Abstract
A confident interaction between pedestrians and automated vehicles will be a milestone in the acceptability of the use of these new vehicles. The automated vehicle should be able to offer the pedestrian a safe and non-uncertain street-crossing situation. The aim of the study was to perform an analysis of the activity of street-crossing, focusing on the decision-making in a natural environment.
The study was carried out with a sample of 20 participants A triangulation of Ergonomics methods (explicitation interview, video recordings and questionnaires) was conducted. Immediately after each last crossing, participants were invited to participate to an elicitation interview. In total, 73 street-crossings were described. Cognitive, perceptive activities and emotional feelings were identified, classified and analyzed.
The results highlight some different patterns of perceptive and cognitive activities between risky and non-risky decision-making. They show the complexity of the decision-making that cannot be reduced to a specific moment but constitutes a continuously updated process containing perception, action, cognition and social aspects. Moreover, a strong link with the emotional feelings is highlighted. In the context of the future interaction between the pedestrian and the automated vehicle, this study is a first step toward AVs which will have to anticipate and react appropriately to the street-crossing behavior of the pedestrians.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Arman MA, Rafe A, Kretz T (2015) Pedestrian gap acceptance behavior, a case study: Tehran. In: Transportation research board, 15–2217. https://trid.trb.org/view/1337505
Boroujerdian AM, Nemati M (2016) Pedestrian gap acceptance logit model in unsignalized crosswalks conflict zone. Int J Transp Eng 4(2):87–96
Cahour B, Salembier P, Zouinar M (2016) Analyzing lived experience of activity. Le Travail Humain 79(3):259. https://doi.org/10.3917/th.793.0259
Charron C, Festoc A, Guéguen N (2012) Do child pedestrians deliberately take risks when they are in a hurry? An experimental study on a simulator. Transp Res Part F: Traffic Psychol Behav 15(6):635–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRF.2012.07.001
Dommes A, Le Lay T, Vienne F, Dang N-T, Beaudoin AP, Do MC (2015) Towards an explanation of age-related difficulties in crossing a two-way street. Acc Anal Prev 85:229–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.09.022
Endsley M (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 37:32–64
Faria JJ, Krause S, Krause J (2010) Collective behavior in road crossing pedestrians: the role of social information. Behav Ecol 21(6):1236–1242. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arq141
Geruschat DR, Hassan SE, Turano KA (2003) Gaze behavior while crossing complex intersections. Optom Vis Sci: Official Pub Am Acad Optomet 80(7): 515–28. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12858087
Hoc JM (1996) Supervision et contrôle de processus - La cognition en situation dynamique. Presses Universitaires de Grenoble, Grenoble
Koh PP, Wong YD, Chandrasekar P (2014) Safety evaluation of pedestrian behaviour and violations at signalised pedestrian crossings. Saf Sci 70:143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.05.010
Kraiem S, Bel M, Coeugnet S (2018) Prediction of the road users’ behaviors beyond an autonomous vehicle. In: 29th international congress of applied psychology, Montréal
Lazarus RS, Folkman S (1984) Coping and adaptation. In: Gentry WD (ed) The handbook of behavioral medicine. Guilford Press, New York, pp 282–325
Lobjois R, Cavallo V (2009) The effects of aging on street-crossing behavior: from estimation to actual crossing. Acc Anal Prev 41(2):259–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AAP.2008.12.001
Mathews A, MacLeod C (1985) Selective processing of threat cues in anxiety states. Behav Res Ther 23(5):563–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(85)90104-4
Millard-Ball A (2016) Pedestrians, autonomous vehicles, and cities. J Plan Educ Res 38:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X16675674
Neider MB, McCarley JS, Crowell JA, Kaczmarski H, Kramer AF (2010) Pedestrians, vehicles, and cell phones. Acc Anal Prev 42(2):589–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AAP.2009.10.004
Pawar DS, Patil GR (2015) Pedestrian temporal and spatial gap acceptance at mid-block street crossing in developing world. J Saf Res 52:39–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2014.12.006
Rothenbucher D, Li J, Sirkin D, Mok B, Ju W (2016) Ghost driver: a field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles. In: 2016 25th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 795–802. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745210
Vermersch P (1994) L’entretien d’explicitation (ESF), Paris
Vermersch P (2009) Describing the practice of introspection. J Conscious Stud 16:20–57
Yagil D (2000) Beliefs, motives and situational factors related to pedestrians’ self-reported behavior at signal-controlled crossings. Transp Res Part F: Traffic Psychol Behav 3(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(00)00004-8
Yiend J (2010) The effects of emotion on attention: a review of attentional processing of emotional information. Cogn Emotion 24(1):3–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930903205698
Zhou R, Horrey WJ, Yu R (2009) The effect of conformity tendency on pedestrians’ road-crossing intentions in China: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Acc Anal Prev 41(3):491–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AAP.2009.01.007
Zhuang X, Wu C (2014) Pedestrian gestures increase driver yielding at uncontrolled mid-block road crossings. Acc Anal Prev 70:235–244
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cœugnet, S., Cahour, B., Kraïem, S. (2019). A Psycho-Ergonomic Approach of the Street-Crossing Decision-Making: Toward Pedestrians’ Interactions with Automated Vehicles. In: Bagnara, S., Tartaglia, R., Albolino, S., Alexander, T., Fujita, Y. (eds) Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018). IEA 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 823. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96074-6_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96074-6_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-96073-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-96074-6
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)