3 ms·

I don't know. that's why I said it'd be interesting to separate the behavior from the price sensitivity.

by riggins 13y ago

rjsw 13y ago
An example that doesn't have a cost penalty is to watch how people merge lanes on a multi-lane highway, some people merge as soon as they see a roadsign, some at the last possible point. It always seems to me that there are a lot more luxury car drivers in the group who merge late.
- Lost_BiomedE 13y ago
  I thought about this situation and concluded that merging late is the right thing to do; however, many drivers also do this 'get ahead' behavior in areas where it is not advantageous to all. What I see, is that the best way to ensure even distribution of the merging cars is by merging late in a one for one fashion. Otherwise, you get more merging cars than those originally in the lane. This really only applies when traffic is heavy enough that space is limited.
- 300bps 13y ago
  There have been plenty of studies that suggest the most optimal behavior in terms of getting people to their destination quickly and safely. Specifically, when in traffic congestion, use your lane until the last second and then merge taking turns with the other lane(s). One source of many: http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-dont-hate-the-sidezoomer.html http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-d...
  - arjie 13y ago
    This is provided you can merge at the velocity of the merging lane. It's obvious that merging late is a good strategy if you can do that because essentially you're using what is otherwise unused space. However, the problem is that many people who merge late go so far that they have to practically stop to enter the lane they're merging into. Note that late merging is usually around 50 meters before the lane ends. If you go too far, then you're forced to slow down drastically and your merging will cause a problem for other drivers.

I don't know. that's why I said it'd be interesting to separate the behavior from the price sensitivity.

by riggins 13y ago

I don't know. that's why I said it'd be interesting to separate the behavior from the price sensitivity.

rjsw 13y ago

An example that doesn't have a cost penalty is to watch how people merge lanes on a multi-lane highway, some people merge as soon as they see a roadsign, some at the last possible point. It always seems to me that there are a lot more luxury car drivers in the group who merge late.

Lost_BiomedE 13y ago
I thought about this situation and concluded that merging late is the right thing to do; however, many drivers also do this 'get ahead' behavior in areas where it is not advantageous to all. What I see, is that the best way to ensure even distribution of the merging cars is by merging late in a one for one fashion. Otherwise, you get more merging cars than those originally in the lane. This really only applies when traffic is heavy enough that space is limited.
300bps 13y ago
There have been plenty of studies that suggest the most optimal behavior in terms of getting people to their destination quickly and safely. Specifically, when in traffic congestion, use your lane until the last second and then merge taking turns with the other lane(s). One source of many: http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-dont-hate-the-sidezoomer.html http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-d...
- arjie 13y ago
  This is provided you can merge at the velocity of the merging lane. It's obvious that merging late is a good strategy if you can do that because essentially you're using what is otherwise unused space. However, the problem is that many people who merge late go so far that they have to practically stop to enter the lane they're merging into. Note that late merging is usually around 50 meters before the lane ends. If you go too far, then you're forced to slow down drastically and your merging will cause a problem for other drivers.