IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i2p395-d306025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Random Parameters Ordered Probit Analysis of Injury Severity in Truck Involved Rear-End Collisions

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaojun Shao

    (The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China)

  • Xiaoxiang Ma

    (The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China)

  • Feng Chen

    (The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China)

  • Mingtao Song

    (The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China)

  • Xiaodong Pan

    (The Key Laboratory of Road and Traffic Engineering, Ministry of Education Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China)

  • Kesi You

    (Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design Institute (Group) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200092, China)

Abstract

Social and economic burdens caused by truck-involved rear-end collisions are of great concern to public health and the environment. However, few efforts focused on identifying the difference of impacting factors on injury severity between car-strike-truck and truck-strike-car in rear-end collisions. In light of the above, this study focuses on illustrating the impact of variables associated with injury severity in truck-related rear-end crashes. To this end, truck involved rear-end crashes between 2006 and 2015 in the U.S. were obtained. Three random parameters ordered probit models were developed: two separate models for the car-strike-truck crashes and the truck-strike-car crashes, respectively, and one for the combined dataset. The likelihood ratio test was conducted to evaluate the significance of the difference between the models. The results show that there is a significant difference between car-strike-truck and truck-strike-car crashes in terms of contributing factors towards injury severity. In addition, indicators reflecting male, truck, starting or stopped in the road before a crash, and other vehicles stopped in lane show a mixed impact on injury severity. Corresponding implications were discussed according to the findings to reduce the possibility of severe injury in truck-involved rear-end collisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaojun Shao & Xiaoxiang Ma & Feng Chen & Mingtao Song & Xiaodong Pan & Kesi You, 2020. "A Random Parameters Ordered Probit Analysis of Injury Severity in Truck Involved Rear-End Collisions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:2:p:395-:d:306025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/2/395/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/2/395/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Boes & Rainer Winkelmann, 2006. "Ordered Response Models," Springer Books, in: Olaf Hübler & Jachim Frohn (ed.), Modern Econometric Analysis, chapter 12, pages 167-181, Springer.
    2. Feng Chen & Mingtao Song & Xiaoxiang Ma, 2019. "Investigation on the Injury Severity of Drivers in Rear-End Collisions Between Cars Using a Random Parameters Bivariate Ordered Probit Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-12, July.
    3. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    4. David Revelt & Kenneth Train, 1998. "Mixed Logit With Repeated Choices: Households' Choices Of Appliance Efficiency Level," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 647-657, November.
    5. Abay, Kibrom A. & Paleti, Rajesh & Bhat, Chandra R., 2013. "The joint analysis of injury severity of drivers in two-vehicle crashes accommodating seat belt use endogeneity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 74-89.
    6. Bhat, Chandra R., 2003. "Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 837-855, November.
    7. Feng Chen & Suren Chen & Xiaoxiang Ma, 2016. "Crash Frequency Modeling Using Real-Time Environmental and Traffic Data and Unbalanced Panel Data Models," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seongmin Park & Juneyoung Park, 2022. "Multilevel Mixed-Effects Models to Identify Contributing Factors on Freight Vehicle Crash Severity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Fanyu Meng & Pengpeng Xu & Cancan Song & Kun Gao & Zichu Zhou & Lili Yang, 2020. "Influential Factors Associated with Consecutive Crash Severity: A Two-Level Logistic Modeling Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Wen Cheng & Fei Ye & Changshuai Wang & Jiping Bai, 2023. "Identifying the Factors Contributing to Freeway Crash Severity Based on Discrete Choice Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    4. Shuaiming Chen & Haipeng Shao & Ximing Ji, 2021. "Insights into Factors Affecting Traffic Accident Severity of Novice and Experienced Drivers: A Machine Learning Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Hamed, Mohammad M. & Mohammed, Ali & Olabi, Abdul Ghani, 2023. "Renewable energy adoption decisions in Jordan's industrial sector: Statistical analysis with unobserved heterogeneity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    6. Xiuguang Song & Rendong Pi & Yu Zhang & Jianqing Wu & Yuhuan Dong & Han Zhang & Xinyuan Zhu, 2021. "Determinants and Prediction of Injury Severities in Multi-Vehicle-Involved Crashes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-16, May.
    7. Ming Lv & Xiaojun Shao & Chimou Li & Feng Chen, 2022. "Driving Performance Evaluation of Shuttle Buses: A Case Study of Hong Kong–Zhuhai–Macau Bridge," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-13, January.
    8. Konstantinou, Theodora & Gkritza, Konstantina, 2023. "Are we getting close to truck electrification? U.S. truck fleet managers’ stated intentions to electrify their fleets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Kanghyun Kim & Jungyeol Hong, 2023. "Severity Predictions for Intercity Bus Crashes on Highway Using a Random Parameter Ordered Probit Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-15, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Faisal, Asif & Yigitcanlar, Tan & Paz, Alexander, 2023. "Understanding driverless car adoption: Random parameters ordered probit model for Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    2. Abay, Kibrom A., 2013. "Examining pedestrian-injury severity using alternative disaggregate models," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 123-136.
    3. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    4. Staus, Alexander, 2008. "Standard and Shuffled Halton Sequences in a Mixed Logit Model," Working Papers 93856, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    5. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Derive Individual-Specific WTP Estimates for Landscape Improvements under Agri-Environmental Schemes: Evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Irel," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12220, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Lexicographic Preferences in Discrete Choice Experiments: Consequences on Individual-Specific Willingness to Pay Estimates," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12224, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Sandor, Zsolt & Andras, P.Peter, 2004. "Alternative sampling methods for estimating multivariate normal probabilities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 207-234, June.
    8. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 720-734, July.
    9. Junyi Shen, 2009. "Latent class model or mixed logit model? A comparison by transport mode choice data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(22), pages 2915-2924.
    10. Hess, Stephane & Train, Kenneth E., 2011. "Recovery of inter- and intra-personal heterogeneity using mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 973-990, August.
    11. Marco A. Palma & Dmitry V. Vedenov & David Bessler, 2020. "The order of variables, simulation noise, and accuracy of mixed logit estimates," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(5), pages 2049-2083, May.
    12. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    13. Rose, John M. & Hensher, David A. & Caussade, Sebastian & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Jou, Rong-Chang, 2009. "Identifying differences in willingness to pay due to dimensionality in stated choice experiments: a cross country analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 21-29.
    14. Campbell, Danny, 2007. "Combining mixed logit models and random effects models to identify the determinants of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7975, Agricultural Economics Society.
    15. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Budziński, Wiktor, 2019. "Simulation error in maximum likelihood estimation of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 73-85.
    16. Jie Ma & Xin Ye & Cheng Shi, 2018. "Development of Multivariate Ordered Probit Model to Understand Household Vehicle Ownership Behavior in Xiaoshan District of Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Patil, Priyadarshan N. & Dubey, Subodh K. & Pinjari, Abdul R. & Cherchi, Elisabetta & Daziano, Ricardo & Bhat, Chandra R., 2017. "Simulation evaluation of emerging estimation techniques for multinomial probit models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 9-20.
    18. Danny Campbell & George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2006. "Using mixed logit models to derive individual-specific WTP estimates for landscape improvements under agri-environmental schemes: evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Working Papers 0607, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    19. Ahtiainen, Heini & Pouta, Eija & Zawadzki, Wojciech & Tienhaara, Annika, 2023. "Cost vector effects in discrete choice experiments with positive status quo cost," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    20. Cherchi, Elisabetta & Guevara, Cristian Angelo, 2012. "A Monte Carlo experiment to analyze the curse of dimensionality in estimating random coefficients models with a full variance–covariance matrix," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 321-332.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:2:p:395-:d:306025. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.