Organisation: University of Surrey
Date of Publication: July 2022
Uploaded to Knowledge Centre: 12 October 2022
The transition to daylight saving time (DST) may cause people to take dangerous risks when driving, according to this research from the University of Surrey.
Researchers found that, after DST is introduced, drivers’ behaviours are riskier, and their reaction time and ability to read situations are compromised.
The project team, from the University of Surrey and the University of Padova in Italy, investigated if disruption to circadian rhythms (the internal process that regulates the sleep-wake cycle and other rhythmic functions) and sleep deprivation caused by the spring transition to DST had an impact on driving performance.
The driving performance of 23 males (the experimental group) was assessed before and after the introduction of springtime DST. A control group of 22 males also undertook two assessments, both prior to DST. In each experiment, participants were asked to drive an 11.5km route on a driving simulator, which included both rural and urban roads, and were faced with different driving scenarios.
To test if drivers would take unnecessary risks, participants found themselves behind a vehicle on a long straight road with a continuous centreline to see if any of them would try to overtake. Following the first assessment, which took place before DST, it was found that the behaviour of drivers in both groups was similar, with only 9% opting to overtake.
During assessment two, which took place after DST was introduced, 39% of people in the experimental group overtook the leading vehicle. In contrast, those in the control group maintained safer behaviours. This indicates that those in the experimental group were more likely to engage in risky behaviour as they were more prone to commit overtaking violations in the post-DST trial than in their first assessment.
When encountering a cyclist, most experimental and control participants overtook in both simulations; however, noticeable differences were identified in the second assessment. Those in the control group increased the distance between themselves and the cyclist when passing. In contrast, the experimental group shortened the distance, compromising the cyclist’s safety.
Read the full report (FOC) on the iscience website: