COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF REPORTS IN THE INVESTIGATION OF SIGNALS PASSED AT DANGER (SPADs)

摘要

Evidence collected in the investigation of SPADs includes a range of technical (e.g. train speed, signal operation) and self reported information. This study aimed to provide an insight into the reliability of the evidence collected by self report methods during the investigation process. A qualitative approach informed the research methodology. Witness reports relating to six SPAD incidents were analysed in depth, with each incident providing four self report data types: tape recordings between the driver and signaller, driver statements, initial interview (between the driver and driver manager) and investigative interview transcripts (between the driver and incident investigator). It was concluded that drivers' reports, whilst valuable and necessary to understanding an event, may be inaccurate, unreliable and incomplete in some circumstances, due to the limitations of human memory and the approach to questioning. Further steps can be taken across the industry to inform those who are involved in collecting reports or in carrying out investigations of the factors impacting on memory and reporting.