Impact of Texting on Pedestrian Crossing Behavior: Key Findings
School
San Diego State University**We aren't endorsed by this school
Course
PSY 301
Subject
Chemistry
Date
Dec 10, 2024
Pages
4
Uploaded by MateRock13901
Pre lab: Discussion CH 6Assess your resultsIt was hypothesized that traffic crossing behavior would be dependent on texting behavior, such that those who were texting would exhibit riskier crossing behaviors than those now texting.Was it supported?Link results to broader literature (you can also discuss future directions—where wouldthe research go from here)While the hypothesis and results are supported by the literature, additional research including morephone activities that go beyond just not texting or texting, along with more specific ‘risky’ or ‘safe’behaviors being analyzed. The results yielded significant, but to add a much larger sample size and allow for data to be gathered in different intersections allows for a better generalizability in the overallhypothesis and the overall population of college campuses. What do your findings mean? (In a broader theory? In its application? Is itconsistent with previous literature [i.e., background article you referenced in theIntroduction]?) The findings yielding significant results shows how phone distractions, texting in this case, allow for more unsafe crossing behaviors or lack of attention to pedestrians' surroundings. This is consistent with other literature as phone distractions in general have an impact on the Awareness of the pedestrian crossing. Other potential explanations? (Is there something else that might explain your
findings?—especially if they did not support your hypothesis)Variables that could affect my results include the intersection and time I chose to collect data, with less cars around pedestrians might have found it safer to be on their phones. WWS Ch. 62. “In short, the results suggest that music, phone conversation and text all distract college pedestrians in their level of crossing performance, with text distraction associated with the highest impairment, followed by phone conversation distraction and music distraction” (Jiang et al., 2018). 3. “Music distraction had the least influence on pedestrian crossing performance, which is similar to the findings of previous works on safe automobile driving (Bellinger et al., 2009; Dibben and Williamson, 2007) and an observational study on pedestrian crossing behavior (Walker et al., 2012)” (Jiang et al., 2018). 6. a. “This result is likely because listening to music involves less due to the cognitive complexity and visual distraction of listening to music than phone conversation or text operation” (Jiang et al., 2018).b. “One possible explanation for the lower crossing speed is that individuals who are distracted by phone conversations attempt to be- have more cautiously than those who are not distracted. However, the slower crossing speed could lead to pedestrians failing to finish crossing during the effective green light time” (Jiang et al., 2018). 8.a. “Field studies (e.g., Lopresti-Goodman et al., 2012; Schwebel et al., 2012; Perlmutter et al., 2014) have provided partial confirmation of these findings” (Jiasng et al., 2018).
b. “Given the prominence of mobile phone distractions that are now inherent in everyday living, our findings highlight the need for continued experimental research on the effects of these distractions, particularly within the larger context of mixed traffic within the intersection area” (Jiang et al., 2018). 10.a. “While efforts should certainly be made to outreach to pedestrians to combat distracted walking (and one intervention study from Schwebel et al. (2017) in 2017 shows some limited benefit to self-reported in- tentions and thoughts), these efforts should not be conducted without also considering design elements and driver regulation” (Jiang et al., 2018). b. “....future research could extend the work to a more varied sample” (Jiang et al., 2018).12. a. “There are also some limitations in this study. First, the small sample size and the limiting of the sample to college students may limit the degree to which the findings of this study can be generalized to the overall pedestrian population” (Jiang et al., 2018). b. “Second, participants were restricted from self- regulation and behavioral adaptation in this experiment, so we do not know whether participants would use mobile phones in the same way during daily life. Third, the data collection was limited to one specific signalized intersection with the very low traffic volume” (Jiang et al., 2018).13. a. “Recognizing pedestrian behavior may inform design policies and driver regulations to afford more protection for pedestrians who may be distracted and are more vulnerable to conflicts with other transportation modes” (Jiang et al., 2018).
14.a. “Regarding the phone conversation distraction, pedestrians also crossed the street at a lower average speed” (Jiang et al., 2018).b. “In addition to the traffic signal area and crosswalk area, pedestrians distracted by phone conversations focus less on fixation points of the right traffic area and spend less fixation time and average fixation duration on the left traffic area compared with the undistracted condition (Jiang et al., 2018).