All Issue

2021 Vol.39, Issue 4 Preview Page

Article

A Behavioral Approach to Increase Pedestrian Safety Behavior: Examining the Effects of Prompting Strategies

프롬프트를 활용한 보행자 안전행동 증진 효과 분석

Jihan CHOI1
,
Sungjun LIM2
,
Shezeen OAH3*
최 지한1
,
임 성준2
,
오 세진3*
1Senior Researcher, Traffic Science Institute, Road Traffic Authority, Wonju 26466, Korea
2Researcher/Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Chung Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea
3Professor, Department of Psychology, Chung Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea
1도로교통공단 교통과학연구원 선임연구원
2중앙대학교 심리학과 연구원/강사
3중앙대학교 심리학과 교수
*Corresponding Author
31 August 2021. pp. 464-473
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Even now, pedestrian safety remains a serious concern in South Korea. Pedestrians accounted for almost 40% of traffic deaths over the last few years. Pedestrian safety has been addressed in previous studies or policies, but there is a lack of literature concerning direct intervention on pedestrian safety behavior. Hence, the objectives of this study were: 1) to evaluate the effects of a prompt, which is one of the behavioral approaches to promote pedestrian safety behavior; 2) to compare the effects of two types of prompts, timely prompt and non-timely prompt. We used an LED sign to deliver messages about three key behaviors for safe crossing procedures, and the prompting strategies were applied according to the timeliness of message delivery. Compared to the baseline, the percentage of pedestrian safety behavior increased when using both types of prompts, but prompting strategies did not make a difference in its effectiveness. Findings suggest that prompts for pedestrian safety behavior were effective, but further consideration for prompting strategies is necessary.

Keywords
behavioral approach
crossing behavior
pedestrian safety
prompts
timeliness

국내 보행자의 안전 수준은 OECD 회원국 중 최하위에 머무른다. 현재 보행자 안전향상을 위한 법 ‧ 제도 마련, 공학적 ‧ 환경적 설계 등 다양한 접근이 이루어지고 있으나, 보행자 행동에 대한 직접적인 개입은 시도되지 않았다. 이에 본 연구는 보행자 안전 향상을 위한 대안으로 행동분석적 접근을 도입하여 프롬프트 적용이 보행자 안전행동에 미치는 영향을 검증하였다. LED 전광판을 이용하여 횡단 절차에 따른 세 가지 안전행동에 대한 프롬프트를 제시하였고, 프롬프트 제시의 적시성에 따라 적시적 프롬프트와 비적시적 프롬프트로 구분하여 적용하였다. 연구 결과, 프롬프트를 적용하지 않은 기저선에 비해 프롬프트를 적용한 처치 단계에서 보행자 안전행동 비율이 유의하게 높은 것으로 나타났으나, 처치 단계 내 두 프롬프트 제시 유형 간 효과 차이는 나타나지 않았다. 따라서 프롬프트 처치가 보행자의 안전행동을 증가시키는 데 효과적이라고 할 수 있으나, 프롬프트 제시 유형 간 특성을 명확하게 밝히기 위한 후속 연구가 진행될 필요가 있다.

키워드
보행자 안전
횡단보도
프롬프트
적시적 프롬프트
비적시적 프롬프트
References
1
Austin J., Hatfield D. B., Grindle A. C., Bailey J. S. (1993), Increasing Recycling in Office Environments: The Effects of Specific, Informative Cues, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26(2), 247-253. 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-24716795793PMC1297743
2
Cho C. Y., Yim H. K., Lee M. J. (2017), Development of ICT-based Road Safety Integrated Facilities for Pedestrian Crossing, Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society, 18(12), 93-99.
3
Cox B. S., Cox A. B., Cox D. J. (2000), Motivating Signage Prompts Safety Belt Use among Drivers Exiting Senior Communities, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33(4), 635-638. 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-63511214040PMC1284288
4
Cox M. G., Geller E. S. (2010), Prompting Safety Belt Use: Comparative Impact on the Target Behavior and Relevant Body Language, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(2), 321-325. 10.1901/jaba.2010.43-32121119908PMC2884358
5
Crowley-Koch B. J., Van Houten R., Lim E. (2011), Effects of Pedestrian Prompts on Motorist Yielding at Crosswalks, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 44(1), 121-126. 10.1901/jaba.2011.44-12121541107PMC3050473
6
Dixon M. R., Loukus A. K., Bogdanovich T., Doctor K., Marlett K., Stocks R. et al. (2014), Naturalistic Experimental Analysis of Driver Compliance with Posted Speed Limits, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 34(3), 196-206. 10.1080/01608061.2014.944743
7
Geller E. S., Bruff C. D., Nimmer J. G. (1985), “Flash for life”: Community-based Prompting for Safety Belt Promotion, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18(4), 309-314. 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-30916795691PMC1308026
8
Geller E. S., Winett R. A., Everett P. B. (1982), Preserving the Environment: New Strategies for Behavior Change, Pergamon Press(New York, U.S.A.).
9
GHSA (2020), Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State: 2019 Preliminary Data.
10
Hantula D. A., Stillman F. A., Waranch H. R. (1991), A Comparison of Strategies for Facilitating Smoking Survey Return in Low-SES Employees, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 11(2), 47-59. 10.1300/J075v11n02_04
11
Ka D. H., Lee D. H., Yeo H. S. (2019), Development of Predictive Pedestrian Collision Warning Service Considering Pedestrian Characteristics, J. Korea Inst. Intelligent. Transp. Syst., 18(3), 66-83. 10.12815/kits.2019.18.3.68
12
Kazdin A. E. (1977), The token economy: A Review and Evaluation, Plenum Press(New York, U.S.A.). 10.1007/978-1-4613-4121-5
13
Kim J. Y., Yeo H. S. (2019), Pedestrian Simulation Model for Path Planning with Anticipation Behavior, J. Korean Soc. Transp., 37(5), Korean Society of Transportation, 410-421. 10.7470/jkst.2019.37.5.410
14
KoROAD (2019), Comparison of Traffic Accidents in OECD Countries.
15
KOTSA (2019), Pedestrian Crossing Safety Survey Announced.
16
MOLIT (2020), 3,349 People Died by Traffic Accidents in 2019, it Decreased by 11.4% as Compare to Last Year.
17
Parker R. I., Vannest K. J., Davis J. L., Sauber S. B. (2011), Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U, Behavior Therapy, 42(2), 284-299. 10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.00621496513
18
Samsung Traffic Safety Research Institute (2018), Analysis on the Distribution of Attention and the Characteristics of Accidents, May 15, 2018. (http://sts.samsungfire.com)
19
Seo Y. H., Hong K. S., Kho S. Y., Yoon S. W. (2019), Effectiveness of Flashing Speed Limit Sign on the Driving Speed in School Zones, J. Korean Soc. Transp., 37(3), Korean Society of Transportation, 254-265. 10.7470/jkst.2019.37.3.254
20
Son S. O., Park J. Y., Kim M. W., Choe B. H. (2019), Assessing the Safety Effects of Reduction of Speed Limit on Urban roads, J. Korean Soc. Transp., 37(6), Korean Society of Transportation, 514-524. 10.7470/jkst.2019.37.6.514
21
Squires J., Wilder D. A., Fixsen A., Hess E., Rost K., Curran R. et al. (2007), The Effects of Task Clarification, Visual Prompts, and Graphic Feedback on Customer Greeting and Up-selling in a Restaurant, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 27(3), 1-13. 10.1300/J075v27n03_01
22
TAAS, Traffic Accident Analysis System, http://taas.koroad.or.kr
23
Van Houten R., Malenfant L., Rolider A. (1985), Increasing Driver Yielding and Pedestrian Signaling with Prompting, Feedback, and Enforcement, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18(2), 103-110. 10.1901/jaba.1985.18-10316795686PMC1307998
24
Vannest K. J., Ninci J. (2015), Evaluating Intervention Effects in Single-case Research Designs, Journal of Counseling & Development, 93(4), 403-411. 10.1002/jcad.12038
Information
  • Publisher :Korean Society of Transportation
  • Publisher(Ko) :대한교통학회
  • Journal Title :Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
  • Journal Title(Ko) :대한교통학회지
  • Volume : 39
  • No :4
  • Pages :464-473
  • Received Date : 2021-05-06
  • Revised Date : 2021-05-24
  • Accepted Date : 2021-06-28
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.7470/jkst.2021.39.4.464
Journal Informaiton Journal of Korean Society of Transportation Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
Archives
: 2015 Vol.34~
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • crossref cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close