Abstract
Pedestrian safety is vital, especially when it comes to crossing at intersections. Setting pedestrian safety facilities is one of the solutions to provide a safer environment for pedestrians to cross at intersections. And most studies have focused on the influence of pedestrian safety facilities on drivers’ yielding behavior. Meanwhile, psychological factors underlying drivers’ decisions to yield to pedestrians have received little attention. The current study explored the relationship between drivers’ yielding behavior and psychological factors using a questionnaire mainly designed based on the extended theory of planned behavior (TPB). Measures of the questionnaire included elements of the theory of planned behavior model, risk perception part, new countermeasure, and traditional countermeasure. Pearson correlation test revealed that young drivers or highly educated drivers were more likely not to yield to pedestrians. Factors analysis proved the extended TPB questionnaire to be valid and reliable. Structural equation modeling showed that attitude (0.23), subjective norm (0.58), perceived behavioral control (0.21), and risk perception (0.38) significantly and directly influenced drivers’ yielding intentions. Traditional countermeasure (0.66) and new countermeasure (0.44) significantly influenced drivers’ risk perception and then influenced drivers’ yielding intentions indirectly. According to these findings, promotion and education on yielding behavior and on the functions of pedestrian safety facility were proposed.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Aberg L (1993) Drinking and driving: intentions, attitudes, and social norms of Swedish male drivers. Accid Anal Prev 25(3):289–296
Ai G et al (2016) Analysis on yielding behavior and its influencing factors of motor vehicle at pedestrian crosswalk in Guangzhou. J Saf Sci Technol 12(12):133–137
Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211
Ajzen I (2002) Constructing a TpB Questionnaire: conceptual and methodological considerations. https://chuang.epage.au.edu.tw/ezfiles/168/1168/attach/20/pta_41176_7688352_57138.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2018
Atombo C et al (2016) Investigating the motivational factors influencing drivers intentions to unsafe driving behaviours: speeding and overtaking violations. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 43:104–121
Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1988) On the evaluation of structural equation models. J Acad Mark Sci 16(1):74–94
Bella F, Silvestri M (2015) Effects of safety measures on driver’s speed behavior at pedestrian crossings. Accid Anal Prev 83:111–124
Bentler PM, Bonett DG (1980) Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 88(3):588
Cambridge NM (2012) Effects of symbol prompts and 3D pavement illusions on motorist yielding at crosswalks https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/48/. Accessed 21 May 2018
Castanier C et al (2013) Theory of planned behavior and road violations: the moderating influence of perceived behavioural control. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 18(5):148–158
Chen SY (2007) The structural equation model. Psychology Press Ltd, Hove
Chiu HC (2003) The theory, technology, and application of the structural equation model-LISREL. Yeh Yeh Book Gallery, Taipei
Duan WT, Jiang GR (2008) A review of the theory of planned behavior. Adv Psychol Sci 16(2):315–320
Elliott MA et al (2003) Drivers’ compliance with speed limits: an application of the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Psychol 88(5):964
Goddard T et al (2015) Racial bias in driver yielding behavior at crosswalks. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 33(1):1–6
Goodyear S (2014) The Swedish approach to road safety: ‘The Accident Is Not the Major Problem’. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2014/11/the-swedish-approach-to-road-safety-the-accident-is-not-the-major-problem/382995/. Accessed 13 June 2018
Harbeck EL, Glendon AI (2013) How reinforcement sensitivity and perceived risk influence young drivers’ reported engagement in risky driving behaviors. Accid Anal Prev 54:73–80
Harbeck EL et al (2018) Young driver perceived risk and risky driving: a theoretical approach to the “fatal five”. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 58:392–404
Hassan HM, Abdel-Aty MA (2011) Analysis of drivers’ behavior under reduced visibility conditions using a structural equation modeling approach. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 14(6):614–625
Hirun W (2016) Factors affecting driver yielding behavior at a mid-block zebra crossing. Int J Eng Technol 8(2):906–912
Hsu IY et al (2012) Analysis of business safety performance by structural equation models. Saf Sci 50(1):1–11
Jiang C et al (2016) The effects of the self and social identity on the intention to microblog: an extension of the theory of planned behavior. Comput Hum Behav 64:754–759
Jiang K et al (2017) Psychological predictors of mobile phone use while crossing the street among college students: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Traffic Inj Prev 18(2):118–123
Li P et al (2016) The theory of planned behavior and competitive driving in China. Procedia Eng 137:362–371
Mckenna FP et al (2006) Does anticipation training affect drivers’ risk taking? J Exp Psychol Appl 12(1):1
Moan IS, Rise J (2011) Predicting intentions not to “drink and drive” using an extended version of the theory of planned behaviour. Accid Anal Prev 43(4):1378–1384
Nation Bureau of Statistics of China (2018) China statistical yearbook—2017. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2017/indexch.htm. Accessed 9 May 2018
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2017) Pedestrians: 2016 data (traffic safety facts). http://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812493. Accessed 23 May 2018
Nelson E et al (2009) The effects of perception of risk and importance of answering and initiating a cellular phone call while driving. Accid Anal Prev 41(3):438–444
Parker D et al (1992) Intention to commit driving violations: an application of the theory of planned behavior. J Appl Psychol 77(1):94–101
Parker D et al (1998) Attitudinal predictors of interpersonally aggressive violations on the road. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 1(1):11–24
Pollatsek A et al (2006) Identifying and remedying failures of selective attention in younger drivers. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 15(5):255–259
Potts IB et al (2015) Effect of beacon activation and traffic volume on driver yielding behavior at rapid flashing beacons. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2492:78–83
Przepiorka AM et al (2018) Factors influencing intentions to text while driving among Polish drivers. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 55:306–313
Pulugurtha SS et al (2012) Evaluating effectiveness of infrastructure-based countermeasures for pedestrian safety. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2299(1):100–109
Rowe R et al (2016) Identifying beliefs underlying pre-drivers’ intentions to take risks: an application of the theory of planned behaviour. Accid Anal Prev 89:49–56
Rutter D, Quine L (2002) Changing health behavior. Open University Press, Buckingham
Schermelleh-Engel K et al (2003) Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol Res Online 8(2):23–74
Şimşekoğlu Ö, Lajunen T (2008) Social psychology of seat belt use: a comparison of theory of planned behavior and health belief model. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 11(3):181–191
Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (2017) Road traffic safety law of the People’s Republic of China. http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/zfjc/zfjcelys/2016-12/13/content_2003512.htm. Accessed 10 June 2018
Steiger JH (1990) Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivar Behav Res 25(2):173–180
Tavafian SS et al (2011) Predictors of speeding behavior among a sample of Iranian commercial automobile drivers: an application of the theory of planned behavior. Traffic Inj Prev 12(3):274–278
U. S. Department of Transportation (2016). U.S. Dot, National Safety Council launch road to zero coalition to end roadway fatalities. http://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-dot-national-safety-council-launch-road-zero-coalition-end-roadway-fatalities. Accessed 10 June 2018
Useche SA et al (2017) Stress-related psychosocial factors at work, fatigue, and risky driving behavior in bus rapid transport (BRT) drivers. Accid Anal Prev 104:106–114
Van Hengle D (2013) Build it and they will yield: effects of median and curb extension installations on motorist yield compliance. Presented at 92nd annual meeting of the transportation research board, Washington DC, 2013
Waddell LP, Wiener KKK (2014) What’s driving illegal mobile phone use? Psychosocial influences on drivers’ intentions to use hand-held mobile phones. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 22:1–11
White KM et al (2010) Mobile phone use while driving: an investigation of the beliefs influencing drivers’ hands-free and hand-held mobile phone use. Transp Res Part F Psychol Behav 13(1):9–20
Wilde GJS (2010) A theory of risk homeostasis: implications for safety and health. Risk Anal 2(4):209–225
World Health Organization (2016) Global status report on road safety 2015. http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2015/GSRRS2015_Summary_EN_final2.pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2018
Wu ML (2006) The application of the structural equation model SIMPLIS. Wunan Book Co., Ltd., Taipei
Zhang W et al (2018) Investigating factors influencing drivers’ speed selection behavior under reduced visibility conditions. Traffic Inj Prev 19(5):488–494
Zhou R et al (2009) Young driving learners’ intention to use a handheld or hands-free mobile phone when driving. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 12(3):208–217
Zhou H et al (2016) An extension of the theory of planned behavior to predict pedestrians’ violating crossing behavior using structural equation modeling. Accid Anal Prev 95(Pt B):417–424
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by Beijing Municipal Natural Science Foundation (No. KZ201710005005).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix A: The entire questionnaire in the research
Appendix A: The entire questionnaire in the research
1.1 Part 1: Demographic measures
-
1.
Frequency of driving
○ Never ○ Seldom ○ Sometimes ○ Often ○ Always
-
2.
Gender
○ Male ○ Female
-
3.
Age
○ < 25 ○ 25–35 ○ 36–45 ○ > 45
-
4.
Education level
○ Middle school or less ○ High school ○ College/University ○ Masters or above
-
5.
Year(s) of driving experience
○ < 3 ○ 3–5 ○ 6–10 ○ > 10
1.2 Part 2: The extended TPB model items
Item | Description |
---|---|
Self-reported yielding behavior (never to always from 1 to 5) | |
1 | I yielded to pedestrian when making a turn during the past 3 months |
Intention to yielding to pedestrian when making a turn (IN) (strongly disagree to strongly agree from 1 to 5) | |
1 | I am willing to yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
2 | I will encourage my family members and friends to yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
3 | I will yield to pedestrian when making a turn in the future period of time |
Attitude (ATT) (strongly disagree to strongly agree from 1 to 5) | |
1 | I think that rear-end collision by a sudden braking may happen if I yield to pedestrian when making a |
2 | I think that yielding to pedestrian when making a turn will waste my time |
3 | I think that yielding to pedestrian when making a turn will make my driving less smoothly turn |
4 | I think refusing to yielding to pedestrian when making a turn is a retaliation to people who crossed roads without obeying traffic regulations |
5 | Whether or not yielding to pedestrian when making a turn depend on my mood |
Subjective norm (SN) (strongly disagree to strongly agree from 1 to 5) | |
1 | My family members think that I should yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
2 | My friends/classmates/colleagues think that I should yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
3 | News and media propagate that I should yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
4 | Traffic laws require that I should yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
Perceived behavioral control (PBC) (strongly disagree to strongly agree from 1 to 5) | |
1 | I can react quickly to emergencies when driving, so I am able to yield to pedestrian timely when making a turn |
2 | I can maintain my attention when driving, so I am able to yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
Risk perception (RP) (very unlikely to very likely from 1 to 5) | |
1 | The possibility of harming pedestrian safety if I do not yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
2 | The possibility of making accident compensation to injured pedestrians if I do not yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
3 | The possibility of being punished if I do not yield to pedestrian when making a turn |
New countermeasure (NC) (very unlikely to very likely from 1 to 5) The example of new countermeasure | |
1 | The possibility of yielding to pedestrian when turning at an intersection with colored crosswalk markings |
2 | The possibility of yielding to when turning at an intersection with specially patterned crosswalk markings |
Traditional countermeasure (TC) (very unlikely to very likely from 1 to 5) | |
1 | The possibility of yielding to pedestrian when turning at an intersection with “YIELD TO PEDESTRIAN” marking behind stop line |
2 | The possibility of yielding to pedestrian when turning at an intersection with traffic police or auxiliary police (TC2) |
3 | The possibility of yielding to pedestrian when turning at an intersection with white crosswalk markings (TC3) |
4 | The possibility of yielding to when turning at an intersection with continental markings (TC4) |
1.3 Part 3: Addition
-
1.
Have you ever crossed intersection with new crosswalk markings shown in the picture below?
○ yes ○ no
-
2.
What do you think the extent to which new crosswalk markings improve drivers’ yielding behavior compared to the continental marking? (did not improve to obviously improved from 1 to 5)
○ 1 ○ 2 ○ 3 ○ 4 ○ 5
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, B., Liang, K., Zhao, X. et al. Psychological influences on drivers’ yielding behavior at the crosswalk of intersections. Cogn Tech Work 22, 501–516 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00589-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00589-w