Driver Preference Regarding Merging Strategies at Work Zones

Merging at work zones with lane closures is associated with delays and conflicts that often result in crashes. To minimize these undesirable effects of merging, researchers have studied and evaluated various merging strategies, such as Early Merge (EM), Late Merge (LM), Joint Lane Merge (JLM) and Signalized Merge (SM). While these studies provided important insights on the efficiency and safety aspects, a key gap exists in the literature where limited knowledge is available on driver preference and perceptions of the merging strategies. This paper aims to examine drivers’ preferences of merging strategies and how demographic and travel characteristics influence their preference. Using an online survey of 455 drivers in Australia, data on these strategies and the Australian Conventional Merging (CM) setup were collected. This survey sample is equally split between drivers with and without work zone-related employment experience, thus capturing insights and viewpoints of both groups. Results from an ordered probit model showed that drivers with less driving experience drivers preferred CM more and SM less than the experienced drivers. The JLM strategy was less preferred by female drivers than male drivers. Non-conventional merging strategies like EM and SM were preferred over the CM strategy by those without any work zone-related employment experience than those who have such experience. These findings regarding drivers’ merging strategy preferences have important implications for implementing merging strategies in future work zones, including potential improvement in driver compliance rates.