79
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of social and technological distraction on pedestrian crossing behaviour: an observational study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The objective of the present work was to study the impact of technological and social distraction on cautionary behaviours and crossing times in pedestrians.

          Methods

          Pedestrians were observed at 20 high-risk intersections during 1 of 3 randomly assigned time windows in 2012. Observers recorded demographic and behavioural information, including use of a mobile device (talking on the phone, text messaging, or listening to music). We examined the association between distraction and crossing behaviours, adjusting for age and gender. All multivariate analyses were conducted with random effect logistic regression (binary outcomes) and random effect linear regression (continuous outcomes), accounting for clustering by site.

          Results

          Observers recorded crossing behaviours for 1102 pedestrians. Nearly one-third (29.8%) of all pedestrians performed a distracting activity while crossing. Distractions included listening to music (11.2%), text messaging (7.3%) and using a handheld phone (6.2%). Text messaging, mobile phone use and talking with a companion increased crossing time. Texting pedestrians took 1.87 additional seconds (18.0%) to cross the average intersection (3.4 lanes), compared to undistracted pedestrians. Texting pedestrians were 3.9 times more likely than undistracted pedestrians to display at least 1 unsafe crossing behaviour (disobeying the lights, crossing mid-intersection, or failing to look both ways). Pedestrians listening to music walked more than half a second (0.54) faster across the average intersection than undistracted pedestrians.

          Conclusions

          Distracting activity is common among pedestrians, even while crossing intersections. Technological and social distractions increase crossing times, with text messaging associated with the highest risk. Our findings suggest the need for intervention studies to reduce risk of pedestrian injury.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Walking on music.

          The present study focuses on the intricate relationship between human body movement and music, in particular on how music may influence the way humans walk. In an experiment, participants were asked to synchronize their walking tempo with the tempo of musical and metronome stimuli. The walking tempo and walking speed were measured. The tempi of the stimuli varied between 50 and 190 beats per minute. The data revealed that people walk faster on music than on metronome stimuli and that walking on music can be modeled as a resonance phenomenon that is related to the perceptual resonance phenomenon as described by Van Noorden and Moelants (Van Noorden, L., & Moelants, D. (1999). Resonance in the perception of musical pulse. Journal of New Music Research, 28, 43-66).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Distribution of road traffic deaths by road user group: a global comparison.

            Road traffic deaths are a major global health and development problem. An understanding of the existing burden of road traffic deaths in the population is necessary for developing effective interventions. To outline systematically the global distribution of road traffic deaths by road user groups (pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists, motorised four-wheeler occupants). Comprehensive searches of PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, TransportLink, grey literature and reference lists and communication with experts from international organisations and country-level institutions were conducted to identify eligible studies and data sources. All data sources that provided a breakdown of road traffic deaths by road user group at the national or sub-national level were eligible for inclusion. A breakdown of road traffic deaths by road user group was constructed for 14 epidemiologically defined World Health Organization (WHO) sub-regions in addition to World Bank income categories. In addition, the total number of road traffic fatalities by road user group in low-income, middle-income and high-income countries was estimated. The breakdown of road traffic deaths by road user group varies dramatically across epidemiological WHO sub-regions. The magnitude of pedestrian fatalities ranges from more than half in African sub-region AfrE (55%) to 15% or less in AmrA or EurA. The distribution also varies across low-income, middle-income and high-income countries. 45% of road traffic fatalities in low-income countries are among pedestrians, whereas an estimated 29% in middle-income and 18% in high-income countries are among pedestrians. The burden of road traffic injuries on vulnerable road users differs substantially across income levels. An estimated total of 227,835 pedestrians die in low-income countries, as opposed to 161,501 in middle-income countries and 22,500 in high-income countries each year. Ameliorating road safety requires the implementation of context-specific solutions. This review of the road traffic injury literature provides strong evidence that the distribution of road traffic fatalities varies dramatically across different parts of the world. Therefore, context-appropriate and effective prevention strategies that protect the particular at-risk road user groups should be carefully investigated.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Distraction and pedestrian safety: how talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street.

              As use of handheld multimedia devices has exploded globally, safety experts have begun to consider the impact of distraction while talking, text-messaging, or listening to music on traffic safety. This study was designed to test how talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music may influence pedestrian safety. 138 college students crossed an interactive, semi-immersive virtual pedestrian street. They were randomly assigned to one of four groups: crossing while talking on the phone, crossing while texting, crossing while listening to a personal music device, or crossing while undistracted. Participants distracted by music or texting were more likely to be hit by a vehicle in the virtual pedestrian environment than were undistracted participants. Participants in all three distracted groups were more likely to look away from the street environment (and look toward other places, such as their telephone or music device) than were undistracted participants. Findings were maintained after controlling for demographics, walking frequency, and media use frequency. Distraction from multimedia devices has a small but meaningful impact on college students' pedestrian safety. Future research should consider the cognitive demands of pedestrian safety, and how those processes may be impacted by distraction. Policymakers might consider ways to protect distracted pedestrians from harm and to reduce the number of individuals crossing streets while distracted. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Inj Prev
                Inj. Prev
                injuryprev
                ip
                Injury Prevention
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                1353-8047
                1475-5785
                August 2013
                13 December 2012
                : 19
                : 4
                : 232-237
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Harborview Injury Prevention & Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
                [2 ]Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
                [3 ]Seattle Children's Hospital and Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, USA
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Beth E Ebel, Harborview Injury Prevention & Research Center, University of Washington, 325 Ninth Ave, Box 359960, Seattle, Washington 98104-2499, USA; bebel@ 123456uw.edu
                Article
                injuryprev-2012-040601
                10.1136/injuryprev-2012-040601
                3717764
                23243104
                f745c53e-9b67-4ec0-87c1-726d25b22e39
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

                History
                : 2 November 2012
                Categories
                1506
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content345

                Cited by55

                Most referenced authors114