Human factors of pedestrian walking and crossing behaviour

Similar documents
Road, traffic and human factors of pedestrian crossing behaviour: Integrated Choice and Latent Variables models

Human factors of pedestrian walking and crossing behaviour

Pedestrian Risk Taking while Road Crossing: A Comparison of Observed and Declared Behaviour

Integration of human factors in pedestrian crossing choice models

THE ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOUR OF EUROPEAN PEDESTRIANS

Road Safety Attitudes and Perceptions of Pedestrians in Europe

IMPROVED SAFETY SURFACE ACCESS AT LOW COST AIRPORTS: KUALA LUMPUR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, MALAYSIA CASE STUDY

FLETCHER AVENUE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST BEHAVIOR CHANGE FORMATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT

PEDESTRIAN GAP ACCEPTANCE FOR MID-BLOCK STREET CROSSING

DOI /HORIZONS.B P23 UDC : (497.11) PEDESTRIAN CROSSING BEHAVIOUR AT UNSIGNALIZED CROSSINGS 1

Baseline Survey of New Zealanders' Attitudes and Behaviours towards Cycling in Urban Settings

WILMAPCO Public Opinion Survey Summary of Results

Market Factors and Demand Analysis. World Bank

Safety culture in professional road transport in Norway and Greece

Complete Streets Policy Survey in Grant County, Kentucky

CARE AND VIGILANCE SAVE LIVES!

Do As I Say Not As I Do: Observed Compliance vs. Stated Understanding of Pedestrian Crossing Laws in Florida

Country fact sheet Germany

Cluster 5/Module 2 (C5/M2): Pedestrians and Transit Oriented Development (TOD)

2017 North Texas Regional Bicycle Opinion Survey

Country fact sheet South Korea

BUILT FOR WALKING: SAFE ENVIRONMENTS FOR ACTIVE SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION

VI. Market Factors and Deamnd Analysis

CROSSING GUARD PLACEMENT CONSIDERATIONS AND GAP ASSESSMENT

2018 Transportation Survey October 17, Prepared by:

Summary Report: Built Environment, Health and Obesity

ESP 178 Applied Research Methods. 2/26/16 Class Exercise: Quantitative Analysis

Current Travel Needs and Operating Conditions (See pages 4 9 of the Discussion Guide)

GIS Based Data Collection / Network Planning On a City Scale. Healthy Communities Active Transportation Workshop, Cleveland, Ohio May 10, 2011

Crossing at a Red Light: Behavior of Tourists and Commuters

EXPLORING MOTIVATION AND TOURIST TYPOLOGY: THE CASE OF KOREAN GOLF TOURISTS TRAVELLING IN THE ASIA PACIFIC. Jae Hak Kim

Traffic Safety Barriers to Walking and Bicycling Analysis of CA Add-On Responses to the 2009 NHTS

Driverless Vehicles Potential Influence on Bicyclist Facility Preferences

Cycling and risk. Cycle facilities and risk management

From road shares to road sharing: Cyclist-motorists interactions and its effect on cyclists' perceptions and willingness to share the road

Life Transitions and Travel Behaviour Study. Job changes and home moves disrupt established commuting patterns

Sherwood Drive Traffic Circle

Urban Traffic Analysis Using HSL (Helsinki Bus) Dataset Kai Zhao University of Helsinki

Outline. 0 The ESSAIM project: main objective 0 Data collection 0 Results 1 In-situ observations 2 Vehicle-Pedestrian interactions 0 What s next?

Kevin Manaugh Department of Geography McGill School of Environment

Transport attitudes, residential preferences, and urban form effects on cycling and car use.

Crosswalk event overview (Saint Paul) How to organize a crosswalk event. 1. Choose a date, time and location

The Corporation of the City of Sarnia. School Crossing Guard Warrant Policy

DRIVING ON THE HARD SHOULDER A SAFETY ASSESSMENT ABSTRACT

Economic and Social Council

Chapter #4 Traffic Control Devices and Laws

Executive Summary. TUCSON TRANSIT ON BOARD ORIGIN AND DESTINATION SURVEY Conducted October City of Tucson Department of Transportation

UNDERSTANDING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING BEHAVIOUR: A CASE STUDY IN SOUTH AFRICA

Road safety training for professional drivers: worldwide practices

A Critical Review of International Road Safety Databases

TRAFFIC CRASHES involving BICYCLISTS

BICYCLE ACTIVITY AND ATTITUDES SURVEY

Misuse of Seatbelts Among Females Aged Years

Measuring and growing active modes of transport in Auckland

Attitude towards Walk/Bike Environments and its Influence on Students Travel Behavior: Evidence from NHTS, 2009

Double Pair Comparisons PART III AGE & GENDER. Age and Crash Risk. Subject & control groups Relative risk or rate. Relative Accident Involvement Ratio

CAPACITY ESTIMATION OF URBAN ROAD IN BAGHDAD CITY: A CASE STUDY OF PALESTINE ARTERIAL ROAD

A preliminary analysis of in-depth accident data for powered two-wheelers and bicycles in Europe

El Paso County 2040 Major Transportation Corridors Plan

Built Environment and Older Adults: Supporting Smooth Transitions Across the Life- Span. Dr. Lawrence Frank, Professor and Bombardier UBC

cyclingincities opinion survey ABOUT THE STUDY WHO DID WE ASK? WHAT DID WE DO?

Methods for observing pedestrian behaviour : ethologic observation and declared questionnaire

Segmentation overview. Audience understanding and targeted messages. Segmentation.

Southern California Walking/Biking Research And Creative Evaluation

Halifax Regional Municipality 2016 Heads Up Halifax Post-Campaign Study Final Report

15% Survey on Smart Commuting. Factsheet: University of Twente. 435 out of invited employees. This is a response rate of

Thresholds and Impacts of Walkable Distance for Active School Transportation in Different Contexts

Prediction model of cyclist s accident probability in the City of Malang

Accessibility, mobility and social exclusion

Bike/Multipurpose Trail Study for Glynn County, Georgia MAY 16, 2016

Transportation Use and Options of Midlife and Older Adults July 2010

Completing the Street: Denning Drive

telephone survey EDMONTON AND AREA TRAFFIC SAFETY CULTURE SURVEY: SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS 2014

Contributions of neighborhood street scale elements to physical activity in Mexican school children

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space. COST Action TU1103 «STATE OF THE ART» On behalf of the action: Matus Sucha

Effectiveness of Roadside Safety Measures

Which factors influence potential consumers to adopt to the new e-bike sharing system in their mobility behaviour?

Transport safety culture in private and professional road transport in Norway and Greece (the SafeCulture project)

South Florida Commuter Travel Survey Summary and Preliminary Results. Southeast Florida FSUTMS User Group Meeting June 1, 2012

Children s expectations and beliefs toward the relative safety of riding bicycles at night

Paper submitted to the Scottish Transport Studies Group (STSG) April 2004

Mitigating Risky Behavior of Delayed Road Users at Occupied Highway-Railway Crossings: Review of Research and Issues Daniel Blais, Project Officer,

Current and future challenges of the European Road Safety Observatory

The Road Safety Authority

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

A Traffic Operations Method for Assessing Automobile and Bicycle Shared Roadways

Data Analysis February to March Identified safety needs from reported collisions and existing travel patterns.

Cobb Community Transit

6. Transport GAUTENG CITY-REGION OBSERVATORY QUALITY OF LIFE SURVEY 2015 LANDSCAPES IN TRANSITION

Youth s opinions and attitudes towards the use of electric bicycles in Israel. Background. Assessing the characteristics of teens using EB

FHWA Resources for Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals

APPENDIX D. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN AWARENESS SURVEY (Completed by Zogby International)

GIS Based Non-Motorized Transportation Planning APA Ohio Statewide Planning Conference. GIS Assisted Non-Motorized Transportation Planning

20mph in Edinburgh. Phil Noble

Omaha s Complete Streets Policy

General Design Factors

Safety and accident prevention plan in Burgos

PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES OF URBAN UTILITY CYCLISTS A CASE STUDY IN A BRITISH BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Impaired Cycling and Crash Involvement: A Survey Across OECD Countries on Data Availability and Legislation

Developing a self-reporting method to measure pedestrian behaviors at all ages

Transcription:

Human factors of pedestrian walking and crossing behaviour Eleonora Papadimitriou 1, Sylvain Lassarre 2, George Yannis 1 1 Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece 2 Institut français des sciences et technologies des transports, de l'aménagement et des réseaux (IFSTTAR), France Shanghai, July, 2016

Background Human factors related to pedestrians have received less attention in the literature compared to other road users. Road and traffic factors alone may explain only a small part of pedestrian behaviour in urban areas. Several studies dealing with pedestrian human factors, however outside the context of the road and traffic environment. Understanding pedestrian behaviour may assist in the improved design and planning of the road and traffic environment, and consequently to the improvement of pedestrian comfort and safety.

Overview of studies Problem Theory Models Variables Data crossing decision attitudes, perceptions etc. compliance Author Year Hine 1996 Evans and Norman 1998 Yagil 2000 Diaz 2002 Holland and Hill 2007 Oxley et al. 1997 Berhhoft and Carstensen 2008 Rosenbloom et al. 2008 Sisiopiku & Akin 2003 Papadimitriou et al. 2013 Granié et al. 2013 Planned behaviour Other Linear Regression, GLM Factor analysis Other individual roadway traffic observational data self-report

Objectives The objective of this research is the in-depth analysis of human factors of pedestrian walking and crossing behaviour in urban areas. More specifically, this research aims to: capture and analyse key components affecting pedestrian behaviour, namely the pedestrians attitudes, perceptions, motivations, behaviour and habits identify profiles of pedestrians on the basis of these human factors.

Research hypotheses Demographics Age & gender: Younger and male pedestrians are more risktaking Income: low income, perceived social inequality and the lack of alternatives to walking lead to more aggressive behaviour. Travel motivations positive relationship between walking frequency / distance travelled and crossing behaviour Pedestrians walking for health / recreation purposes likely to be less risk-taking and more safety conscious Risk perception and value of time The risk minimizer vs. the delay minimiser; Interaction with other road users Imitation and leader / follower effects Pedestrians with negative opinion on drivers are more likely to be careful and compliant

Data collection A questionnaire was designed with 6 sections (questions with 5-point Likert scales) (a) demographics, (b) mobility and travel motivations, (c) attitudes, perceptions and preferences, (d) self-assessment and identity, (e) behaviour, compliance and risk taking, and (f) opinion on drivers Filled by 75 individuals in the period July - December 2013; 53% of the participants were males, 50% of the participants were 18-24 years old, 27% were 25-34, 20% were 35-45 and 3% were >45 years old. The majority were are frequent pedestrians, but also use both private cars and public transport.

Questionnaire B How many times per week do you travel by each one of the following modes*: B1_i Public transport (metro, bus, trolley bus, tramway) B1_ii Pedestrian B1_iii Passenger car (driver or passenger) Last week, how many kilometers did you travel by each one of the following modes**: B2_i Passenger car (driver or passenger) B2_ii Pedestrian B2_iii Public transport (metro, bus, trolley bus, tramway) As a pedestrian, how much would you agree with each one of the following statements***: B3_i. I walk for the pleasure of it B3_ii I walk because it is healthy B3_iii In short trips, I prefer to walk B3_iv I prefer taking public transportation (buses, metro, tramway, etc.) than my car B3_iv I walk because I have no other choice C As a pedestrian, how much would you agree with each one of the following statements***: C1_i. Crossing roads is difficult C1_ii. Crossing roads outside designated locations increases the risk of accident C1_iii. Crossing roads outside designated locations is wrong C1_iv Crossing roads outside designated locations saves time C1_v Crossing roads outside designated locations is acceptable because other people do it C2_i I prefer routes with signalized crosswalks C2_ii I try to make as few road crossings as possible C2_iii I try to take the most direct route to my destination C2_iv I prefer to cross diagonally C2_v I try to take the route with least traffic to my destination C2_vi I am willing to make a detour to find a protected crossing C2_vii I am willing to take any opportunity to cross C2_viii I am willing to make dangerous actions as a pedestrian to save time D Compared to other pedestrians, how much do you agree that***: D_i I am less likely to be involved in a road crash than other pedestrians D_ii I am faster than other pedestrians D_iii I am more careful than other pedestrians E As a pedestrian, how often do you adopt each one of the following behaviors****: E1_i. I cross diagonally E1_ii I cross at midblock at major urban arterials E1_iii I cross at midblock at urban roads E1_iv I cross at midblock in residential areas E1_v I cross at midblock when I am in a hurry E1_vi I cross at midblock when there is no oncoming traffic E1_vii I cross at midblock when I see other people do it E1_viii I cross at midblock when my company prompts me to do it E1_ix I prompt my company to cross at midblock E1_x I cross at midblock when there is a shop I like on the other side E1_xi I cross even though the pedestrian light is red E1_xii I walk on the pavement rather than on the sidewalk E2_i I cross between vehicles stopped on the roadway in traffic jams E2_ii I cross without paying attention to traffic E2_iii I am absent-minded while walking E2_iv I cross while talking on my cell phone or listing to music on my headphones E2_v I cross even though obstacles (parked vehicles, buildings, trees, etc.) obstruct visibility E2_vi I cross even though there are oncoming vehicles F As a pedestrian, how much would you agree with each one of the following statements***: F1_i Drivers are not respectful to pedestrians F1_ii Drivers drive too fast F1_iii Drivers are aggressive and careless F1_iv Drivers should always give way to pedestrians F1_v When there is an accident, it is the driver s fault most of the times F1_vi I let a car go by, even if I have right-of-way

Analysis methods Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to identify groups of variables ( components or dimensions ), to understand the structure of this set of variables to reduce the dataset to a more manageable size Cluster analysis to group individuals (respondents) instead of variables Grouping of the basis of components scores

Results - descriptive statistics (1/3) Travel motivations Self-assessment Opinion on drivers As a pedestrian, how much would you agree B3 with each one of the following statements: Strongly Neither agree Strongly Disagree Agree disagree nor disagree agree B3_i. I walk for the pleasure of it 6% 4% 29% 43% 18% B3_ii I walk because it is healthy 3% 4% 18% 53% 22% B3_iii In short trips, I prefer to walk 1% 4% 10% 39% 46% I prefer taking public transportation (buses, metro, B3_iv tramway, etc.) than my car 15% 31% 26% 17% 11% B3_iv I walk because I have no other choice 19% 21% 24% 18% 18% Compared to other pedestrians, how much do you D agree that: I am less likely to be involved in a road crash than other D_i pedestrians Strongly Neither agree Strongly Disagree Agree disagree nor disagree agree 1% 10% 26% 50% 13% D_ii I am faster than other pedestrians 3% 14% 26% 38% 19% D_iii I am more careful than other pedestrians 1% 8% 26% 54% 10% F1 As a pedestrian, how much would you agree with each one of the following statements: Strongly Disagree Neither agree nor Agree Strongly agree disagree disagree F1_i Drivers are not respectful to pedestrians 0% 13% 19% 49% 19% F1_ii Drivers drive too fast 1% 7% 32% 47% 13% F1_iii Drivers are aggressive and careless 1% 6% 26% 49% 18% F1_iv Drivers should always give way to pedestrians 3% 14% 24% 36% 24% F1_v When there is an accident, it is the driver s fault most of the times 1% 31% 44% 21% 3% F1_vi I let a car go by, even if I have right-of-way 7% 26% 36% 29% 1%

Results - descriptive statistics (2/3) Attitudes and risk perceptions As a pedestrian, how much would you agree with C1 each one of the following statements: Strongly Neither agree Strongly Disagree Agree disagree nor disagree agree C1_i. Crossing roads is difficult 10% 33% 25% 29% 3% Crossing roads outside designated locations increases the C1_ii. risk of accident 3% 13% 13% 53% 19% C1_iii. Crossing roads outside designated locations is wrong 7% 19% 22% 42% 10% C1_iv Crossing roads outside designated locations saves time 4% 15% 21% 38% 22% Crossing roads outside designated locations is acceptable C1_v because other people do it 19% 43% 24% 7% 7% As a pedestrian, how much would you agree with C2 each one of the following statements: Strongly Neither agree Strongly Disagree Agree disagree nor disagree agree C2_i I prefer routes with singalised crosswalks 1% 8% 32% 50% 8% C2_ii I try to make as few road crossings as possible 3% 17% 26% 42% 13% C2_iii I try to take the most direct route to my destination 0% 1% 19% 44% 35% C2_iv I prefer to cross diagonally 6% 35% 29% 25% 6% C2_v I try to take the route with least traffic to my destination 1% 6% 25% 44% 24% C2_vi I am willing to make a detour to find a protected crossing 8% 24% 38% 25% 6% C2_vii I am willing to take any opportunity to cross 0% 22% 39% 28% 11% C2_viii I am willing to make dangerous actions as a pedestrian to save time 18% 38% 21% 21% 3%

Results - descriptive statistics (3/3) Behaviour, compliance and risk-taking As a pedestrian, how often do you adopt each one of the E1 following behaviours: Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always E1_i. I cross diagonally 10% 33% 33% 21% 3% E1_ii I cross at midblock at major urban arterials 43% 29% 18% 10% 0% E1_iii I cross at midblock at urban roads 11% 28% 36% 22% 3% E1_iv I cross at midblock in residential areas 1% 11% 24% 47% 17% E1_v I cross at midblock when I am in a hurry 3% 11% 25% 46% 15% E1_vi I cross at midblock when there is no oncoming traffic 3% 7% 17% 39% 35% E1_vii I cross at midblock when I see other people do it 21% 33% 35% 10% 1% E1_viii I cross at midblock when my company prompts me to do it 20% 28% 24% 23% 6% E1_ix I prompt my company to cross at midblock 21% 37% 24% 14% 4% E1_x I cross at midblock when there is a shop I like on the other side 11% 37% 24% 15% 13% E1_xi I cross even though the pedestrian light is red 13% 28% 31% 28% 1% E1_xii I walk on the pavement rather than on the sidewalk 4% 19% 32% 29% 15% E2 As a pedestrian, how often do you adopt each one of the following behaviours: Nev er Rarely Sometimes Often Alw ay s E2_i I cross between vehicles stopped on the roadway in traffic jams 1% 15% 25% 47% 11% E2_ii I cross without paying attention to traffic 63% 31% 7% 0% 0% E2_iii I am absent-minded while walking 21% 39% 28% 8% 4% E2_iv I cross while talking on my cell phone or listing to music on my 7% 18% 42% 26% 7% headphones E2_v I cross even though obstacles (parked vehicles, buildings, trees, 21% 26% 32% 18% 3% etc.) obstruct visibility E2_vi I cross even though there are oncoming vehicles 19% 42% 29% 8% 1%

Results - Principal Component Analysis Grouping variables: 3 components explaining 65% of the total variance from the 51 questionnaire variables are extracted (eigenvalue>1 criterion). Component 1: Risk taker & optimizer Loadings Component 2: Conservative & public transport user Loadings Crossing roads outside designated locations increases the risk of accident -0.568 Weekly travel by Public transport 0.698 Crossing roads outside designated locations is wrong -0.509 Weekly travel by Pedestrian 0.470 Crossing roads outside designated locations is acceptable because other people do it 0.418 Weekly travel by Passenger car -0.534 I prefer to cross diagonally 0.633 Weekly Km of travel by Passenger car -0.475 I am willing to make a detour to find a protected crossing -0.564 Weekly Km of travel by Public transport 0.724 I am willing to take any opportunity to cross 0.636 I prefer taking public transportation than my car 0.493 I am willing to make dangerous actions as a pedestrian to save time 0.526 Crossing roads is difficult 0.558 I am faster than other pedestrians 0.473 I try to make as few road crossings as possible -.463 I cross diagonally 0.674 I prefer to cross diagonally -.503 I cross at midblock at major urban arterials 0.579 I am less likely to be involved in a road crash than other pedestrians -.452 I cross at midblock at urban roads 0.739 Component 3: Pedestrian for pleasure Loadings I cross at midblock in residential areas 0.723 Weekly travel by Pedestrian 0.570 I cross at midblock when I am in a hurry 0.825 Weekly travel by Passenger car (driver or passenger) -0.593 I cross at midblock when there is no oncoming traffic 0.602 WeeklyKm of travel by Passenger car (driver or passenger) -0.534 I cross at midblock when I see other people do it 0.467 WeeklyKm of travel by Pedestrian 0.583 I cross at midblock when my company prompts me to do it 0.575 I walk for the pleasure of it 0.562 I prompt my company to cross at midblock 0.746 I walk because it is healthy 0.628 I cross even though the pedestrian light is red 0.593 I prefer routes with singalised crosswalks 0.419 I cross between vehicles stopped on the roadway in traffic jams 0.658 I am willing to make a detour to find a protected crossing.417 I cross even though obstacles (parked vehicles, buildings, trees, etc.) obstruct visibility 0.548 I cross at midblock when there is a shop I like on the other side.425 I cross even though there are oncoming vehicles 0.683 When there is an accident, it is the driver s fault most of the times.478

Results - Cluster Analysis Two clusters of respondents are formed (distribution of almost 40%-60%). Component 2 is strong predictor of cluster membership. Group 1 Negative attitudes and behavior / weak walking motivations : high scores on risk-taking and low delay acceptance low scores on illegal crossing perceived as dangerous rarely use public transport and do not walk for pleasure or health Group 2 Positive attitudes and behavior / strong walking motivations : low scores on risk-taking behaviour high scores on risk perception frequently use public transport and walk for pleasure or health

Discussion 1/2 3 meaningful dimensions / components in the data, the two first strongly related to pedestrian risk-taking attitudes and perceptions, and the third one strongly related to pedestrians walking motivations. Clustering of pedestrians in two groups: on the one hand positive (i.e. non risk taking, compliant, motivated) pedestrians, and on the other hand negative (risk-taking, impatient, unmotivated) pedestrians. The research hypotheses on human factors of pedestrian behaviour were not confirmed by the above results. 5 components were assumed as the structure of the questionnaire, but only 3 emerged. The Anonymous Pedestrians, Wroclaw, Poland

Discussion 2/2 Limitations of the research: Survey sample was rather small older pedestrians are not included, and middle-aged pedestrians are under-represented. The present research confirms that human factors are important determinants of pedestrian behaviour diversity in attitudes, perceptions and declared behaviours strong contrast between pedestrian profiles identified effect on pedestrian walking and crossing behaviour. Next steps: Larger and more representative sample may reveal additional dimensions Combined effect of road, traffic and human factors on pedestrian behaviour

Human factors of pedestrian walking and crossing behaviour Eleonora Papadimitriou 1, Sylvain Lassarre 2, George Yannis 1 1 Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece 2 Institut français des sciences et technologies des transports, de l'aménagement et des réseaux (IFSTTAR), France Shanghai, July, 2016