Exploring occupant exit choices during fire drills and false alarm evacuations in a library

IF 4.7 1区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Safety Science Pub Date : 2024-11-21 DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106708
Yunhe Tong , Nikolai W. F. Bode , Milad Haghani , Ruggiero Lovreglio
{"title":"Exploring occupant exit choices during fire drills and false alarm evacuations in a library","authors":"Yunhe Tong ,&nbsp;Nikolai W. F. Bode ,&nbsp;Milad Haghani ,&nbsp;Ruggiero Lovreglio","doi":"10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Effective disaster management and public safety rely heavily on understanding human behaviour during evacuations. This study investigates 497 occupant exit choices in real-world evacuation scenarios including two evacuation drills and two false alarm evacuations in a university library building. These authentic settings offer a unique opportunity to examine real-world decision-making processes during evacuations. Employing a multinomial logit model, we quantitatively assess the impact of essential factors on human decision-making. Statistical analysis reveals that participants tend to choose the exits chosen by the majority, closer exits, exits indicated by staff, or exits they are familiar with. We found that participants on the ground floor showed a greater preference for familiar exits compared to those on other floors. Most importantly, we found that in fire drills the effect of crowding and familiarity on exit choices was reduced compared to false alarm evacuations. These findings underscore the critical implications for the conduct of drills and emphasise the importance of studying the contextual dependency of human behaviour during evacuations. Our work also contributes a novel exit choice dataset collected in a naturalistic setting and highlights the importance of the context in influencing pedestrian decision-making during evacuations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21375,"journal":{"name":"Safety Science","volume":"182 ","pages":"Article 106708"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753524002984","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Effective disaster management and public safety rely heavily on understanding human behaviour during evacuations. This study investigates 497 occupant exit choices in real-world evacuation scenarios including two evacuation drills and two false alarm evacuations in a university library building. These authentic settings offer a unique opportunity to examine real-world decision-making processes during evacuations. Employing a multinomial logit model, we quantitatively assess the impact of essential factors on human decision-making. Statistical analysis reveals that participants tend to choose the exits chosen by the majority, closer exits, exits indicated by staff, or exits they are familiar with. We found that participants on the ground floor showed a greater preference for familiar exits compared to those on other floors. Most importantly, we found that in fire drills the effect of crowding and familiarity on exit choices was reduced compared to false alarm evacuations. These findings underscore the critical implications for the conduct of drills and emphasise the importance of studying the contextual dependency of human behaviour during evacuations. Our work also contributes a novel exit choice dataset collected in a naturalistic setting and highlights the importance of the context in influencing pedestrian decision-making during evacuations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索图书馆火灾演习和误报疏散时的人员出口选择
有效的灾难管理和公共安全在很大程度上依赖于对疏散过程中人类行为的理解。本研究调查了 497 个真实疏散场景中的人员撤离选择,包括大学图书馆大楼中的两次疏散演习和两次假警报疏散。这些真实场景为研究疏散过程中的真实决策过程提供了一个独特的机会。我们采用多叉 logit 模型,定量评估了基本因素对人类决策的影响。统计分析显示,参与者倾向于选择大多数人选择的出口、较近的出口、工作人员指示的出口或他们熟悉的出口。我们发现,与其他楼层的参与者相比,一楼的参与者更倾向于选择熟悉的出口。最重要的是,我们发现在消防演习中,与误报疏散相比,拥挤和熟悉程度对出口选择的影响有所降低。这些发现强调了进行演习的重要意义,并强调了研究疏散过程中人类行为的环境依赖性的重要性。我们的研究还提供了一个在自然环境中收集的新颖出口选择数据集,并强调了环境对疏散过程中行人决策的重要影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Safety Science
Safety Science 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
9.80%
发文量
335
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: Safety Science is multidisciplinary. Its contributors and its audience range from social scientists to engineers. The journal covers the physics and engineering of safety; its social, policy and organizational aspects; the assessment, management and communication of risks; the effectiveness of control and management techniques for safety; standardization, legislation, inspection, insurance, costing aspects, human behavior and safety and the like. Papers addressing the interfaces between technology, people and organizations are especially welcome.
期刊最新文献
Factors affecting the visual ergonomics of train drivers in VR simulation driving: Snow and Ice line environment and train speed Pedestrian behavior under time pressure: A VR-based study of waiting duration and crashes at signalized intersection Optimization of emergency shelter layout with consideration of toxic gas leakage based on a cell transmission model On the user-based assessments of virtual reality for public safety training in urban open spaces depending on immersion levels The influence of individual characteristics and working environment on driving performance of truck drivers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1