Pedestrian-driver communication and decision strategies at marked crossings

Abstract

The aim of this work is to describe pedestrian-driver encounters, communication, and decision strategies at marked but unsignalised crossings in urban areas in the Czech Republic and the ways in which the parties involved experience and handle these encounters. A mixed-methods design was used, consisting of focus groups with pedestrians and drivers regarding their subjective views of the situations, on-site observations, camera recordings, speed measurements, the measurement of car and pedestrian densities, and brief on-site interviews with pedestrians. In close correspondence with the literature, our study revealed that the most relevant predictors of pedestrians' and drivers' behaviour at crossings were the densities of car traffic and pedestrian flows and car speed. The factors which influenced pedestrians' wait/go behaviour were: car speed, the distance of the car from the crossing, traffic density, whether there were cars approaching from both directions, various signs given by the driver (eye contact, waving a hand, flashing their lights), and the presence of other pedestrians. The factors influencing drivers' yield/go behaviour were: speed, traffic density, the number of pedestrians waiting to cross, and pedestrians being distracted. A great proportion of drivers (36%) failed to yield to pedestrians at marked crossings. The probability of conflict situations increased with cars travelling at a higher speed, higher traffic density, and pedestrians being distracted by a different activity while crossing. The findings of this study can add to the existing literature by helping to provide an understanding of the perception of encounter situations by the parties involved and the motives lying behind certain aspects of behaviour associated with these encounters. This seems necessary in order to develop suggestions for improvements. For instance, the infrastructure near pedestrian crossings should be designed in such a way as to take proper account of pedestrians' needs to feel safe and comfortable, as well as ensuring their objective safety. Thus, improvements should include measures aimed at reducing the speed of approaching vehicles (e.g. humps, speed cushions, elevated crossings, early yield bars, and narrow lanes), as this would enhance yielding by motor vehicles. Other measures that specifically rely on the subjective perception of different situations by the parties involved include the education and training of drivers, the aim of which is to promote their understanding and appreciation of pedestrians' needs and motives.

Communicating Intent of Automated Vehicles to Pedestrians

“…One important part of the process is thought to be a series of cognitive processes that allow people to estimate the internal mental states and to predict future actions of others (Sebanz et al, 2006). In close proximity encounters, such as zebra crossings and parking lots, the cognitive processes involved are highly based on non-verbal communication with drivers; by interpreting cues in a driver’s behavior such as eye contact and gestures, pedestrians can reliably predict their intentions and the near-term movements of the vehicle (Schmidt and Färber, 2009; Sucha et al, 2017). By contrast, when it comes to assessing the imminent actions of AVs, pedestrians do not currently possess comparable intuitive abilities.…”

“…It is known that these interactions are complex and often affected by various factors ( Figure 1 ) such as: vehicle speed and time to collision (Várhelyi, 1998; Sun et al, 2015; Schneemann and Gohl, 2016), traffic density and size of the gap between the vehicles (Wang et al, 2010), road features such as geometry and signs (Knoblauch et al, 1996), weather and light conditions (Sun et al, 2015), crossing speed (Knoblauch et al, 1996), presence and behavior of other road users (Rosenbloom, 2009; Zhou et al, 2009), demographics of drivers and pedestrians (Oxley et al, 2005; Lobjois and Cavallo, 2007; Tom and Granié, 2011), as well as their experiences, knowledge, motivations, and cognitive state (Mwakalonge et al, 2015). In addition, expectations and feelings of safety or insecurity affect the way the interactions develop (Zhou et al, 2009; Malmsten Lundgren et al, 2017; Sucha et al, 2017). …”

“…Sucha et al (2017) found that pedestrians’ decisions to cross and feeling of safety are affected by various signals given by the driver such as eye contact, waving a hand, posture, and flashing lights. They noticed that 84% of pedestrians sought eye contact with drivers.…”

Pedestrian Trust in Automated Vehicles: Role of Traffic Signal and AV Driving Behavior

“…Prior research on pedestrians' interaction with humandriven vehicles (HDVs) has highlighted the importance of nonverbal communication to ensure safety (Sucha et al, 2017;. Human drivers engage in nonverbal communication via eye contact, facial expressions, and hand gestures (Guéguen et al, 2015;.…”

“…Human drivers engage in nonverbal communication via eye contact, facial expressions, and hand gestures (Guéguen et al, 2015;. This is often done to communicate the drivers' intent when negotiating the right-of-way with pedestrians (Sucha et al, 2017). In the absence of a human driver, it is not surprising that pedestrians have expressed concerns over not knowing or understanding the AV's intention (Merat et al, 2018;Reig et al, 2018).…”