Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis

ITARDA
INFORMATION

95

公益財団法人 交通事故総合分析センター

イタルダ・インフォメーション

2012 JULY

No.

道路形状別右折事故の構成率
右折事故のうち

その他 2 %

44

%が信号交差点で交差点付近 4 %発生している単路 14 %

信号交差点
44 %
信号なし交差点 37 %Special feature

Right-turn accidents at
signalized intersections~ Drivers must look out for bicycles
and pedestrians to their right ~Making right turns is a weak point for many
drivers. Drivers making right turns are confronted
not only by oncoming cars but by many otherroad users that they must look out for such as
bicycles and pedestrians passing to the driver’s
right, and failure to confirm safety due to slightinattention or complacency can lead to serious
accidents.
In 2011, the number of accidents which occurred
when the primar y par ty was a four-wheeledvehicle making a right turn (right-turn accidents)stood at 88,445, and the most common place forsuch accidents to occur was signalizedintersections where approximately 44% of rightturn accidents took place, followed byunsignalized intersections at approximately 37%(Fig. 1).
In this issue of ITARDA Information, we look at theis sue of right-turn ac c ident s at signalize dintersections, focusing on accidents involving
bicycles which are particularly common amongsuch accidents, and on accidents involving
pedestrians which are particularly likely to beserious in nature, and will consider the causes
behind such accidents and some driving
techniques that will prevent them from occurring.
No. of right-turn accidents
Other 2 %(traffic accidents)
n=88,445
Ordinary
Vicinities ofroadintersections 4 %14 %Non-signalizedintersections
37 %Signalizedintersections
44 %Fig. 1: Breakdown of right-turn accidents byroad configuration (2011)
CONTENTS

1 Situations where accidents at signalizedintersections occur
2 Distinguishing features and causes ofright-turn accidents
3 Distinguishing features and causes ofright-turn accidents involving bicycles
and pedestrians to the driver’s right
4 Example of an accident
5 Summary（英文）ITARDA95.indd

2

2012/09/19

17:40:03

信号交差点における右折事故

特集〜右折先の自転車、歩行者に注意〜

CTION
SE

1

Situations where accidents at
signalized intersections occur

First, let us look at the situations where accidents at signalized intersections occur.
(1) Road users involved in accidents at signalized intersections
Fig. 2 shows the breakdown of all traffic accidents
by road configuration in 2011. More than half oftraffic accidents occurred at intersections andtheir vicinities, with approximately 16% (109,599)
accidents occurring at signalized intersections.
Fig. 3 shows the road user combinations involved in
accidents at signalized intersections. The majorityof accidents occur from combinations of “fourwheeled vehicle with four-wheeled vehicle,” “fourwheeled vehicle with two-wheeled vehicle (including
mopeds),” “four-wheeled vehicle with bicycle”

and “four-wheeled vehicle with pedestrian”; morethan 90% of such accidents involve four-wheeledvehicles. Furthermore, in approximately 95% of
accidents that involve four-wheeled vehicles thefour-wheeled vehicle driver is the primary party*. It
is evident therefore that the majority of accidents at
signalized intersections occur primarily because of
the negligence of four-wheeled vehicle drivers, with
four-wheeled vehicle drivers thus constituting theperpetrators.

*1. “Primary party” refers either to the party whose negligence was greatest out of the parties directly involved in a traffic accident, or (where both parties’ negligence was
the same) to the party whose injury was the lightest in degree. The other party in the accident with the primary party is referred to as the secondary party.

Other 4%Signalizedintersections
16%
Ordinaryroad
42%

Nonsignalizedintersections
26%

Vicinities ofintersections
12%

Fig. 2: Breakdown of traffic accidents by road configuration [2011]
Primary party other thanfour-wheeled vehicle

Other
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%

100%
Four-wheeled vehicle
with pedestrian 12%
Four-wheeled vehicle
with bicycle 25%
Four-wheeled vehicle with
two-wheeled vehicle 17%
Four-wheeled vehicle with
four-wheeled vehicle 39%

n=109,599

Other accidents
involving fourwheeled vehicles 80%
1%
60%
40%

Four-wheeled vehicle
as primary party 95%20%0%n=103,431

Fig. 3: Breakdown of signalized intersection accidents by road user combination,and percentage of primary parties that are four-wheeled vehicles [2011]
95 ITARDA INFORMATION（英文）ITARDA95.indd

33

2012/09/19

17:40:03

信号交差点における右折事故

特集〜右折先の自転車、歩行者に注意〜(2) Accidents occur most commonly when the primary-party four-wheeled vehicle is making a “right turn”
Let us investigate the movements of primaryparty four-wheeled vehicles when accidents
occur at signalized intersections. Fig. 4 shows
the numbers of accidents and the percentage oft he ac c ide nt s c au se d by t he p r ima r y o r
secondar y par ty being guilty of “ignoringsignals,” broken down by the type of movementof the primary-party four-wheeled vehicles. The
most common type of vehicle movement by
primary-party four-wheeled vehicles was making
a “right turn” (hereinafter referred to as “right-

turn accidents”) which comprised 39% (38,294)of the total, followed by accidents that occurred
when the vehicle was traveling “straight ahead.”
While more than half of the “straight ahead”
accidents were caused by “ignoring signals,” incontrast only approximately 3% of the right-turn
accidents were caused by “ignoring signals,”
indicating that in most right-turn accidents bothroad users are advancing into the intersection
when the signal is green.

Chart 1: No. of accidents and no. of “ignoring signals” accidents, byprimary-party four-wheeled vehicle movement type [2011]
Startingup
No. of traffic accidents at signalized intersections(primary-party four-wheeled vehicles)

No. of “ignoring signals” accidents

Straight
ahead

Left turnRight turn

Other

Total

7,779

32,256

16,39338,294

2,858

97,5801,134

16,515

240

1,032

75

18,9963%

40000■ Percentageof accidents
involving“ignoring
signals”

35000
30000
25000

51%

20000
15000
10000
5000
0
Starting up

Straight
ahead

Left turnRight turn

Other

Fig. 4: No. of accidents and percentage of “ignoring signals”*2 accidents,
by primary-party four-wheeled vehicle movement type [2011]*2 Accidents in which this violation was committed by the primary or secondary party

4

ITARDA INFORMATION 95（英文）ITARDA95.indd

4

2012/09/19

17:40:03

CTIONSE

2

Distinguishing features and causesof right-turn accidents

In what kind of situations do right-turn accidents
occur? Here, we will examine the distinguishingfeatures and causes of right-turn accidents.
Fig. 5 shows the targets that we will analyze.
Accidents to be analyzed are those between
primar y- par t y four-wheeled vehicles ands e c o n d a r y - p a r t y f o u r- w h e e l e d v e h i c l e s(advancing in an opposing direction), twowheeled vehicles (advancing in an opposing
direction), bicycles (advancing in an opposing
direction/advancing in the same direction) andp e d e s t r i a n s (a d va n c i n g i n a n o p p o s i n g
direction/advancing in the same direction).
When aggregated, the accidents from all four ofthese road user combinations together
comprise approximately 70% (26,782 accidents)o f a l l r i g h t- t u r n a c c i d e n t s a t s i g n a l i ze dintersections that occurred in 2011.
The following analysis uses the aggregatedvalues taken from the Traffic Accident Databaseover the five-year period from 2007 to 2011.

Four-wheeled vehicle(opposing direction)

Two-wheeled vehicle(opposing direction)
Bicycle *3(opposing direction)
Pedestrian(opposing direction)

Primaryparty fourwheeled vehicle(performing aright turn)Pedestrian(same direction)
Bicycle *3(same direction)*3 The locations of bicycles included roads, pedestrian crossings and their vicinities.

Fig. 5: Targets for analysis of “right-turn accidents” with primary-party four-wheeled vehicles

95 ITARDA INFORMATION（英文）ITARDA95.indd

55

2012/09/19

17:40:03

特集

信号交差点における右折事故〜右折先の自転車、歩行者に注意〜(1) Among traffic accidents causing fatalities and injuries, accidents with bicycles are common;
among fatal accidents, accidents with pedestrians are common
Fig. 6 shows the component rates of the numbersof accidents from various road user combinations.
Among traffic accidents, accidents with bicycles
are the most common, followed by accidents withother four-wheeled vehicles. Among fatal
accidents, accidents with pedestrians are themost common, followed by accidents with twowheeled vehicles. It is evident that among rightturn accidents, accidents with bicycles occur themost frequently, and that accidents involving
pedestrians and two-wheeled vehicles are themost likely to turn into serious accidents.

100
21%
80
60

With bicycles
30%

40

23%

20

With four-wheeledvehicles26%0■ Between four-wheeledvehicles and pedestrians■ Between four-wheeledvehicles and bicycles■ Between four-wheeledvehicles and two-wheeledvehicles■ Between four-wheeledvehicles and four-wheeledvehiclesWith pedestrians
42%
13%
With two-wheeledvehicles29%
16%

Traffic accidents n = 143,816 people

Fatal accidents n = 1,028 people

Fig. 6: Component rates of secondary parties involved in “right-turn
accidents” with a primary-party four-wheeled vehicle [2007~2011](2) The main factor behind accidents is four-wheeled vehicle drivers “failing to confirm safety” when
making right turns
What kinds of factors cause right-turn accidents?
Fig. 7 shows the component rates of human causes
attributable to primary-party four-wheeled vehicle
drivers, broken down by road user combination. It isevident that for each road user combination, themajority of accidents were caused by “failure toconfirm safety.” Among accidents with bicycles andpedestrians, the percentage caused by “distraction”
was quite high, indicating that drivers’ attention was
turned towards something else at the time theaccident occurred. Among accidents with other fourwheeled vehicles and with two-wheeled vehicles, thepercentage of accidents caused by “error of
judgment” was high, meaning that a driver perceived
100
22%

the presence of the other road user (the fourwheeled vehicle or two-wheeled vehicle) but madean error of judgment—“I think I’m the one who’s tomove first,” —leading to an accident.
What kind of situations lead drivers to “fail to confirm
safety,” the factor which caused the majority ofaccidents? From the next section onwards, we will
focus on bicycle and pedestrian accidents which
occur in particularly large numbers, and will look atwhat kind of situations give rise to accidents caused
by “failure to confirm safety,” based on an analysis
which breaks accidents down by road width and by
daytime/nighttime.

13%

*4

80
60
70%

40

81%

88%

81%

■ Other■ Error of operation■ Error of judgment■ Failure to confirm safety■ Distracted driving■ Aimless driving

20
0

7%
Four-wheeled vehicle Four-wheeled vehicle
with four-wheeledwith two-wheeledvehiclevehicleFour-wheeledvehicle withbicycle12%
our-wheeledvehicle withpedestrian*4 “Failure to confirm safety” refers to both “Driver did not confirm safety” and “Driver did not confirm safety sufficiently”; “Distracted driving”
refers to items such as “Driver was looking at other vehicle or pedestrian,” “Driver was operating a navigation device” etc.; “Error of
judgment” refers to human causes such as “Driver made error of judgment regarding the distance or speed between own vehicle andother road user,” “Driver failed to keep an eye on other road user due to the belief that other road user would give way” etc.

Fig. 7: Component rates of human causes attributable to primary-party four-wheeled vehicle drivers [2007~2011]
6

ITARDA INFORMATION 95（英文）ITARDA95.indd

6

2012/09/19

17:40:03

CTIONSE

3

Distinguishing features and causes ofright-turn accidents involving bicycles
and pedestrians to the driver’s right(1) Distinguishing features of right-turn accidents broken down by road width
Let us analyze the situations which give rise toaccidents according to the width of the roadfrom which the primary-party four-wheeledvehicle emerged, breaking down the accidents
according to whether the road was “narrow,”“medium” or “wide.” Roads from which the

Narrow

primary-party four-wheeled vehicles emerged(roads) are categorized as “narrow” if they were
under 5.5m in width, “medium” if they were 5.5m
or over and under 13m, and “wide” if they were
13m or over (Fig. 8).

MediumPrimary-party
four-wheeledvehicle← Under →
5.5m

Wide

Primary-party
four-wheeledvehicle←5.5m~13m→

Primary-party
four-wheeledvehicle←13m orover→

Fig. 8: Width of roads from which primary-party four-wheeled vehicles emerged

95 ITARDA INFORMATION（英文）ITARDA95.indd

77

2012/09/19

17:40:04

特集

信号交差点における右折事故〜右折先の自転車、歩行者に注意〜

Fig. 9 shows the component rates of thenumbers of the various road user combinations
involved in accidents, broken down by roadwidth. When drivers enter an intersection from anarrow road, the percentage of accidents withbicycles and pedestrians is high. In
intersections with a narrow width, the traffic
volume of four-wheeled vehicles and twowheeled vehicles coming in an opposing
direction is smaller, meaning that in relative
terms accidents with bicycles and pedestrians

to the driver’s right become more likely tohappen. When drivers enter an intersection froma wide road, the percentage of accidents with
four-wheeled vehicles is higher. It is believedthat these accidents increase because the wider
the road, the higher the traffic volume in the
opposing lane and the higher the average
dr i v i ng s p e e d, m a k i ng i t h a r d e r to s p ot
oncoming vehicles and to judge whether it ispossible to turn right or not.

Four-wheeled vehicle
with bicycle/pedestrianPrimary-party
four-wheeled vehicle

100%
13%
With
pedestrian
30%

80%

25%

27%

60%

■ Four-wheeled vehicle withpedestrian■ Four-wheeled vehicle withbicycle■ Four-wheeled vehicle with
two-wheeled vehicle■ Four-wheeled vehicle with
four-wheeled vehicle

30%
With bicycle
36%

23%
Four-wheeled vehicle
with four-wheeledvehicle

40%
23%

19%

20%

23%

FourwheeledvehicleWith fourwheeledvehicle36%

Primary-party
four-wheeled vehicle

15%0%Narrow n=15,019

Medium n=81,911

Wide n= 46,886

Fig. 9: Breakdown of secondary parties by width of road from which
the primary-party four-wheeled vehicle emerged [2007~2011].
8

ITARDA INFORMATION 95（英文）ITARDA95.indd

8

2012/09/19

17:40:04

(2) When drivers enter an intersection from a “wide” road, they are apt tooverlook bicycles and pedestrians traveling in the same direction
Fig. 10 shows the directions in which bicycles
road the harder it is for the driver to gauge theand pedestrians are traveling at the timesituation in the opposing lane; it is believed that
accidents occur, broken down by road width.
because drivers’ attention is thus diverted in a
The wider the road, the higher the percentage offrontward direction towards the opposing lane,
accidents in which the vehicle and pedestrian/they neglect to pay attention to bicycles andcyclist were traveling in the “same direction.” Aspedestrians to their right who are traveling fromwe saw in the previous section, the wider thethe same direction as their own vehicles.
100%

Opposing direction

90%

31%

80%
70%

52%

59%

33%
47%

53%

Primary-party
four-wheeled vehicle

60%

Same direction

50%
67%

40%

69%

30%
20%

48%

41%

53%

47%

Primary-party
four-wheeled vehicle

10%0%Narrow

MediumWide

Between four-wheeledvehicles and bicycles

Narrow

MediumWide

Between four-wheeledvehicles and pedestrians

Fig. 10: Percentages of bicycle/pedestrian movement types, byprimary-party four-wheeled vehicle road width [2007~2011](3) At nighttime, drivers are apt to overlook pedestrians and bicycles traveling from the same direction
Let us look at the directions in which bicycles andpedestrians were traveling at the times of accidents,
breaking these down by daytime/nighttime.
Accidents which occurred in the daytime were split
approximately 50:50 between those in whichbicycles and pedestrians were traveling in an“opposing” direction to the four-wheeled vehicle andthose in which they were traveling in the “samedirection.” By contrast, among nighttime accidents

there was a rise in the percentage of accidents inwhich the pedestrian or bicycle was traveling in the“same direction” as the driver (Fig. 11). This isbelieved to be because as the driver’s surroundings
grow dark at night, it is harder for the driver toperceive bicycles and pedestrians traveling in the“same direction” as the driver, partly because thelight from the front headlights of four-wheeledvehicles does not easily reach them.

100%

Opposing direction

90%
80%
70%

36%

35%
53%

53%

Primary-party
four-wheeled vehicle

60%

Same direction

50%
40%
65%

30%
20%

47%

47%

64%
Primary-party
four-wheeled vehicle

10%0%DaytimeNighttime

Between four-wheeledvehicles and bicycles

DaytimeNighttime

Between four-wheeledvehicles and pedestrians

Fig. 11: Percentages of bicycle/pedestrian directions, by daytime/nighttime [2007~2011]
95 ITARDA INFORMATION（英文）ITARDA95.indd

992012/09/19

17:40:04

特集

信号交差点における右折事故〜右折先の自転車、歩行者に注意〜(4) “Lack of focused attention” and “complacency/failure to confirm safety” cause
drivers to overlook bicycles and pedestrians
It is evident from the results of the above analysis that—is an underlying cause of drivers’ neglecting todrivers’ overlooking bicycles and pedestrians is
confirm safety.
affected by the situation in the opposing lane and by
Meanwhile, a feeling among cyclists of being atheir surrounding environment. In order to understandprivileged road user—“That car is sure to stop”—is also
in more detail the actual situation surrounding sucha major cause of accidents. Cyclists perceived the fouroverlooking of bicycles and pedestrians, accident
wheeled vehicles, so had the cyclists continued to keepcauses were classified in greater detail based onan eye on the vehicles’ movements right to the end, theinterview surveys of four-wheeled vehicle drivers who
accidents might have been prevented. Many cases
had caused right-turn accidents, cyclists andwere also seen in which cyclists neglected to confirm
pedestrians. Data used in the analysis was extracted
the safety of their surroundings due to complacency—from recent examples of accidents taken from our in“I don’t think any cars will come out” —and thus failed
depth study database gathered at the Institute.
to notice vehicles coming towards them until
Fig. 12 shows the causes (attributable to either party) ofimmediately before the collision. There were also plenty
accidents between four-wheeled vehicles and bicycles.
of examples of negligence by cyclists in accidents at
Data from a total of 28 accidents was analyzed.
nighttime and on rainy days, including cyclists cycling
In terms of causes attributable to four-wheeled vehicle
without lights or while holding umbrellas. It is importantdrivers, a large number of accidents were observed tothat cyclists ensure that they cycle with lights on and at
be as a result of “lack of focused attention” by drivers,a slower speed when travelling at night.
such as “Driver’s attention was turned towards the
Looking at causes attributable to four-wheeled vehicle
oncoming four-wheeled vehicles” and “Driver was
drivers among accidents between four-wheeled
worried about something to his/her right.” It is believed
vehicles and pedestrians, as with accidents withthat such accidents might have been avoided had thebicycles “lack of focused attention” by drivers such as
driver in each case confirmed the safety of his/her“Driver’s attention was turned towards the oncoming
surroundings carefully before starting to make a rightfour-wheeled vehicles” was seen in a large number ofturn, and decelerated adequately and confirmed thecases. Meanwhile, among the pedestrians, a large
road to his/her left and right after moving to the right.
number of accidents were seen in which pedestrians
The other cause of accidents was omissions instarted to cross roads without thinking and did notconfirming safety, such as “Driver started turning rightnotice vehicles coming towards them until immediately
without thinking” and “Driver turned right by following
before the collision; it is believed that inattentivenessthe preceding vehicle.” It is believed that inattention or
and complacency—“The light’s green, so it’s okay tocomplacency—“I don’t think there are any cars there”
cross”—led to these accidents.
Causes attributable tofour-wheeled vehicle
drivers

Lack offocusedattention
Omissions in
confirming
safetyDriver’s attention was turned
towards the oncoming vehicles
Driver was worried aboutsomething to his/her right
Driver was worried about
the adjacent car
Driver started turning
right without thinking
Driver turned right by following
the preceding vehicle
Driver was rushing

0

2

4

6

8

10

12 (Cases)

Causes attributable
to cyclists

Cyclist became inattentive when thevehicle that was turning right stopped
Cyclist believed complacently that thevehicle would not come out
Cyclist had poor visibility/was cycling onehanded while holding an umbrella
Cyclist came out at too high a speed
Cyclist did not use headlights
No cause/unclear

0

2

4

6

8

10 (Cases)

Fig. 12: Human causes of “right-turn accidents” between four-wheeled vehicles and bicycles
10

ITARDA INFORMATION 95（英文）ITARDA95.indd

10

2012/09/19

17:40:04

CTIONSE

4

Example of an accident

Here we will present an example of an accident between a four-wheeled vehicle and a bicycle, takenfrom the Traffic Accident Database.
[Accident situation]
On a rainy night, a 66-year-old woman was
driving a standard-sized passenger car (CarA); as she made a right turn at a crossroadintersection equipped with traffic signals, she
stopped her vehicle for a moment near thecenter of the intersection because the oncoming
vehicle that was waiting to turn right was throwninto shadow and visibility in the oncominglane was poor. After letting several oncoming
vehicles pass, the driver then drove to the right,
paying attention to the situation in the oncoming
lane; at this moment the vehicle collided with
Bicycle B which was coming over the pedestriancrossing from the driver’s right-hand side.

[Causes]
The cause of the accident was that Driver A’s
attention was drawn by the oncoming lane,causing her to overlook the bicycle. Had she
paid attention to the area surrounding thepedestrian crossing as well before starting to
make a right turn, it is possible that she might
have spotted the bicycle earlier. Meanwhile,
Cyclist B was using an umbrella and cycling
one-handed—violations of cycling rules—andthis was one factor that delayed the cyclist’s
noticing the vehicle. It goes without saying thatroad users need to obey traffic rules; it is also
important that cyclists put effort into defensive
cycling, such as paying closer attention to theirsurroundings and attaching reflective materials
to their bicycles to make themselves more
conspicuous.

Diagram of the scene of the accident

A3
B2

B1

A2

Oncoming right-turning vehicle

A1

95 ITARDA INFORMATION（英文）ITARDA95.indd

1111

2012/09/19

17:40:04

〜右折先の自転車、歩行者に注意〜

CTION
SE

5

Summary◆ Distinguishing features of right-turn accidents at signalized intersections

イタルダ・インフォメーション● Accidents at intersections occur most frequently when primary-party four-wheeled

Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis

信号交差点における右折事故

ITARDA INFORMATION

特集

vehicles are making a right turn.

● Both primary and secondary parties’ vehicles are causing accidents when they enterintersections when the lights are green.

● The main cause of accidents is “failure to confirm safety” by the driver of the

primary-party four-wheeled vehicle making a right turn.

● As drivers’ attention tends to be drawn to oncoming vehicles, they are apt tooverlook bicycles and pedestrians to their right.

● At nighttime, drivers are apt to overlook bicycles and pedestrians who are travelingin the same direction as the driver’s vehicle.

Here, we will summarize some cautionary points for avoiding accidents◆ For drivers of four-wheeled vehicles when making right turns:● In conditions that make it difficult to see the oncoming lane, drivers should make sure that

JULY

95

No.

24
7

◆ For cyclists’ and pedestrian’s self-protection● Cyclists and pedestrians should continue to keep an eye on the movements of vehicles

right to the end, and not become inattentive due to feelings that they are privileged road
users.
● It is crucial that cyclists ensure other road users notice them at nighttime by switching theirlights on and other measures.
● Cyclists should cycle on the left-hand side of the road. Even where there is a sidewalk
where cycling is permissible, cyclists should take care that they cycle on the left-handsidewalk and avoid cycling on the right-hand sidewalk.

(Kenji Fujita)

発 行 公益財団法人 交通事故総合分析センター
発行月 平成 年 月 〒102 0083 東京都千代田区麹町6 6 麹町東急ビル 階

they stop for a moment and confirm safety carefully. To avoid a situation where drivers
are “looking but not really seeing,” it is important that drivers adopt the mindset of “unseen
dangers may be lurking,” and act to confirm danger (or safety).
● When they spot oncoming vehicles, drivers should wait for them to pass rather than try torush across.
● Drivers should confirm the safety of the road to their right before starting to make a rightturn. It is essential that drivers decelerate sufficiently when approaching pedestriancrossings to ensure that they can stop if something unexpected happens.

2012

-

-

5

事務局
〒102-0083 東京都千代田区麹町6-6 麹町東急ビル5階
TEL03-3515-2525 FAX03-3515-2519

ウェブサイト（英文）ITARDA95.indd

12

つくば交通事故調査事務所〒305-0831 茨城県つくば市西大橋6 41-1
（財）日本自動車研究所内
TEL029-855-9021 FAX029-855-9131

2012/09/19

17:40:04

ITARDA
公益財団

Institute for Traffic Accident
Research and Data Analysis

交通事故総合分析センター

ITARDA INFORMATION

No.

95

2012
JULY

Breakdown of right-turn
accidents by road configuration
Other 2 %Vicinities ofintersections 4 %Ordinary road 14 %

44

% of

all right-turn
accidents occur at
signalizedintersections

Signalizedintersections
44 %Non-signalizedintersections 37 %Special feature

Right-turn accidents at
signalized intersections~Drivers must look out for bicycles
and pedestrians to their right~（英文）ITARDA95.indd

13

2012/09/19

17:40:04