Volume 42 Issue 4
Aug.  2024
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  Journal of Transport Information and Safety  > 2024  >  42(4): 136-143
TANG Tianpei, YUAN Quan, YUAN Meining, CHEN Zhiyu, LIN Xinrong. Determinants of Pedestrians' Psychological Boundary in the Coexistence of Pedestrian and Non-motorized Vehicles[J]. Journal of Transport Information and Safety, 2024, 42(4): 136-143. doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2024.04.015
Citation: TANG Tianpei, YUAN Quan, YUAN Meining, CHEN Zhiyu, LIN Xinrong. Determinants of Pedestrians' Psychological Boundary in the Coexistence of Pedestrian and Non-motorized Vehicles[J]. Journal of Transport Information and Safety, 2024, 42(4): 136-143. doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2024.04.015
shu

Determinants of Pedestrians' Psychological Boundary in the Coexistence of Pedestrian and Non-motorized Vehicles

doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2024.04.015
  • 1.

    School of Transportation and Civil Engineering, Nantong University, Nantong 226019, Jiangsu, China

  • 2.

    School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China

  • 3.

    School of Vehicle and Mobility, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

  • Received Date: 2023-09-07
    Available Online: 2024-11-25
    Abstract
  • Investigating the mechanisms influencing pedestrians' psychological boundary in the coexistence of pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles is crucial for improving pedestrian safety and comfort in traffic design and management. This study addresses the limitations of previous studies, which mainly focus on pedestrians'interpersonal spatial expectations. To this end, this study redefines psychological boundaries between pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles based on the mental envelop theory from the two key dimensions: the subject mental envelope (SME) anticipated by pedestrians and the object mental envelope (OME) imposed by pedestrians concerning non-motorized vehicles. Next, the proposed model incorporates perceived threat, perceived closeness, and personal characteristics, and priority as a potential influencing factor. The structural equation model with partial least squares is employed to assess model fit and conduct path analysis. The estimation results show that the SRMR value is 0.035, and R2 values for SME and OME are 0.728 and 0.773, respectively, indicating good fit and strong explanatory power. Further, results show that perceived threat and closeness significantly affect both SME and OME, with stronger effects on OME, which suggests that pedestrians perceive non-motorized vehicles as a threat and demand stricter boundaries for their riding areas. Priority demonstrates a greater positive impact on OME than that on SME, suggesting that pedestrians, when feeling prioritized, expect stricter constraints on non-motorized vehicles. The traffic volume of non-motorized vehicles has a substantial impact on OME. OME also positively influences SME, suggesting that the expanded OME can further elucidate pedestrians' requirements for their safe-activity space. Notably, gender and height of a pedestrian significantly impact both SME and OME, while average weekly cycling frequency significantly affects OME exclusively.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(27)
  • [1]
    任福田, 肖秋生, 薛宗惠. 城市道路与规划设计[M]. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 1999.

    REN F T, XIAO Q S, XUE Z H. Urban road and planning design[M]. Beijing: China Building Industry Press, 1999. (in Chinese)
    [2]
    魏雯, 杜雨萌, 董傲然, 等. 基于CIDAS数据与集成学习的电动两轮车骑行者伤害致因分析[J]. 交通信息与安全, 2022, 40(2): 45-52, 62. doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2022.02.006

    WEI W, DU Y M, DONG A R, et al. An analysis of factors affecting injury of electric two-wheeler riders based on CIDAS data and ensemble learning[J]. Journal of Transport Information and Safety, 2022, 40(2): 45-52, 62. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2022.02.006
    [3]
    汤天培, 陈丰, 郭赟韬, 等. 基于强化敏感性理论的电动自行车风险骑行行为影响因素[J]. 交通信息与安全, 2021, 39 (3): 25-32. doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2021.03.004

    TANG T P, CHEN F, GUO Y T, et al. Influencing factors of electrical bikes' risky riding behaviors based on reinforcement sensitivity theory[J]. Journal of Transport Information and Safety, 2021, 39(3): 25-32. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3963/j.jssn.1674-4861.2021.03.004
    [4]
    PHAM T Q, NAKAGAWA C, SHINTANI A, et al. Evaluation of the effects of a personal mobility vehicle on multiple pedestrians using personal space[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2015, 16(4): 2028-2037. doi: 10.1109/TITS.2014.2388219
    [5]
    DIAS C, IRYO-ASANO M, NISHIUCHI H, et al. Calibrating a social force based model for simulating personal mobility vehicles and pedestrian mixed traffic[J]. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 2018, 87: 395-411. doi: 10.1016/j.simpat.2018.08.002
    [6]
    NISHIUCHI H, SATO T, ARATANI T, et al. An analysis of Segway behavior focusing on safety distance for pedestrians and gaze of riders[C]. 17th ITS World Congress, Busan: TRIO, 2010.
    [7]
    MORALES Y, AKAI N, MURASE H. Personal mobility vehicle autonomous navigation through pedestrian flow: a data driven approach for parameter extraction[C]. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Madrid: IEEE, 2018.
    [8]
    NAKAGAWA C, IMAMURA K, SHINTANI A, et al. Simulations of the relationship between a personal mobility vehicle and pedestrians[C]. IEEE International Systems Conference SysCon, Vancouver: IEEE, 2012.
    [9]
    HASEGAWA Y, DIAS C, IRYO-ASANO M, et al. Modeling pedestrians' subjective danger perception toward personal mobility vehicles[J]. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 2018, 56: 256-267. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.04.016
    [10]
    袁泉, 晏楠飞, 郝威. 基于心理安全距离的行人风险评价及预警算法研究[J]. 中国公路学报, 2022, 35(1): 109-118.

    YUAN Q, YAN N F, HAO W. Pedestrian risk assessment and early warning algorithm based on psychological safety distance[J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2022, 35(1): 109-118. (in Chinese)
    [11]
    VASSALLO C, OLIVIER A H, SOUÈRES P, et al. How do walkers avoid a mobile robot crossing their way?[J]. Gait & Posture, 2017, 51: 97-103.
    [12]
    VASSALLO C, OLIVIER A H, SOUÈRES P, et al. How do walkers behave when crossing the way of a mobile robot that replicates human interaction rules?[J]. Gait & Posture, 2018, 60: 188-193.
    [13]
    QIAN M, JIANG J. COVID-19 and social distancing[J]. Journal of Public Health, 2020, 30: 259-261.
    [14]
    DE VOS J. The effect of COVID-19 and subsequent social distancing on travel behavior[J]. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2020, (5): 100121.
    [15]
    SUN C, ZHAI Z. The efficacy of social distance and ventilation effectiveness in preventing COVID-19 transmission[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2020, 62: 102390. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102390
    [16]
    ZOU L, YAI T. A proposal of envelope theorem on the mixed traffic of pedestrians and various mobilities[J]. Asian Transport Studies, 2022, (8): 100050.
    [17]
    HECHT H, WELSCH R, VIEHOFF J, et al. The shape of personal space[J]. Acta Psychologica, 2019, 193: 113-122. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.12.009
    [18]
    IACHINI T, COELLO Y, FRASSINETTI F, et al. Body space in social interactions: a comparison of reaching and comfort distance in immersive virtual reality[J]. PloS One, 2014, 9(11): e111511. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111511
    [19]
    IACHINI T, PAGLIARO S, RUGGIERO G. Near or far? It depends on my impression: moral information and spatial behavior in virtual interactions[J]. Acta Psychologica, 2015, 161: 131-136. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.09.003
    [20]
    MEAD R, MATARIĆ M J. Robots have needs too: how and why people adapt their proxemic behavior to improve robot social signal understanding[J]. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 2016, 5(2): 48-68. doi: 10.5898/JHRI.5.2.Mead
    [21]
    KIM Y, KWAK S S, KIM M S. Am I acceptable to you? effect of a robot's verbal language forms on people's social distance from robots[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2013, 29(3): 1091-1101. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.001
    [22]
    IACHINI T, COELLO Y, FRASSINETTI F, et al. Peripersonal and interpersonal space in virtual and real environments: effects of gender and age[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2016, 45: 154-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.01.004
    [23]
    EVA P, ANDREA K. Determination of priority stream volumes for capacity calculation of minor traffic streams for intersections with bending right-of-way[J]. Transportation Research Procedia, 2019, 40: 875-882. doi: 10.1016/j.trpro.2019.07.123
    [24]
    SANTOS-GONZÁLEZ I, CABALLERO-GIL P, RIVERO-GARCÍA A, et al. Priority and collision avoidance system for traffic lights[J]. Ad Hoc Networks, 2019, 94: 101931. doi: 10.1016/j.adhoc.2019.101931
    [25]
    HAIR JR J, HAIR JR J F, HULT G T M, et al. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)[M]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2021.
    [26]
    FORNELL C, LARCKER D F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 18(1): 39-50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104
    [27]
    WANG C, YAO X, SINHA P N, et al. Why do government policy and environmental awareness matter in predicting NEVs purchase intention? moderating role of education level[J]. Cities, 2022, 131: 103904. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103904
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(5)  / Tables(5)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (55) PDF downloads(7) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    Copyright Editorial Office of Transport Information and Safety鄂ICP备05003336号-2

    Address：No. 1178，Heping Avenue, Wuchang, Wuhan, CHINA (430063)

    Tel：027-86580355 Email：jtjsj@vip.163.com

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd  

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return