Perceived safety and experienced incidents between pedestrians and cyclists in a high-volume non-motorized shared space
Filippos Gkekas, Alexander Bigazzi, Gurdiljot Singh Gill
University of British Columbia
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
Investigation of pedestrian-cyclist interactions is important for understanding both objective risks and traveler comfort. There is a lack of clear understanding of conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists, as they result in few reported incidents or injuries. More research is needed on the frequency and causes of pedestrian-cyclist incidents, and how those incidents affect the comfort and perceived safety of travelers by each mode. The objectives of this research were 1) to investigate the relationship between expressed safety concerns and experienced incidents for travelers in a high-volume non-motorized shared space, and 2) to examine primary factors in pedestrian-cyclist incidents. Data were acquired from an intercept survey of 337 travelers conducted on a large university campus. Results reveal a high frequency of incidents with physical contact between people walking and cycling, consistently described by each, which led to few injuries but verified the expressed concerns of survey participants and anecdotal reporting to the campus transportation agency. Prior experience of an incident was a significant factor influencing perceptions of safety. Cyclists were at least as concerned about intermodal conflicts and safety as pedestrians and preferred to avoid pedestrian-dominated areas, but that preference was weighed against travel time, ease of wayfinding, and avoidance of motor vehicles. Both pedestrians and cyclists identified crowding and pedestrian inattention as major contributing factors to incidents, but they disagreed on whether cyclist speed was a factor. Potential strategies to reduce intermodal conflicts in shared spaces include reducing crowding, separating modes, and reducing cycling speeds.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
工程Traffic and Road Safety
Urban Transport and Accessibility · Evacuation and Crowd Dynamics
参考文献 31
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 69
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条