Investigation of Pedestrian and Driver Behaviors at Push-Button Crosswalk on Main Arterials of Urban Roads : A Case of Samsun City, Türkiye

Abstract

There are different types of crosswalks for pedestrians to cross the street and different methods of operation. Signalization can be used in the operation of at-grade and controlled crosswalk. In these crosswalks, signaling is activated by pedestrians pressing buttons placed on the crosswalks. In this type of crossing, pedestrians press the button to cross the road and the signaling system detects the request. Within a reasonable time, the system turns red for vehicles and green for pedestrians, allowing pedestrians to cross the street safely. However, these systems have some drawbacks. Various observation and data collection studies were carried out at the pilot pedestrian crossing on Atatürk Boulevard in Atakum district of Samsun province. In these studies, 227 pedestrians crossing the crosswalk and 791 vehicles stopped at red lights during the crossing of pedestrians were examined. As a result of the data obtained in line with pedestrian and driver behaviors, it is aimed to determine the operational problems in signalized crosswalk with pedestrian warning and to increase efficiency with the studies to be carried out.

Keywords

• Crosswalk
• push-button crosswalk
• traffic accidents
• pedestrian safety
• traffic lights

References

1. Kıran, S., Şemin, S., and Ergör, A., Kazalar ve toplum sağlığı yönünden önemi. Sürekli Tıp Eğitimi Dergisi, 10(2), 50-1, 2001.
2. Uyurca, Ö. and Atılgan, İ., Ankara ilinde meydana gelen trafik kazalarının incelenmesi. Kent Akademisi, 11(4), 618-626, 2018.
3. Akgüngör, A. and Doğan, E., Smeed ve Andreassen kaza modellerinin Türkiye uygulaması: Farklı senaryo analizleri. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(4), 2008.
4. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, Karayolu Trafik Kaza İstatistikleri 2022, 49513, 2023.
5. Dağli, E., Aydin, M. M., Çoruh, E., Şehir İçi Ana Arterlerde COVID-19 Kısıtlamalarından Dolayı Trafik Akımlarında Meydana Gelen Değişimlerin İncelenmesi: Antalya Örneği. İdealkent, 12(34), 1199-1225, 2021.
6. Özen, M., Yaya kazalarının yaralanma şiddetinin incelenmesi: İkili lojistik regresyon modeli uygulaması. Teknik Dergi, 32(3), 10859-10883, 2021.
7. Karayolları Genel Müdürlüğü, Trafik Güvenliği Dairesi Başkanlığı, Trafik Kazaları Özeti 2022, 2023.
8. Wong, S. C., Sze, N. N. and Li, Y. C., Contributory factors to traffic crashes at signalized ıntersections in Hong Kong. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39(6), 1107-1113, 2007.

9. Mahmud, M.S., Pedestrian crossing behavior at intersections and existing walking facilities in Dhaka metorpolitan city, Bachelor Thesis, Bangladesh University Engineering and Techonology Faculty, 2015.
10. https://www.slc.gov/transportation/walking/, [Accessed: Jan. 10, 2024].
11. https://sinyalizasyon.com.tr/sinyal-yaya-butonu-syb06, [Accessed: Jan. 10, 2024].
12. https://robertdyer.blogspot.com/2022/07/do-drivers-obey-pedestrian-crosswalk.html, [Accessed: Jan. 10, 2024], 2022.
13. Sarısoy, G., Polat, A., Tezcan, H. O., Tramvay istasyonu erişimindeki işikli yaya geçidi ihlallerinin irdelenmesi, TMMOB Elektrik Mühendisleri Odası, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası, Makina Mühendisleri Odası Raylı Sistemler Kongre ve Sergisi, Eskişehir, Türkiye, 2023.
14. Alkan, İ. N., Yeşil, M., yürünebilirlik kavramı ve çevresel faktörler odağında yaya kullanımı: Ordu - Akyazı mahallesi örneği. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi, 11(2), 383-396, 2022.
15. Önelçin, P., Alver, Y., Üst geçit bölgelerinde kural dışı geçiş yapan yaya davranışlarının irdelenmesi ve yürüyen merdivenin üst geçit kullanım oranına etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 24(6), 1100-1106, 2018.
16. Uysal, M. and Alver, Y., Yükseltilmiş yaya geçidinin lise çağındaki yayaların kabul edilebilir aralık seçimine etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 27(3), 342-348, 2020.
17. Feliciani, C., Gorrini, A., Crociani, L., Vizzari, G., Nishinari, K., Bandini, S., Calibration and validation of a simulation model for predicting pedestrian fatalities at unsignalized crosswalks by means of statistical traffic data. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 7(1), 1-18, 2020.
18. Pineda-Jaramillo, J., Barrera-Jiménez, H., Mesa-Arango, R., Unveiling the relevance of traffic enforcement cameras on the severity of vehicle–pedestrian collisions in an urban environment with machine learning models. Journal of Safety Research, 81, 225-238, 2022.
19. Sahu, P. K., Maji, A., Nath, B., Roh, H. J., Questionnaire based study of drivers’ error and violation at four-legged signalized intersection. Transportation Letters, 2021, 1-12, 2021.
20. Ewing, R. and Dumbaugh, E., The built environment and traffic safety: A review of empirical evidence. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(4), 347-367, 2009.
21. Gitelman, V., Carmel, R., Pesahov, F., Evaluating ımpacts of a leading pedestrian signal on pedestrian crossing conditions at signalized urban ıntersections: a field study. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 2(45), 1-12, 2020.
22. Li, R. He, Y. L., T., Li, L., Schwebel, D. C., Huang, H. L., Yin, Q. Y., Hu, G. Q., Left-turning vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at signalized intersections with traffic lights: Benefit or harm? A two-stage study. Chinese journal of traumatology, 22(2), 63-68, 2019.
23. Simeunović, M., Jović, A., Pitka, P., Dobrić, M., The Impact of Uncertainty on Pedestrians’ Decision to Start Roadway Crossing during the Clearance Phase. Complexity, 2021, 1-14, 2021.
24. Hatfield, J., Fernandes, R, Job, R. F. S., Smith, K., Misunderstanding of Right-Of-Way Rules at Various Pedestrian Crossing Types: Observational Study and Survey. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39(4), 833-842, 2007.
25. Yaman, T., Dağlı, E., Aydın, M. M., Keleş, M. A., Fasılalı Geçiş Sistemlerinde Güvenli Geçiş Uygulamaları. İdealkent, 13(36), 797-823, 2022.
26. Hamed M., Analysis of pedestrians’ behavior at pedestrian crossing. Safety Science, 38, 63-82, 2001.
27. Kadali R, Rathi N, Perumal V., Evaluation of pedestrian mid-block road crossing behaviour using artificial neural network. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, (2), 111-119, 2014.
28. Yannis G, Apadimitriou E., Theofilatos AA, pedestrian gap acceptance for mid-block street crossing, WCTR 2010 World Conference on Transport Research Society, Lisbon, Portugal, 2010.
29. Liu Y and Tung C., Risk analysis of pedestrians’ road crossing decisions, effects of age, time gap, time of day, vehicle speed. Safety Science, 63, 77-82, 2014.
30. L. Hell, J. Sprenger, M. Klusch, Y. Kobayashi, C. Müller, Pedestrian behavior in Japan and Germany: A Review, IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Nagoya, Japan, 2021.
31. İ. Küçükali, Understanding Pedestrian Road Crossing Behavior, Bachelor Thesis, The Graduate School of Social Sciences Of Özyeğin University, 2020.
32. Faisal, A. R., Kent Merkezi Ana Arter ve Kavşak Yaklaşımında Yaya Geçiş Davranışının İncelenmesi, Bachelor Thesis, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2019.
33. Kruszyna, M., Jeremi Rychlewski, J., Influence of approaching tram on behaviour of pedestrians in signalised crosswalks in Poland. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 55 185-191, 2013.
34. Tiwari, G., Bangdiwala, T., Saraswat, A., Gaurav, S., Survival analysis: Pedestrian risk exposure at signalized intersections. Transportation Research Part F, 10(2), 77–89, 2007.
35. Lavalette, B.C., Tijus, C., Poitrenaud, S., Leproux, C., Bergeron, J., Thouez, J.P., Pedestrian crossing decision-making: a situational and behavioral approach. Safety Science, C47(9), 1248–125, 2009.
36. https://yandex.com.tr/harita, [Accessed: Jan. 11, 2024].
37. https://www.google.com/maps, [Accessed: Jan. 10, 2024].
38. Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü, Trafik İstatistik Bülteni Kasım 2023, 2023.
39. Saplıoğlu, M., Faisal, A. R., Sinyal kontrollü ve kontrolsüz kesimlerde yayaların karşıdan karşıya geçiş davranışlarının değerlendirilmesi. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(2), 309-320, 2020.
40. Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board National Research Council; 2010, 2010.