater
than any other sign and preferably lower than non-changeable signs.

29 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

6.1.5. Content
As some content, particularly emotional content, can capture attention automatically, it
is undesirable for such content to be used in roadside advertising. For a similar reason, content
that mimics the content of traffic signs would also be undesirable.

6.2. Mental Workload

Because humans have a limited capacity for processing information simultaneously
there is the potential for the processing of roadside advertising to interfere with the processing
of information critical for safe driving. In order to minimise the possibility that attention is
consumed to an unsafe degree the following principles should be considered.

6.2.1. Visual Clutter

A highly cluttered visual field makes it difficult to locate and prioritise processing of
driving-critical information. Therefore, roadside advertising should not be placed in locations
where there are already a number of existing signs and distracting material visible to a driver.
The subjective impression that the driving environment is already cluttered is likely to be a
good indication that further signage should be avoided.

6.2.2. Driving Demand

Aspects of the driving environment other than visual clutter are likely to increase
mental workload and decrease capacity to process task-irrelevant material such as roadside
advertising. In particular, intersections, decision-making points and merge points are likely to
be demanding of attention. This suggests that in these and similarly demanding driving
environments roadside advertising should not be visible.

6.2.3. Content
The greater the quantity of information in an advertising display, the longer it will take
to process and hence the longer a driver’s eyes will be off the road. This suggests that the
informational load of the advertising message should be minimised as much as possible so that
the content can be processed as rapidly as possible. This will minimise the time during which
drivers’ eyes are off the road.

Similarly, advertising messages should not be displayed to create a meaningful

sequence across transitions as this is likely to create an excessive quantity of information to be
processed. In addition it is undesirable for more than one sign to be visible at a time as this
will also increase the amount of information to be processed.

30 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

6.3. Gaze Direction

Safe driving requires that drivers are looking in the appropriate direction to maximise
their information gain about critical aspects of the driving environment. Clearly if they are
looking in a direction that is well outside the visual envelope of normal driving-relevant
information there is the risk that such relevant information will be missed. As a result it is
important that roadside advertising that attracts attention is only located in positions which
obviate this possibility.

This consideration suggests that roadside advertising is best located in the line of sight
of the forward roadway, provided that it does not obscure or background critical other signage,
signals or infrastructure. The following principles are suggested.

6.3.1. Offset
Roadside advertising should not be substantially offset from the travel lane it is desired
to be viewed from as this could move gaze direction away from the forward roadway.

6.3.2. Elevation
Roadside advertising should not be elevated to the extent that it draws gaze away from
the forward roadway.

6.4. Road Environment

A final consideration is the existing safety profile of the road environment in question.
For example, a road with an existing high crash rate would probably be a poor choice for
installation of roadside advertising. By the same token, a road rated as risky by any of the road
assessment methods (e.g. AusRAP) would also be an environment in which roadside
advertising probably should not be introduced. These considerations give rise to the following
principles.

6.4.1. Crash Rate Assessment

Black spot locations should not be sites for roadside advertising, especially where crash
types are likely to be exacerbated by distraction (e.g. rear end).

6.4.2. Risk Assessment

Roads assessed as having an unacceptable risk profile should not be sites for roadside
advertising.

31 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

7. CURRENT GUIDELINES
Table 7.1. Key jurisdiction and/or planning authority and industry guidance documents for roadside
advertising

32 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

8. GAP ANALYSIS
While many of the best practice principles identified are covered in at least some of the
road authorities’ existing guidelines, a number of issues are not yet considered. In particular,
the following issues typically are not covered:
 specification of appropriate dwell and transition times relative to road speed limit or
speed environment as well as the sight distance to the device
 restrictions in relation to the use of:
- special effects for transition between messages e.g. ‘fade’, ‘zoom’ or ‘fly-in’
effects
- message sequencing e.g. the maximum number of sequential messages
permitted and/or the minimum and maximum time duration for the entire
sequence
- emotive content – although this may be covered more comprehensively in
general guidelines for advertising content, it is not typically being considered in
relation to the impact on road safety
- audio, interactive or personalised electronic message displays

 specification of maximum and minimum duration times for display of non-static

messages i.e. animated or video displays (if permitted)
 restrictions on quantity of information permitted within an advertising message
depending on the road speed limit or speed environment as well as the size of the
device e.g. the maximum number of informational elements
 additional specifications regarding luminance, particularly in relation to electronic
devices:
- default display luminance or display settings in event of failure
- requirements for change in luminance in response to changing light conditions
- luminance contrast and contrast ratio
- particularly in relation to changeable devices i.e. digital billboards, specification
of:
- maximum dimensions
- maximum height
- minimum spacing between changeable devices
- specification of maximum required viewing times and minimum sight distances
of advertising devices relative to road speed limit or speed environment

33 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

9. REFERENCES
AASHTO 1989. Roadside design guide, American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, USA.
Austroads 2011, Innovative road safety measures to address fatigue: review of
research and results from a treatment trial, AP-R379/11, Austroads, Sydney, New South
Wales, Australia.
Australian Transport Council 2009, National road safety action plan: 2009 and 2010,
ATSB, Canberra, ACT.
Bendak, S & Al-Saleh, K 2010, ‘The role of roadside advertising signs in distracting
drivers’, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 40, no.3, pp. 233-36.
Chattington, M, Reed, N, Basacik, D, Flint, A & Parkes, A 2009, Investigating driver
distraction: the effects of video and static advertising: a driving simulator study, report 409,
TRL, Crowthorne, UK.
Crundall, D, Van Loon, E & Underwood, G 2006, ‘Attraction and distraction of
attention with roadside advertisements’, Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 38, no. 4, pp.
671-7.
Department of Planning NSW 2007, Transport corridor outdoor advertising and
signage guidelines: assessing development applications under SEPP 64, Department of
Planning, Sydney, NSW.
Department of Planning and Community Development Vic 2007, Advisory committee
reviewing advertising sign provisions in Victorian planning schemes: issues and options
paper, Advisory Committee, DPCD, Melbourne, Vic.
Dingus, T.A., Antin, J.F., Hulse, M.C., and Wierwille, W.W. 1989, Attentional
Demand Requirements of an Automobile Moving-Map Navigation System, Transportation
Research, 23A ( 4), 301-315
Edquist, J, Horberry, T, Hosking, S & Johnston, I 2011, ‘Effects of advertising
billboards during simulated driving’, Applied Ergonomics, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 619-26.
Edquist, J, Hosking, S, Horberry, T & Johnston, I, n.d., ‘Investigating the effects of
visual clutter in road environments’.
Franconeri, SL & Simons, DJ 2003, ‘Moving and looming stimuli capture attention’,
Perception & Psychophysics, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 999-1010.
Fuller, R 2005, ‘Towards a general theory of driver behaviour’, Accident Analysis &
Prevention, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 461-72.
Greist-Bousquet, S., Schiffman, N. (1992). The effect of Task interruption and closure
on perceived duration. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30(1), 9-11).
Ho, G, Scialfa, CT, Caird, JK & Graw, T 2001, ‘Visual search for traffic signs: the
effects of clutter, luminance, and aging’, Human Factors, vol. 43, no. 2, pp.194-207.

34 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Hollingworth, A, Simons, DJ & Franconeri, SL 2010, ‘New objects do not capture

attention without a sensory transient’, Attention, Perception and Psychophysics, vol. 72, no. 5,
pp. 1298-1310.
Horberry, T, Regan, MA, & Edquist, J 2009, ‘Driver distraction from roadside
advertising: the clash of road safety evidence, highway authority guidelines and commercial
advertising pressure’, powerpoint A51‐P, International conference on driver distraction and
inattention, 1st, 2009, Gothenburg, Sweden, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg,
Sweden.
Klauer, SG, Dingus, TA, Neale, VL, Sudweeks, JD, & Ramsey, DJ 2006, The impact of
driver inattention on near-crash/crash risk: an analysis using the 100-car Naturalistic Driving
Study data, report DOT HS 810 594, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
Washington, DC, USA.
Lamy, D & Tsal, Y1999, ‘A salient distractor does not disrupt conjunction search’,
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 93-8.
Lee, SE, McElheny, MJ & Gibbons, R 2007, Driver performance and digital
billboards: final report prepared for the Foundation for Outdoor Advertising Research and
Education, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, Center for Automotive Safety Research,
Blacksburg, VA, USA.
MacLeod, C, Mathews, A & Tata, P 1986, ‘Attentional bias in emotional disorders’,
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 15-20.
MacLeod, C & Rutherford, EM 1992, ‘Anxiety and the selective processing of
emotional information: mediating roles of awareness, trait and state variables, and personal
relevance of stimulus materials’, Behaviour Research and Therapy, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 479–91.
McPhee, LC, Scialfa, CT, Dennis, WM, Ho, G & Caird, JK 2004, ‘Age differences in
visual search for traffic signs during a simulated conversation’, Human Factors, vol. 46, no. 4,
pp. 674-85.
Most, SB, Chun, MM, Widders, DM & Zald, DH 2005, ‘Attentional rubbernecking:
cognitive control and personality in emotion-induced blindness’, Psychonomic Bulletin &
Review, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 654-61.
National Road Safety Strategy 2011 – 2020, Australian Transport Council, Canberra,
Australia.
NZ Transport Agency 2011, Traffic control devices manual: part 3: advertising signs,
NZTA, Wellington, NZ.
Oron-Gilad, T, Ronen, A & Shinar, D 2008, ‘Alertness maintaining tasks (AMTs)
while driving’, Accident Analysis and Prevention, vol. 40, no.3, pp.851-60.
Outdoor Media Association 2010, Discussion paper: digital billboards and road
safety: an analysis of current policy and research findings, OMA, Sydney, NSW.
Parkes, AM & Coleman N 1990, ‘Route guidance systems: a comparison of methods of
presenting directional information to the driver’, in Lovesey, EJ (ed), Contemporary
ergonomics, Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 480-85.

35 | P a g e
 Impact of roadside advertising on road safety

Roads and Traffic Authority 2011, RTA supplement to the Austroads guide to road
design: part 2 (2006): design considerations, RTA/Pub. 11.091, RTA NSW, Sydney, NSW.
Rosenholtz, R, Li, Y & Nakano, L 2007, ‘Measuring visual clutter’, Journal of Vision,
vol. 7 no. 2, pp. 1-22.
Ruz, M & Lupianez, J 2002, ‘A review of attentional capture: on its automaticity and
sensitivity to endogenous control’, Psicológica, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 283-309.
Shinar, D, Meir, M & Ben-Shoham, I 1998, ‘How automatic is manual gear shifting?’
Human Factors, vol. 40, no. 4, pp.647–54.
Smiley, A, Persaud, B, Bahar, G, Mollett, C, Lyon, C., Smahel, T & Kelman WL 2005,
‘Traffic safety evaluation of video advertising signs’, Transportation Research Record, no.
1937, pp. 105-112.
Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. 2001, Driven to distraction: Dual-task studies of
simulated driving and onversing on a cellular phone Psychological Science, 12, 462-466
Stutts, JC, Reinfurt, DW, Staplin, L, Rodgman, EA, 2001, The role of driver distraction
in traffic crashes, AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, Washington, DC, USA.
Theeuwes, J, 1995, ‘Abrupt luminance change pops out; abrupt colour changes does
not’, Perception & Psychophysics, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 637-44.
Trick, LM & Enns, JT 2009, ‘A two-dimensional framework for understanding the role
of attentional selection in driving’, in Castro, C (ed), Human factors of visual and cognitive
performance in driving, CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, pp. 63-73.
Wachtel, J 2009, Research for AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways task 256:
safety impacts of the emerging digital display technology for outdoor advertising signs,
National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Washington, DC, USA.
Wallace, B 2003, External-to-vehicle driver distraction, Transport Research Planning
Group, Edinburgh, UK.
Wang, JS, Knipling, RR & Goodman, MJ 1996, ‘The role of driver inattention in
crashes: new statistics from the 1995 crashworthiness data system’, Association for the
advancement of automotive medicine conference, 40th, 1996, Vancouver, Canada, AAAM,
Des Plaines, Illinois, USA, pp. 377-92.
Wickens, CD 2002, ‘Multiple resources and performance prediction’, Theoretical
Issues in Ergonomics Science, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 159-77.
Yantis, S & Hillstrom, AP 1994, ‘Stimulus-driven attentional capture: evidence from
equiluminant visual objects’, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 95-107.
Yantis, S & Jonides, J 1990, ‘Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: voluntary
versus automatic allocation’, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and
Performance, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 121-34.
Young, MS, Mahfoud, JM, Stanton, NA, Salmon, PM, Jenkins, DP & Walker, GH
2009, ‘Conflicts of interest: the implications of roadside advertising for driver attention’.

36 | P a g e