PEDESTRIAN RULE COMPLIANCE AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN DIFFERENT URBAN CONTEXTS: AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Transport Problems

Silesian University of Technology

Subject: Economics, Transportation, Transportation Science & Technology

GET ALERTS

eISSN: 2300-861X

DESCRIPTION

0
Reader(s)
0
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 2 (June 2019) > List of articles

PEDESTRIAN RULE COMPLIANCE AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS IN DIFFERENT URBAN CONTEXTS: AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

Antonio PRATELLI / Marino LUPI / Alessandro FARINA / Carmela IANELLI

Keywords : illegal pedestrian crossing behavior; rule compliance; urban context influence in pedestrian behavior; crossing speeds; commuters and tourists red light violations

Citation Information : Transport Problems. Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 29-41, DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/tp.2019.14.2.3

License : (CC BY 4.0)

Received Date : 10-January-2018 / Accepted: 29-May-2019 / Published Online: 14-July-2019

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this paper is to examine the rule compliance behavior of pedestrians at signalized intersections located in two different urban contexts in Italy, a tourist context and a typical working urban context, and to highlight if there is any influence, of the specific urban context, on the non-compliance behavior of pedestrians. Digital video camera images are gathered in two different urban contexts and data are processed using automated software, self-written in MatLab. Both test places are located in Tuscany (Italy) and they are only 20 km apart. The tourist, or recreational, context is the beach town of Viareggio. The typical working, or commuter, urban context is the historical city of Lucca. Factors such as age, sex and group size are analyzed. Pearson’s chi-square test has been applied to investigate whether the difference between observed values and expected values of variables is statistically significant. The average crossing speed in tourists is found to be 1.50 m/s and the average 15th percentile is 1.09 m/s, whereas in commuters, the average crossing speed is found to be 1.78 m/s and the average 15th percentile is 1.42 m/s. The obtained results highlight that pedestrians in a tourist urban context are generally more compliant to traffic lights than in a commuter urban context. Moreover, the results point out that pedestrian behavior is highly linked to the urban context, and the obtained results of this exploratory study on pedestrians, in a recreational context as compared to a working one, raise some interesting questions that deserve further research work.

Content not available PDF Share

FIGURES & TABLES

REFERENCES

1. Koh, P.P. & Wong, Y.D. & Chandrasekar, P. Safety evaluation of pedestrian behavior and violations at signalized pedestrian crossings. Safety Science. 2014. Vol. 70. P. 143-152.

2. Keegan, O. & O’Mahoney, M. Modifying pedestrian behavior. Transportation Research A. 2003. Vol. 10. P. 889-901. 

3. Langbroek, J. & De Ceunynck, T. & Daniels, S. & et al. Analyzing interactions between pedestrians and motor vehicles at two-phase signalized intersections – An explorative study combining traffic behavior and traffic conflict observations in a cross-national context. In: Proceedings of 25th ICTC. 2012. P. 1-21.

4. Rosenbloom, T. Crossing at red light: behavior of individuals and groups. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior. 2009. Vol. 12(5). P. 389-394.

5. Eliou, N. & Galanis, A. & Proios, A. Pedestrian risk perception in signalized street crossings. In Pratelli A. (ed.) Intersection Control and Safety. WIT Press. 2013. P. 73-81.

6. Moyano Diaz, E. Theory of planned behaviour and pedestrians’ intention to violate traffic regulations. Transportation Research Part F. 2002. Vol. 5(3). P. 389-394.

7. Tom, A. & Granié, M. Gender differences in pedestrian rule compliance and visual search at signalized and unsignalized crossroads. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2011. Vol. 43(5). P. 1794-1801.

8. Yagil, D. Beliefs, motives and situational factors related to pedestrians’ self-reported behavior at signal-controlled crossings. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior. 2000. Vol. 3. No. 1. P. 1-13. 

9. Nesic, M. & Lipovac, K. & Rosic, M. Pedestrian behaviour at pedestrian crossing regulated with traffic lights – case study Belgrade. In Proceedings of 12th International Symposium on Road Accidents Prevention ’14. 2014. P. 99-108.

10. Faria, J.J. & Krause, S. & Krause J. Collective behavior in road crossing pedestrians: the role of social information. Behavioral Ecology. 2010. Vol. 21(6). P. 1236-1242.

11. Harrell, W.A. Factors influencing pedestrian cautioness in crossing streets. Journal of Social Psychology. 1991. Vol. 131(3). P. 367-372.

12. Sun, K. The implications of social psychology theories of groups dynamics for gang research. Journal of Gang Research. 1993. Vol. 1. P. 39-44.

13. Hamed, M.M. Analysis of Pedestrians’ Behavior and Pedestrian Crossing. Safety Science. 2001. Vol. 38. P. 63-82. 

14. Brosseau, M. & Zangenehpour, S. & Saunier, N. & Miranda-Moreno, L. The impact of waiting time and other factors on dangerous pedestrian crossing and violations at signalized intersections: A case study in Montreal. Transportation Research Part F. 2013. Vol. 21. P. 159-172.

15. Asaba, M.T. A study on pedestrian signal phase indication system. In Proceedings of 9th Int. Conf. on Road Transport Information and Control, Institution of Electrical Engineers. 1998. No. 454.  P. 21-23.

16. Hatfield, J. & Murphy, S. The effects of mobile phone use on pedestrian crossing behavior at signalized and unsignalized intersections. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2007. Vol. 39. P. 197205.

17. Thompson, L.L. & Rivara, F.P. & Ayyagari, R.C. & Ebel, B.E. Impact of social and technological distraction on pedestrian crossing behavior: an observational study. Injury Prevention. 2013. Vol. 19. P. 232-237.

18. Wu, J. & Zhang, S. & Singh, A.K. & Wang, Q. Pedestrian walking speed characteristics at signalized intersections in new urban district communities. Proceedings of ICTIM 2016. 2016. P. 453-461.

19. Onelcin, P. & Alver, Y. The crossing speed and safety margin of pedestrians at signalized intersections. Transportation Research Procedia. 2017. Vol. 22. P. 3-12.

20. Trpkovic, A. & Milenkovic, M. & Vujanic, M. & Stanic, B. & Glavic, D. The crossing speed of elderly pedestrians. Promet – Traffic & Transportation. 2017. Vol. 29. P. 175-183.

21. Murrau, R. & Pinna, F. Pedestrian behaviour in urban area. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Traffic and Transport Engineering. Belgrade. 2014. Nov. 27-28. P. 772-779.

22. Pratelli, A. & Lupi, M. & Razzuoli, D. Illegal pedestrian crossing at a traffic light: a study on tourist behavior. International Journal of Transport Development and Integration. 2017. Vol. 1. No. 4.  P. 633-639.

23. Pratelli, A. & Lupi, M. & Iannelli, C. & Lorenzini, A. Crossing at red light: behavior of tourists and commuters. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development. 2018. Vol. 14. P. 263-269.

24. Galanis, A. & Nikolaos, E. Pedestrian crossing behavior in signalized crossing in middle size cities in Greece. In Proceedings of REAL CORP 2012 Tagungsband. 2012. P. 563-570.

25. Daamen, W. & Hoogendorn, S.P. Experimental research of pedestrian walking behavior. Transportation Research Record. 2003. No. 1828. P. 20-30.

26. Bunghum, T.J. & Day, C. & Henry, L.J. The association of distraction and caution displayed by pedestrians at a lighted crosswalk. Journal Common Health. 2005. Vol. 30(4). P. 269-279.

27. Marisamynathan, S. & Perumal, V. Study on pedestrian crossing behavior at signalized intersections. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. 2014. Vol. 2. No.1. P. 103-110.

28. Poó, F.M. & Ledesma, R.D. & Trujillo, R. Pedestrian crossing behavior, an observational study in the city of Ushuaia, Argentina. Traffic Injury Prevention. 2018. Vol. 19. P. 305-310.

29. King, M.J. & Soole, D. & Ghafourian, A. Illegal pedestrian crossing at signalized intersections: Incidence and relative risk. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2009. Vol. 41. P. 485-490.

EXTRA FILES

COMMENTS