Evaluating the gap choice decisions of pedestrians in conflict situations in mass religious gatherings and controlled experimental setup – A pilot study

Karthika P S and Ashish Verma

Journal of choice modelling, 2023, vol. 49, issue C

Abstract: Previous studies on modelling the microscopic behaviour of pedestrians have focused on conflict resolution among pedestrians in pedestrian-pedestrian interactions. Many of these models propose alternate mechanisms to avoid conflicts by introducing repulsive forces between pedestrians or a set of predefined rules stating the precedence of movements to sidestep obstacles and other pedestrians. However, the possibility of formulating the decision-making mechanism pedestrians use to overcome conflicts as a gap-seeking behaviour has not been explored. In this study, resolving conflicts between opposing pedestrians is modelled as gap choice decisions made by individuals. Pedestrians looking for gaps or spaces in a crowd to facilitate their movement form the basis for such an analysis. The study compares pedestrians' gap acceptance behaviour across two scenarios: pedestrian movement in a field setup (Kumbh Mela) and a controlled experiment. Multiple gap choice decisions of individuals are modelled to understand the effect of individual-level heterogeneity on gap choices. Apart from the gap duration, spacing, position of gap, linear density, age, and presence of luggage significantly influenced the gap choices. Model validation is done using appropriate methods for both field and experimental data. The bootstrap method of internal validation and holdout validation is used to assess the performance of the estimated model on field data and experimental data, respectively. It is seen that the models have reasonable predictive and discriminative abilities. The analysis results also indicate that pedestrians tend to force gaps to facilitate movement in their natural state. Consequently, controlled experiments might have limitations in reproducing or motivating the participants to behave like a crowd.

Keywords: Pedestrian; Gap acceptance; Gap forcing; Conflict; Crowd; Mass gatherings (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534523000519
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:49:y:2023:i:c:s1755534523000519

DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100450

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of choice modelling is currently edited by S. Hess and J.M. Rose

More articles in Journal of choice modelling from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().