IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i20p10628-d653395.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Significant Factors Affecting Frequent Lane-Changing Related to Road Safety: An Integrated Approach of the AHP–BWM Model

Author

Listed:
  • Danish Farooq

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Comsats University Islamabad, Wah Campus, Wah 47040, Pakistan)

  • Sarbast Moslem

    (Department of Transport Technology and Economics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, 1111 Budapest, Hungary)

  • Arshad Jamal

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Design and Built Environment, King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, KFUPM Box 5055, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
    Interdisciplinary Research Center of Smart Mobility and Logistics (IRC-SML), King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia)

  • Farhan Muhammad Butt

    (Transportation and Traffic Engineering Department, College of Engineering, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982, Dammam 31451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Yahya Almarhabi

    (Center of Excellence in Trauma and Accidents, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
    Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia)

  • Rana Faisal Tufail

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Comsats University Islamabad, Wah Campus, Wah 47040, Pakistan)

  • Meshal Almoshaogeh

    (Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Qassim University, Buraydah 51452, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

Frequent lane changes cause serious traffic safety concerns for road users. The detection and categorization of significant factors affecting frequent lane changing could help to reduce frequent lane-changing risk. The main objective of this research study is to assess and prioritize the significant factors and sub-factors affecting frequent lane changing designed in a three-level hierarchical structure. As a multi-criteria decision-making methodology (MCDM), this study utilizes the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) combined with the best–worst method (BWM) to compare and quantify the specified factors. To illustrate the applicability of the proposed model, a real-life decision-making problem is considered, prioritizing the most significant factors affecting lane changing based on the driver’s responses on a designated questionnaire survey. The proposed model observed fewer pairwise comparisons (PCs) with more consistent and reliable results than the conventional AHP. For level 1 of the three-level hierarchical structure, the AHP–BWM model results show “traffic characteristics” (0.5148) as the most significant factor affecting frequent lane changing, followed by “human” (0.2134), as second-ranked factor. For level 2, “traffic volume” (0.1771) was observed as the most significant factor, followed by “speed” (0.1521). For level 3, the model results show “average speed” (0.0783) as first-rank factor, followed by the factor “rural” (0.0764), as compared to other specified factors. The proposed integrated approach could help decision-makers to focus on highlighted significant factors affecting frequent lane-changing to improve road safety.

Suggested Citation

  • Danish Farooq & Sarbast Moslem & Arshad Jamal & Farhan Muhammad Butt & Yahya Almarhabi & Rana Faisal Tufail & Meshal Almoshaogeh, 2021. "Assessment of Significant Factors Affecting Frequent Lane-Changing Related to Road Safety: An Integrated Approach of the AHP–BWM Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-17, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:20:p:10628-:d:653395
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/20/10628/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/20/10628/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Danish Farooq & Sarbast Moslem & Szabolcs Duleba, 2019. "Evaluation of Driver Behavior Criteria for Evolution of Sustainable Traffic Safety," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Muhammad Zahid & Yangzhou Chen & Arshad Jamal & Khalaf A. Al-Ofi & Hassan M. Al-Ahmadi, 2020. "Adopting Machine Learning and Spatial Analysis Techniques for Driver Risk Assessment: Insights from a Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Sarbast Moslem & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke & Szabolcs Duleba, 2019. "Analysing Stakeholder Consensus for a Sustainable Transport Development Decision by the Fuzzy AHP and Interval AHP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-22, June.
    5. Kuan-Wei Huang & Jen-Hung Huang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2016. "New Hybrid Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Model for Improving Competence Sets: Enhancing a Company’s Core Competitiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, February.
    6. Arshad Jamal & Waleed Umer, 2020. "Exploring the Injury Severity Risk Factors in Fatal Crashes with Neural Network," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-22, October.
    7. Dong-Shang Chang & Sheng-Hung Chen & Chia-Wei Hsu & Allen H. Hu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2015. "Evaluation Framework for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: Sustainable Development Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-25, August.
    8. Hamid Pourghasemi & Biswajeet Pradhan & Candan Gokceoglu, 2012. "Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 63(2), pages 965-996, September.
    9. Danish Farooq & Janos Juhasz, 2019. "Simulation-Based Analysis of the Effect of Significant Traffic Parameters on Lane Changing for Driving Logic “Cautious” on a Freeway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Tufail Ahmed & Mehdi Moeinaddini & Meshal Almoshaogeh & Arshad Jamal & Imran Nawaz & Fawaz Alharbi, 2021. "A New Pedestrian Crossing Level of Service (PCLOS) Method for Promoting Safe Pedestrian Crossing in Urban Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-18, August.
    11. Liou, James J.H. & Tsai, Chieh-Yuan & Lin, Rong-Ho & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2011. "A modified VIKOR multiple-criteria decision method for improving domestic airlines service quality," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 57-61.
    12. Jian Wang & Jian-Xun Ding & Qin Shi & Reinhart D. Kühne, 2016. "Lane-changing behavior and its effect on energy dissipation using full velocity difference model," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 27(02), pages 1-14, February.
    13. Rezaei, Jafar, 2016. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 126-130.
    14. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    15. Li, Xiang & Sun, Jian-Qiao, 2017. "Studies of vehicle lane-changing dynamics and its effect on traffic efficiency, safety and environmental impact," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 467(C), pages 41-58.
    16. Muhammad Zahid & Yangzhou Chen & Sikandar Khan & Arshad Jamal & Muhammad Ijaz & Tufail Ahmed, 2020. "Predicting Risky and Aggressive Driving Behavior among Taxi Drivers: Do Spatio-Temporal Attributes Matter?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-21, June.
    17. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    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. Mohammed Saleh Alfawzan & Ahmad Aftab, 2022. "Efficiency Assessment of New Signal Timing in Saudi Arabia Implementing Flashing Green Interval Complimented with Law Enforcement Cameras," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-15, November.
    2. Hala Aburas & Isam Shahrour & Carlo Giglio, 2024. "Route Planning under Mobility Restrictions in the Palestinian Territories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-23, January.

    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. Sarbast Moslem & Muhammet Gul & Danish Farooq & Erkan Celik & Omid Ghorbanzadeh & Thomas Blaschke, 2020. "An Integrated Approach of Best-Worst Method (BWM) and Triangular Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating Driver Behavior Factors Related to Road Safety," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "Better decisions with less cognitive load: The Parsimonious BWM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    3. Muhammad Ijaz & Lan Liu & Yahya Almarhabi & Arshad Jamal & Sheikh Muhammad Usman & Muhammad Zahid, 2022. "Temporal Instability of Factors Affecting Injury Severity in Helmet-Wearing and Non-Helmet-Wearing Motorcycle Crashes: A Random Parameter Approach with Heterogeneity in Means and Variances," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Zhou, Ligang & Qin, Jindong & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "An analytical framework for the best–worst method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Kheybari, Siamak & Javdanmehr, Mahsa & Rezaie, Fariba Mahdi & Rezaei, Jafar, 2021. "Corn cultivation location selection for bioethanol production: An application of BWM and extended PROMETHEE II," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    6. Dehnavi, Morteza Narimani & Yazdian, Seyed Ahmad & Sadjadi, Seyed Jafar, 2023. "Evaluating effective criteria on customer satisfaction using the best-worst method and optimizing resource allocation, case study Iran aseman airlines," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Aziz Naghizadeh Vardin & Ramin Ansari & Mohammad Khalilzadeh & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Romualdas Bausys, 2021. "An Integrated Decision Support Model Based on BWM and Fuzzy-VIKOR Techniques for Contractor Selection in Construction Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-28, June.
    8. Junnan Wu & Xin Liu & Dianqi Pan & Yichen Zhang & Jiquan Zhang & Kai Ke, 2023. "Research on Safety Evaluation of Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant Based on Improved Best-Worst Method and Fuzzy Comprehensive Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, May.
    9. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    10. Besharati Fard, Moein & Moradian, Parisa & Emarati, Mohammadreza & Ebadi, Mehdi & Gholamzadeh Chofreh, Abdoulmohammad & Klemeŝ, Jiří Jaromír, 2022. "Ground-mounted photovoltaic power station site selection and economic analysis based on a hybrid fuzzy best-worst method and geographic information system: A case study Guilan province," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    11. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    12. Chong Li & He Huang & Ya Luo, 2022. "An Integrated Two-Dimension Linguistic Intuitionistic Fuzzy Decision-Making Approach for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Supplier Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-24, September.
    13. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    14. Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Patrik Juhász & Sergii V. Kadenko & Vitaliy Tsyganok, 2023. "Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices based on graphs with average degree approximately 3," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 783-807, July.
    15. Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Gupta, Himanshu & Kunc, Martin, 2021. "Risks associated with the implementation of big data analytics in sustainable supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    16. Gholamreza Haseli & Reza Sheikh & Jianqiang Wang & Hana Tomaskova & Erfan Babaee Tirkolaee, 2021. "A Novel Approach for Group Decision Making Based on the Best–Worst Method (G-BWM): Application to Supply Chain Management," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-20, August.
    17. Murad, C.A. & Bellinello, M.M. & Silva, A.J. & Netto, A. Caminada & de Souza, G.F.M. & Nabeta, S.I., 2022. "A novel methodology employed for ranking and consolidating performance indicators in holding companies with multiple power plants based on multi-criteria decision-making method," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    18. Mohammadi, Majid & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Bayesian best-worst method: A probabilistic group decision making model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    19. Siamak Kheybari & Mohammad Reza Mehrpour & Paul Bauer & Alessio Ishizaka, 2024. "How Can Risk-Averse and Risk-Taking Approaches be Considered in a Group Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problem?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 883-909, August.
    20. Md. Raquibuzzaman Khan & Nazia Tabassum & Niaz Ahmed Khan & Mohammad Jahangir Alam, 2022. "Procurement challenges in public-sector agricultural development projects in Bangladesh," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.

    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:18:y:2021:i:20:p:10628-:d:653395. 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.