Human Factors Assessment of Pedestrian Roadway Crossing Behavior

Introduction

Vehicle collisions with pedestrians are both common and deadly. In 2009, 12.1 percent (a number that has remained relatively consistent since 2000, ranging from 12.1 percent to 12.9 percent) of roadway fatalities in the United States were pedestrians.⁽¹⁾ The problem is even graver elsewhere in the world. For example, 67 percent of roadway fatalities in Hong Kong, 51 percent in Ethiopia, and 50 percent in Romania are pedestrians.⁽2⁾ It has been estimated that approximately 400,000 pedestrian fatalities occur globally each year.⁽3⁾ Further, the World Health Organization estimates that roadway crashes will become the third leading cause of years of life lost by 2020. (Years of life lost is a measure quantifying premature mortality.)⁽4⁾

An examination of pedestrian fatalities in the United States reveals that most occur at non-intersection locations.⁽1⁾ As a result, it is important both to be able to determine where these collisions are likely to occur and to understand what measures can be taken to improve safety. The present study focuses on the former. In other words, this study focuses on determining what factors, both pedestrian and environmental, influence potentially dangerous non-intersection crossing behavior. It is hoped that this information might be used to increase the proportion of safe pedestrian crossing behaviors.

During the daytime in the United States, about 1,500 pedestrian fatalities occur in urban environments each year (based on an analysis of Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data for 1994–2009).⁽1⁾ Of these, about 64 percent occur on the roadway in non-intersection locations, while only about 30 percent occur in intersections or are intersection related.

Figure 1 illustrates this relationship. It should be noted that the number of non-intersection and intersection/intersection-related fatalities do not equate to the total number of daytime fatalities. This is because areas such as driveways, exit ramps, and rail grade crossings were excluded from both the intersection/intersection-related and non-intersection categories. (These areas were excluded from analyses because they result in special circumstances that are distinctly different from traditional non-intersection crossing.) In addition, rural environments, interstates, expressways, and unknown roadway types were excluded from the non-intersection and intersection/intersection-related categories. These areas were excluded from analyses because of the focus of the current study. This study focuses on urban areas where pedestrian populations are the densest. Furthermore, these urban areas have the greatest likelihood of crossing treatment safety enhancements (e.g., pedestrian hybrid beacon). In addition, as a result of the perceptual complexities involved with nighttime pedestrian collisions, the present study focuses only on those occurring during daylight hours.

As a result of the large proportion of pedestrian fatalities that occur at non-intersection locations, it is important to investigate the causal factors of these collisions. It is probable that some of these collisions result from pedestrians traveling along the roadway. However, it is likely that the majority result from pedestrians crossing the roadway. Despite the large proportion of crashes involving pedestrians crossing roadways at unmarked locations, little research has investigated the reasons.

Figure 1. Graph. Total number of pedestrian fatalities, number of urban intersection/ intersection-related fatalities, and number of urban non-intersection fatalities in daytime environments by year.

It has been shown that pedestrians who cross away from crosswalks are more likely to be trapped in the middle of the street than those who cross at the crosswalk.⁽5⁾ Furthermore, pedestrians who cross at crosswalks are more likely to yield to vehicles than those who cross away from crosswalks.⁽5⁾ This is especially important to safety. If pedestrians take measures to increase their safety, they are less likely to be involved in pedestrian–vehicle collisions.

In many areas, pedestrian markings and signalization can be implemented to attempt to increase safety as pedestrians cross midblock. However, it is obvious that some areas simply do not feasibly (or realistically) allow for the addition of marked pedestrian crossings (e.g., rural and gridlock-prone roads).

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has multiple current projects investigating the performance of several different pedestrian crossing treatments. These projects include identifying the optimal number and combination of rectangular rapid flashing beacons and circular rapid flashing beacons, as well as examining the effect of varying characteristics, such as flash pattern/sequence, intensity, size, shape, and positioning.

No matter the situation, it is important to understand what types of factors influence pedestrians to cross at unmarked locations. Roadway designs and environmental factors have the ability to both promote and hinder opportunities to cross at unmarked and midblock locations. For example, a concrete lane divider severely reduces the ability to quickly and safely cross a roadway. Yet, some areas appear to encourage people to cross at unmarked locations. Pedestrians may elect to cross the road for many reasons. This report focuses on two of these factors—those intrinsic to pedestrians and those of the roadway environment itself.