Technical Papers
Nov 28, 2019

Assessment of Methodological Alternatives for Modeling the Spatiotemporal Crossing Compliance of Pedestrians at Signalized Midblock Crosswalks

Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 146, Issue 2

Abstract

At the midblock crosswalks with either Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs) or Traffic Control Signals (TCSs), pedestrians’ crossing compliance can be considered in terms of the space (crossing location with respect to stripes) and time (waiting for a WALK signal). In any crossing incident, two combinations of a scenario are performed jointly; pedestrians can cross within stripes when WALK signal is either active or inactive, also they can cross outside the stripes when WALK signal is either active or inactive. This study presents the assessment of alternative methodologies for modeling the spatiotemporal crossing compliance of pedestrians. It uses data collected from five signalized crosswalks located along four major arterials in Las Vegas, Nevada. Three models, multinomial logit, ordered logit, and logistic regression (LR), are proposed and evaluated. Bayesian information criterion (BIC), Akaike information criterion (AIC), and misclassification error are the three performance measures used to compare the models. Based on these performance measures, the logistic regression outperformed the other two, as it had low AIC and BIC, as well as low misclassification error. This model was then used to evaluate the factors associated with the pedestrians’ spatiotemporal crossing compliance. The logistic regression results revealed that the active WALK sign and the crossing incidences involve female(s) only are positively associated with pedestrians’ spatiotemporal crossing compliance. On the other hand, the optional one/two cross stages, pedestrian wait time, children and teens, as well as people who cross while riding a bike are negatively associated with spatiotemporal crossing compliance.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request. The items that can be made available upon request are data and codes generated for this study.

References

Akaike, H. 1974. “A new look at the statistical model identification.” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 19 (6): 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705.
Brosseau, M., S. Zangenehpour, N. Saunier, and L. Miranda-Moreno. 2013. “The impact of waiting time and other factors on dangerous pedestrian crossings and violations at signalized intersections: A case study in Montreal.” Transp. Res. Part F: Psychol Behav. 21 (Nov): 159–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2013.09.010.
Chimba, D., D. Emaasit, and B. Kutela. 2012. “Likelihood parameterization of bicycle crash injury severities.” J. Transp. Technol. 02 (03): 213–219. https://doi.org/10.4236/jtts.2012.23023.
Fabozzi, F. J., S. M. Focardi, S. T. Rachev, and B. G. Arshanapalli. 2014. The basics of financial econometrics. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2009. Manual on uniform traffic control devices (MUTCD). Washington, DC: FHWA, DOT.
Guo, H., F. Zhao, W. Wang, Y. Zhou, Y. Zhang, and G. Wets. 2014. “Modeling the perceptions and preferences of pedestrians on crossing facilities.” Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2014: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/949475.
Kim, K., I. M. Brunner, and E. Yamashita. 2008. “Modeling violation of Hawaii’s crosswalk law.” Accid. Anal. Prev. 40 (3): 894–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2007.10.004.
Koh, P. P., and Y. D. Wong. 2014. “Gap acceptance of violators at signalised pedestrian crossings.” Accid. Anal. Prev. 62 (Jan): 178–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.09.020.
Kuhn, M. 2019. “caret: Classification and Regression Training. R package version 6.0-84.” Accessed June 1, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.09.020.
Mergia, W. Y., D. Eustace, D. Chimba, and M. Qumsiyeh. 2013. “Exploring factors contributing to injury severity at freeway merging and diverging locations in Ohio.” Accid. Anal. Prev. 55 (Jun): 202–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.03.008.
R Core Team. 2018. “R: A language and environment for statistical computing.” Accessed November 17, 2018. https://www.r-project.org/.
Ripley, B., B. Venables, D. M. Bates, K. Hornik, A. Gebhardt, and D. Firth. 2018. “Package ‘MASS’.” Accessed June 2018. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nnet/index.html.
Ripley, B., and W. Venables. 2016. “Package ‘Nnet’.” Accessed June 2018. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nnet/index.html.
Rosenbloom, T. 2009. “Crossing at a red light: Behaviour of individuals and groups.” Transp. Res. Part F: Psychol. Behav. 12 (5): 389–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2009.05.002.
Sisiopiku, V., and D. Akin. 2003. “Pedestrian behaviors at and perceptions towards various pedestrian facilities: An examination based on observation and survey data.” Transp. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav. 6 (4): 249–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2003.06.001.
Stone, M. 1979. “Comments on model selection criteria of Akaike and Schwarz.” J. Royal Stat. Society. Ser. B (Methodological) 41 (2): 276–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1979.tb01084.x.
UCLA: Statistical Consulting Group. 2014. “Introduction to generalized linear mixed models.” Accessed May 31, 2017. https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/other/mult-pkg/introduction-to-generalized-linear-mixed-models/.
Wang, Y., and Q. Liu. 2006. “Comparison of Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) in selection of stock–recruitment relationships.” Fish. Res. 77 (2): 220–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2005.08.011.
Washington, S. P., M. G. Karlaftis, and F. L. Mannering. 2011. Statistical and econometric methods for transportation data analysis. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Woodridge, J. M. 2012. Introductory economics a modern approach. 5th ed. Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning.
Yanfeng, W., Z. Shunying, W. Hong, L. Bing, and L. Mei. 2010. “Characteristic analysis of pedestrian violation crossing behavior based on logistics model.” In Proc., Int. Conf. on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation, 926. New York: IEEE.
Zheng, Y., T. Chase, L. Elefteriadou, B. Schroeder, and V. P. Sisiopiku. 2015. “Modeling vehicle-pedestrian interactions outside of crosswalks.” Simul. Modell. Pract. Theory 59 (Dec): 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2015.08.005.
Zhou, Z.-P., Y.-S. Liu, W. Wang, and Y. Zhang. 2013. “Multinomial logit model of pedestrian crossing behaviors at signalized intersections.” Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc. 2013: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/172726.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 146Issue 2February 2020

History

Received: Dec 31, 2018
Accepted: Jul 1, 2019
Published online: Nov 28, 2019
Published in print: Feb 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Apr 28, 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Boniphace Kutela, S.M.ASCE [email protected]
Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas, 4505 S Maryland Pkwy., Las Vegas, NV 89154 (corresponding author). Email: [email protected]
Hualiang “Harry” Teng, Ph.D. [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Nevada, Las Vegas, 4505 S Maryland Pkwy., Las Vegas, NV 89154. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share