Traditionally, highway improvement project evaluation is done without incorporating highway users’ views. The Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) wants drivers to be satisfied and have “good feelings” about its passing lanes program. KDOT needs input to decide whether passing lanes are efficient, safe, and acceptable to the public. Drivers’ views were solicited via a questionnaire survey which was part of a comprehensive study on passing lanes in Kansas. Generally, drivers support the passing lane program and suggest construction of more passing lanes. Drivers think that passing lanes are more beneficial for improving safety than for saving time. They are equally divided on the length of passing lanes between “too short” and “just right,” although the provided lengths are within the recommended optimum lengths found in the literature. The “too short” responses could be due to existing passing lane spacings, preference of four-lane highways over two-lane highways, and difference in local conditions from those used to determine lengths. Drivers cited fellow drivers’ failure to follow signs and markings properly, and failure to use the lanes properly; this seems to indicate that improvements in signing and pavement markings should be considered. A smaller proportion of drivers, satisfied with a lower frequency of local travel on a route closer to the state’s borders (i.e., more unfamiliar drivers), suggests the importance of standardizing highway operating and design practices throughout the country.
How translational modelling in oncology needs to get the mechanism just right
