Exit choice during evacuation is influenced by both the size and proportion of the egressing crowd
Exit choice during evacuation is influenced by both the size and proportion of the egressing crowd
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.physa.2021.125746
复制
发表时间：
2021-01-29
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Warren, William H.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kinateder, Max;Warren, William H.
目前还不清楚建筑物的住户如何使用有关社会和建筑环境的信息时，选择紧急疏散的出口路线。先前已经报道了回避倾向：跟随人群，避免拥挤，以及单独避免未知的出口路线。我们假设，这些趋势取决于社会影响力和建筑环境的可供性（出口的机会）之间的相互作用。在三个虚拟现实（VR）实验（每个N = 15）中，我们研究了社会影响力如何与可用出口的启示相互作用，以确定出口选择。参与者沉浸在一群走向左边或右边出口的虚拟人中，并被要求走到其中一个出口。实验1测试了社会影响力的作用，通过操纵人群走向一个出口点的比例（人群比例为0至100%，增量为10%）和虚拟人的绝对数量（人群规模为10或20）。实验2通过在一个封闭的房间中引入两个可见的出口门（1米宽），并遵循相同的协议来测试启示的作用。实验3测试了更大的出口门（2米宽），为更多的人提供快速出口。在小群体中，参与者越来越有可能跟随大多数，因为它的比例增加。然而，在人群中，如果门很窄（实验2），参与者倾向于避开更拥挤的出口，但如果门很宽（实验3），则不会。参与者倾向于在所有实验中遵循100%的大多数，从而避免独自前往出口。我们建议，出口选择的动态可以被理解为替代出口路线之间的竞争：出口的吸引力增加的人群向它移动的比例，成为占主导地位的100%，但减少的绝对数量的人群向它移动，相对于出口的启示出口。皇冠版权所有（C）2021由Elsevier B.V.出版。保留所有权利。
It is unclear how building occupants use information about the social and built environment when choosing an egress route during emergency evacuation. Conflicting tendencies have been previously reported: to follow the crowd, to avoid congestion, and to avoid unknown egress routes alone. We hypothesize that these tendencies depend on an interaction between social influence and the affordances (opportunities for egress) of the built environment. In three virtual reality (VR) experiments (each N = 15), we investigated how social influence interacts with the affordances of available exits to determine exit choice. Participants were immersed in a crowd of virtual humans walking to the left or right exit and were asked to walk to one of the exits. Experiment 1 tested the role of social influence by manipulating both the proportion of the crowd walking toward one exit point (Crowd Proportion of 0 to 100%, in 10% increments) and the absolute number of virtual humans going to the exit point (Crowd Size of 10 or 20). Experiment 2 tested the role of affordances by introducing two visible exit doors (1 m width) in a closed room, and following the same protocol. Experiment 3 tested larger exit doors (2 m width) that afford rapid egress for more people. In the small crowd, participants were increasingly likely to follow the majority as its proportion increased. In the large crowd, however, participants tended to avoid the more crowded exit if the doors were narrow (Experiment 2), but not if the doors were wide (Experiment 3). Participants tended to follow a 100% majority in all experiments, thereby avoiding going to an exit alone. We propose that the dynamics of exit choice can be understood in terms of competition between alternative egress routes: the attraction of an exit increases with the proportion of the crowd moving toward it, becoming dominant at 100%, but decreases with the absolute number in the crowd moving toward it, relative to the exit's affordance for egress. Crown Copyright (C) 2021 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.